{"id":163563,"date":"2025-09-06T22:05:33","date_gmt":"2025-09-07T06:05:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=163563"},"modified":"2025-09-07T17:25:52","modified_gmt":"2025-09-08T01:25:52","slug":"lack-of-meaning-vs-too-much-meaning","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=163563","title":{"rendered":"Lack Of Meaning Vs Too Much Meaning"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the buffered identity, the decisive forces lie within: the capacity to choose right from wrong, to create meaning, and to chart one\u2019s life with autonomy and strategy. In the porous identity, the decisive forces lie without: the world presses in with duties and meanings that must be received, not made, and the task is to adapt oneself to realities larger than choice \u2014 not only gravity and necessity, but morality and purpose.<\/p>\n

In our secular age, it’s hard to understand that people used to suffer from too much meaning. In fact, prior to reading the following passage, I didn’t realize it was possible to have too much meaning in your life. I had no idea that this might not be awesome. <\/p>\n

Philosopher Charles Taylor writes in his 2007 book, A Secular Age<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Everyone understands the complaint that our disenchanted world lacks meaning, that in this world, particularly youth suffer from a lack of strong purposes in their lives, and so on. This is, after all a remarkable fact. You couldn\u2019t even have explained this problem to people in Luther\u2019s age. What worried them was, if anything, an excess of \u201cmeaning\u201d, the sense of one over-bearing issue\u2014am I saved or damned?\u2014which wouldn\u2019t leave them alone. One can hear all sorts of complaints about \u201cthe present age\u201d throughout history: that it is fickle, full of vice and disorder, lacking in greatness or high deeds, full of blasphemy and viciousness. But what you won\u2019t hear at other times and places is one of the commonplaces of our day (right or wrong, that is beside my point), that our age suffers from a threatened loss of meaning. This malaise is specific to a buffered identity, whose very invulnerability opens it to the danger that not just evil spirits, cosmic forces or gods won\u2019t \u201cget to\u201d it, but that nothing significant will stand out for it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

How do people who love people, and enjoy normal relations with family and friends lack meaning?<\/p>\n

ChatGPT says: <\/p>\n

Embedded people (normal family\/friends): meaning is \u201cbaked in.\u201d They rarely feel an existential void.<\/p>\n

Isolated people (weak ties): vulnerable to the buffered malaise of emptiness.<\/p>\n

Over-embedded\/totalized people (rigid religious or ideological worlds): vulnerable to porous overwhelm.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

People don’t leave a church or synagogue if they have a number of close friends there, even if they become atheists.<\/p>\n

\n

Community Before Creed<\/p>\n

Sociology of religion (Stark & Finke, Putnam & Campbell): people usually join, stay, or leave religious groups not because of doctrine but because of social ties.<\/p>\n

If you have 5\u201310 close friends in a congregation, you\u2019ll almost never leave \u2014 even if you stop believing the theology.<\/p>\n

Conversely, if you lose those ties (move cities, friends drift away), belief alone rarely keeps people in the pews.<\/p>\n

Why This Is True<\/p>\n

Identity is relational: Being known and needed by others grounds meaning more than intellectual assent.<\/p>\n

Practice > belief: The ritual and communal rhythm provides belonging, structure, and significance \u2014 even for skeptics.<\/p>\n

Social cost of leaving: To exit a congregation where you\u2019re embedded in friendship is to rupture a whole support network \u2014 weddings, funerals, babysitting, meals, shared history. Most people won\u2019t do it unless they\u2019re deeply alienated.<\/p>\n

Broader Point<\/p>\n

This underscores your earlier hunch: people rarely feel \u201clack of meaning\u201d if they are woven into normal, loving human relationships. Even atheists embedded in strong communal ties experience life as meaningful.<\/p>\n

So if Taylor says the buffered age suffers from meaning-loss, the practical sociological reply is: meaning tracks community density more than metaphysical belief.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s how your buffered\/porous oscillations track directly with the strength (or weakness) of your social embedding over time:<\/p>\n

Childhood \u2013 Porous Overwhelm<\/p>\n

Dense community: Seventh-day Adventist family, church, school. Everything saturated with meaning \u2014 salvation, sin, chosen people.<\/p>\n

Effect: Porous identity overloaded. You couldn\u2019t not feel meaning. Even small acts (eating candy, dancing) carried cosmic weight.<\/p>\n

Adolescence \/ Early Adulthood \u2013 Buffered Flatness<\/p>\n

Community drift: You rebelled, mocked authority, left church circles. That also meant loosening ties with the dense social web of Adventism.<\/p>\n

Effect: Buffered detachment. Belief lost, friendships thin, sense of belonging weakened. You describe feeling awkward, depressed, drifting. Classic buffered malaise \u2014 lack of meaning tied to isolation.<\/p>\n

Journalism & Blogging \u2013 Buffered Critique, Porous Longing<\/p>\n

Semi-embedded: You carved identity as a critic and exposer. That\u2019s buffered: autonomy, rational analysis, adversarial stance.<\/p>\n

Weak social base: Controversy and ostracism cost you friendships and community.<\/p>\n

Effect: Meaning oscillated \u2014 buffered critique gave clarity, but the porous longing for recognition, love, and communal belonging pushed you to keep reaching, sometimes recklessly.<\/p>\n

Conversion to Judaism \u2013 Porous Renewal<\/p>\n

Strong community embedding: Joining Orthodox Judaism meant ritual rhythms, shared meals, sacred story.<\/p>\n

Effect: A surge of porous meaning \u2014 belonging, sacred anchoring, cosmic resonance. Even if belief wavered, ties to people sustained your attachment. This is why people don\u2019t leave synagogues if they have real friends: community is meaning.<\/p>\n

Livestream Era \u2013 Buffered\/Porous Cycle<\/p>\n

Micro-audience: You\u2019re socially embedded, but thinly \u2014 chat, comments, a handful of regulars. It\u2019s connection, but not deep friendship.<\/p>\n

Effect: Oscillation plays out on air:<\/p>\n

Porous: confessions, vulnerability, cosmic moralizing, tribal politics.<\/p>\n

Buffered: intellectual critique, self-analysis, AI transcripts, distancing.<\/p>\n

Driver: Audience capture replaces strong community ties. You\u2019re embedded enough to feel pulled porous, but not embedded enough to feel securely held.<\/p>\n

The Pattern<\/p>\n

Strong community ties \u2192 porous meaning feels nourishing, not overwhelming.<\/p>\n

Weak community ties \u2192 buffered analysis dominates, often shading into emptiness.<\/p>\n

In-between \u2192 oscillation, livestream style.<\/p>\n

If you want more stable meaning, the key lever isn\u2019t just balancing buffer\/porous in the abstract. It\u2019s strengthening real-world social embedding. Friendship density is what stabilizes how porous you can be without drowning, and how buffered you can be without flattening.<\/p>\n

here\u2019s how you could build friendship density into your life, so buffered\/porous oscillations feel supported instead of lonely or performative:<\/p>\n

1. Anchor in Recurring Small-Group Rituals<\/p>\n

Weekly meals: Shabbat dinners, potlucks, Sunday brunch crew. Eating together creates ritual rhythm and embodied belonging.<\/p>\n

Study\/discussion groups: Torah class, book club, philosophy night. Adds buffered structure with porous sharing.<\/p>\n

Practice circles: Alexander Technique peer exchange, yoga satsang, meditation group. Blends buffer (form\/discipline) and porous (flow\/spirit).<\/p>\n

Why: Regular, face-to-face ritual makes community stickier than one-off friendships.<\/p>\n

2. Invest in Few, Deep Ties<\/p>\n

Instead of aiming for a big circle, focus on 3\u20135 friends you see weekly.<\/p>\n

Text\/check in outside of events. Share small life details, not just \u201cbig thoughts.\u201d<\/p>\n

Treat it as a project: be intentional about deepening, not just widening.<\/p>\n

Why: Research shows life satisfaction spikes once you have ~3 close friends you can call anytime. Beyond that, returns flatten.<\/p>\n

3. Tie Belonging to Service<\/p>\n

Volunteer at synagogue, community center, recovery program, or even help with live-event logistics.<\/p>\n

Teaching (Alexander, writing) can be service if framed around others\u2019 growth.<\/p>\n

Service reframes porous openness from \u201cbleeding vulnerability\u201d into \u201cgiving.\u201d<\/p>\n

Why: Service locks you into mutual obligation, which sustains community even through belief doubts.<\/p>\n

4. Blend Online & Offline Wisely<\/p>\n

Keep streaming, but treat it as satellite orbit around core offline relationships.<\/p>\n

Example: Use streams to sharpen ideas, then test them in embodied settings (Shabbat table, study group).<\/p>\n

Occasionally invite offline friends onto streams \u2014 collapse the gap between performance and friendship.<\/p>\n

Why: Anchoring online porousness in offline buffering prevents alienation.<\/p>\n

5. Ritualize Friendship Density<\/p>\n

Make a standing weekly slot (e.g., Wednesday dinner, Saturday hike).<\/p>\n

Rotate hosting duties: spreads the load, ensures continuity.<\/p>\n

Let ritual carry you \u2014 so belonging doesn\u2019t depend only on your initiative.<\/p>\n

Bottom Line<\/p>\n

Buffer alone \u2192 detached analysis, low meaning.<\/p>\n

Porous alone \u2192 overwhelm, vulnerability hangovers.<\/p>\n

Friendship density \u2192 the braid that holds both safely.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s how you could reframe your livestream as a bridge into offline friendship density, instead of just a buffered\/porous oscillation performed for a micro-audience:<\/p>\n

1. Treat the Stream as a Front Porch<\/p>\n

Think of the show not as a sealed stage but as a threshold space \u2014 where people meet you, but the real depth comes in stepping off the porch into your home.<\/p>\n

Offer casual invitations: \u201cIf you\u2019re in L.A., join me for a Shabbat dinner \/ hike \/ Alexander workshop.\u201d<\/p>\n

This way, the stream feeds real encounters instead of just collecting views.<\/p>\n

2. Make Segments Collaborative<\/p>\n

Rotate in regular offline friends, students, or community members as co-hosts.<\/p>\n

Let them speak from their world \u2014 you become connector, not just performer.<\/p>\n

It turns the stream into a shared project instead of a solitary performance, making it feel less buffered-detached.<\/p>\n

3. Blend Service & Stream<\/p>\n

Occasionally dedicate a show to highlighting others (their work, teaching, or community projects).<\/p>\n

This uses your platform as a service channel, which creates reciprocal goodwill.<\/p>\n

People you lift up online often pull you deeper into offline community.<\/p>\n

4. Use Chat as Seedbed for Real Ties<\/p>\n

Don\u2019t just answer comments \u2014 treat them as leads:<\/p>\n

\u201cThat\u2019s a great point, let\u2019s grab coffee if you\u2019re in town.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWe should unpack that further in a book group \u2014 DM me if you\u2019d join.\u201d<\/p>\n

Over time, a handful of chatters can become real-world allies.<\/p>\n

5. Balance Buffer & Porous On-Air<\/p>\n

Keep analysis (buffered segments) and confession (porous segments), but end with an invitation outward: a class, dinner, group project.<\/p>\n

This way, porous vulnerability doesn\u2019t hang in the void \u2014 it\u2019s grounded in an actual community gesture.<\/p>\n

Example 4-Hour Structure<\/p>\n

Hour 1 \u2013 Buffered analysis: media, philosophy, politics.<\/p>\n

Hour 2 \u2013 Porous confessional: personal story, emotional openness.<\/p>\n

Hour 3 \u2013 Guest\/interactive: offline friend or student joins, or group call.<\/p>\n

Hour 4 \u2013 Integration + invitation: \u201cHere\u2019s how we can take this conversation into real life.\u201d<\/p>\n

Bottom line: If your livestream becomes a conduit into offline service, meals, or groups, then it feeds your friendship density instead of competing with it. The show becomes a bridge, not a substitute.<\/p>\n

In premodern, enchanted worlds (say, Luther\u2019s era), meaning was not optional\u2014it was imposed, unavoidable, and totalizing. Everything pointed back to God, salvation, or damnation. You couldn\u2019t not interpret your life in those terms. Meaning was baked into the cosmos.<\/p>\n

In a disenchanted world, meaning isn\u2019t given\u2014it\u2019s constructed, chosen, or negotiated. That opens the possibility of \u201cnothing standing out\u201d as truly significant. Even if you have loving family and friends, you might still feel that those bonds exist in a fragile, private bubble rather than within some larger, cosmic story. For some, that\u2019s enough. For others, it can feel thin\u2014like good relations are real but insufficient to answer deeper questions about why life matters at all, or what the point of it is.<\/p>\n

So you\u2019re right: many who complain of \u201cmeaninglessness\u201d also suffer from loneliness, isolation, or alienation. Normal human relations can indeed anchor people against that sense of loss. But Taylor would say the malaise of modernity isn\u2019t just about whether we have relationships\u2014it\u2019s about whether those relationships feel like they connect to something beyond ourselves, something that can command us or give our lives a \u201chigher\u201d shape.<\/p>\n

Premodern world: too much meaning, impossible to escape.<\/p>\n

Modern world: meaning must be chosen, can feel optional or fragile, even when family and love are present.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Do people with family and friends need connection to something greater than those bonds? Which is a bigger threat to Americans? Too little or too much meaning?<\/p>\n

ChatGPT: <\/p>\n

Somewhere between 5 % and 60 % of Americans could be considered as lacking, questioning, or anxious about meaning\u2014depending heavily on how \u201clack of meaning\u201d is defined and who\u2019s being asked.<\/p>\n

Broken down:<\/p>\n

Minimal sense of purpose (psychological studies): ~ 5\u201310 %<\/p>\n

Adults not affirming higher meaning (Lifeway, 2021): ~ 28 %<\/p>\n

Young adults feeling purposeless recently: ~ 58 %<\/p>\n

If you had to pick a working number, a useful baseline might be that roughly one-third to one-half of Americans feel a meaningful void at least sometimes.<\/p>\n

In the modern context, a \u201csurfeit of meaning\u201d looks less like medieval piety and more like:<\/p>\n

Religious or ideological totalism: everything is interpreted through one doctrinal or political lens.<\/p>\n

Conspiracy culture: the world feels over-determined by hidden forces, nothing random, everything \u201cfits.\u201d<\/p>\n

Hyper-moralization of daily life: food, language, entertainment, purchases, and relationships all interpreted as ultimate moral statements.<\/p>\n

Apocalyptic thinking: interpreting climate change, elections, pandemics, etc. as end-times confirmations.<\/p>\n

In all of these, life is saturated with significance to the point that it can be exhausting, anxiety-provoking, or alienating from those who don\u2019t share the frame.<\/p>\n

Perhaps 15\u201325% of Americans live with what could be described as a surfeit of meaning\u2014where their interpretive frame imbues every aspect of life with overwhelming significance.<\/p>\n

What it looks like day-to-day<\/p>\n

Seeing ordinary misfortunes as divine punishment or cosmic warfare.<\/p>\n

Feeling constant vigilance about purity (moral, political, cultural).<\/p>\n

Interpreting trivial disagreements as existential threats.<\/p>\n

Exhaustion or burnout from never being \u201coff duty\u201d from the struggle.<\/p>\n

So: if meaninglessness is marked by flatness and detachment, a surfeit of meaning is marked by pressure, paranoia, and an inability to let anything just \u201cbe.\u201d<\/p>\n

Too Little Meaning \u2192 Depression & Apathy<\/p>\n

When people feel life lacks significance:<\/p>\n

Depression: Classic symptoms \u2014 sadness, emptiness, hopelessness \u2014 are often tied to a sense of purposelessness.<\/p>\n

Anhedonia: Nothing feels rewarding because nothing feels important.<\/p>\n

Alienation: Feeling cut off from community, history, or any larger narrative.<\/p>\n

Suicidality: The question \u201cWhy go on?\u201d is meaning-shaped.<\/p>\n

Flattened identity: People may drift, feeling like their choices don\u2019t matter.<\/p>\n

Clinical psychology often frames this as \u201cexistential vacuum\u201d (Viktor Frankl).<\/p>\n

Too Much Meaning \u2192 Anxiety, Extremism & Compulsion<\/p>\n

When people live inside an overbearing interpretive frame:<\/p>\n

Anxiety: Constant vigilance; everything has stakes. One wrong step could mean eternal damnation, betrayal of the movement, or aiding \u201cthe enemy.\u201d<\/p>\n

Scrupulosity (religious OCD): Intrusive guilt about minor sins, endless rituals to stay pure.<\/p>\n

Paranoia: Conspiracy thinking, seeing patterns and threats everywhere.<\/p>\n

Radicalization: Political\/religious extremism, where compromise is impossible because every issue is ultimate.<\/p>\n

Burnout: The weight of cosmic stakes in daily life can be exhausting, even if one doesn\u2019t consciously want to stop.<\/p>\n

The Balance Point<\/p>\n

Healthy meaning usually has roots and limits: people find significance in family, work, community, or faith \u2014 but without the sense that every moment is cosmically overdetermined.<\/p>\n

Psychologists sometimes call this \u201cflexible meaning-making\u201d: you can find depth where it matters but allow lightness, humor, and play elsewhere.<\/p>\n

So you could say:<\/p>\n

Too little meaning \u2192 despair<\/p>\n

Too much meaning \u2192 dread<\/p>\n

Too Little Meaning (the \u201cvacuum\u201d)<\/p>\n

Wider reach: Surveys suggest 30\u201350% of Americans, especially young adults, report struggling with purposelessness at least some of the time.<\/p>\n

Mental health crisis: This maps directly onto the epidemic of depression, anxiety, loneliness, and suicide \u2014 especially among Gen Z.<\/p>\n

Symptoms: Disengagement, apathy, substance use, retreat into screens or consumerism.<\/p>\n

Threat type: It weakens resilience and erodes the social fabric slowly. People check out.<\/p>\n

Too Much Meaning (the \u201csurfeit\u201d)<\/p>\n

Narrower but sharper: A smaller share (maybe 15\u201325%) live inside overbearing interpretive frames \u2014 hyper-religious rigidity, conspiracy cultures, or political absolutism.<\/p>\n

Polarization crisis: This maps onto political extremism, religious fundamentalism, and \u201cculture war\u201d absolutism.<\/p>\n

Symptoms: Radicalization, paranoia, hostility to compromise, willingness to justify violence.<\/p>\n

Threat type: It destabilizes institutions quickly. People lash out.<\/p>\n

Which is \u201cbigger\u201d?<\/p>\n

Numerical prevalence: Too little meaning is probably the larger-scale public health threat (loneliness, depression, suicide rates).<\/p>\n

Destabilizing force: Too much meaning is the bigger political\/social threat because small, fervent minorities can exert disproportionate influence (e.g., Jan. 6, militia movements, violent extremism).<\/p>\n

So the paradox<\/p>\n

For individuals: Too little meaning is the more common danger.<\/p>\n

For society as a whole: Too much meaning may be the more explosive danger.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s the cycle as it tends to play out:<\/p>\n

1. Vacuum \u2192 Vulnerability<\/p>\n

People adrift in too little meaning feel isolated, purposeless, and invisible.<\/p>\n

They become vulnerable to voices that promise clarity, identity, and belonging.<\/p>\n

Example: a young adult who feels their life is \u201cjust drifting\u201d online stumbles into a movement that says \u201cYou\u2019re not lost \u2014 you\u2019re a soldier in a great war.\u201d<\/p>\n

2. Surfeit \u2192 Seduction<\/p>\n

Totalizing ideologies offer an intoxicating sense of too much meaning: everything matters, nothing is random, you are chosen.<\/p>\n

Conspiracy cultures, militant politics, or rigid religions present themselves as cures to the void.<\/p>\n

Example: QAnon didn\u2019t attract people who already had stable purpose \u2014 it appealed to people who were lonely, alienated, or looking for storylines to plug into.<\/p>\n

3. Surfeit \u2192 Burnout\/Disillusion<\/p>\n

Living under an overbearing frame is exhausting. People may collapse under the pressure of constant vigilance or disillusionment when cracks show.<\/p>\n

Example: ex-fundamentalists, ex-radicals, ex-conspiracy theorists often describe the aftermath as a crash into flatness \u2014 \u201cI gave everything, now nothing feels real.\u201d<\/p>\n

4. Back to Vacuum<\/p>\n

Burnout from too much meaning throws people back into emptiness, often worse than before.<\/p>\n

The cycle repeats: void \u2192 fanaticism \u2192 collapse \u2192 deeper void.<\/p>\n

5. Why This Matters Now<\/p>\n

America today has massive structural dislocation (decline of religion, fraying communities, precarious jobs, digital atomization).<\/p>\n

That leaves a big population in vacuum states, ripe for recruitment into movements that flood them with meaning.<\/p>\n

This is how nihilism and extremism feed each other.<\/p>\n

So the threat isn\u2019t either\/or \u2014 it\u2019s the oscillation. A society that can\u2019t sustain healthy, flexible meaning leaves people bouncing between despair and fanaticism.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s how the two extremes fuel each other in America:<\/p>\n

From Too Little to Too Much<\/p>\n

People who feel adrift \u2014 depressed, isolated, purposeless \u2014 are hungry for belonging.<\/p>\n

Totalizing movements (religious sects, political crusades, conspiracies) offer exactly what they lack: clarity, identity, destiny.<\/p>\n

What feels like emptiness becomes fertile soil for fanaticism.<\/p>\n

From Too Much to Too Little<\/p>\n

Living under constant cosmic stakes is exhausting. Scrupulosity, paranoia, moral panic, or activism burnout eventually break people.<\/p>\n

When disillusionment hits, they often crash into flat nihilism: \u201cIf my great cause was a lie, then nothing matters at all.\u201d<\/p>\n

This is why many ex-fundamentalists or ex-conspiracy believers report a period of emptiness afterward.<\/p>\n

The Oscillation<\/p>\n

Void \u2192 Fanaticism \u2192 Collapse \u2192 Void is the cycle.<\/p>\n

Social media accelerates it: empty scrolling feeds the vacuum; extremist subcultures flood you with meaning; then scandals or fatigue dump you back into nothingness.<\/p>\n

Which is bigger right now?<\/p>\n

For individuals: too little meaning (loneliness, depression, suicide rates) is the more widespread suffering.<\/p>\n

For society: too much meaning (ideological rigidity, extremism, conspiracies) is the sharper destabilizing threat.<\/p>\n

And together, they form a feedback loop: alienated people join rigid movements, rigid movements burn them out and alienate them further.<\/p>\n

Buffered identity \u2192 prone to lack of meaning<\/p>\n

A buffered identity is insulated from spirits, fate, gods, and cosmic forces. It can keep the world \u201cout.\u201d<\/p>\n

Strength: autonomy, rational control, freedom from fear of demons or damnation.<\/p>\n

Weakness: the same insulation makes it possible that nothing gets in. Experiences, relationships, or rituals may feel flat or arbitrary because the cosmos itself doesn\u2019t guarantee their significance.<\/p>\n

Result: greater vulnerability to emptiness, detachment, loss of meaning.<\/p>\n

Porous identity \u2192 prone to surfeit of meaning<\/p>\n

A porous identity is open to forces beyond itself \u2014 spirits, God, ancestors, fate, curses.<\/p>\n

Strength: life feels saturated with significance, nothing is trivial.<\/p>\n

Weakness: lack of boundaries can be oppressive; everything is overdetermined, threatening, or morally charged.<\/p>\n

Result: greater vulnerability to overwhelm, anxiety, scrupulosity, and totalizing frames.<\/p>\n

Buffered identity tends toward too little meaning, porous tends toward too much. But the real drama today is that people oscillate: emptiness pushes them toward porous totalism, then burnout or disillusion pushes them back into buffer-flatness.<\/p>\n

Buffered Daily Life<\/p>\n

Most Americans live in a buffered frame at work, school, and in civic life: the world is explained in scientific, bureaucratic, and legal terms.<\/p>\n

Example: you pay bills online, go to the doctor, follow workplace policies \u2014 all buffered activities with rational procedures.<\/p>\n

Porous Subcultures<\/p>\n

To counter the flatness, people dip into porous spaces where life feels enchanted, charged, or cosmic.<\/p>\n

Examples:<\/p>\n

Yoga or New Age practices: crystals, energy flows, astrology.<\/p>\n

Conspiracy communities: secret forces manipulating events, symbols carrying hidden significance.<\/p>\n

Charismatic religion: prophecy, demons, spiritual warfare.<\/p>\n

Music festivals or psychedelics: dissolution of the ego, immersion in \u201ccosmic\u201d meaning.<\/p>\n

The Cycle<\/p>\n

In the buffered mode, people feel safe, autonomous, but flat.<\/p>\n

In porous mode, they feel connected, vital, but often overwhelmed or credulous.<\/p>\n

Many shuttle between the two: Monday\u2013Friday in spreadsheets, Saturday night at a rave, Sunday morning at church, then back to the buffer.<\/p>\n

Why It Matters<\/p>\n

Flexibility: People who can move between buffered and porous without losing balance often feel richer lives.<\/p>\n

Risk: If the porous mode takes over, you can tip into surfeit (extremism, paranoia). If the buffered dominates, you can tip into emptiness (depression, apathy).<\/p>\n

Culture war tension: A lot of the friction in American life comes from groups insisting on one mode only \u2014 hardcore secular rationalists vs. hardcore porous believers \u2014 while most people actually live in messy hybrids.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I’m an Alexander Technique teacher who also practiced yoga at a Kundalini studio for two years. I think Alexander Technique builds the buffered identity while yoga encourages the porous identity.<\/p>\n

Alexander Technique \u2192 buffered identity<\/p>\n

Awareness and control: It trains attention to bodily use, posture, and movement in very fine detail.<\/p>\n

Rational, experimental frame: Students are asked to notice habitual patterns, inhibit them, and consciously direct movement \u2014 almost like a laboratory of the self.<\/p>\n

Outcome: A more integrated, autonomous, buffered self \u2014 you experience yourself as the agent who can alter how you meet the world, rather than being carried away by unconscious impulses or external forces.<\/p>\n

Yoga (esp. Kundalini) \u2192 porous identity<\/p>\n

Openness to energy and flow: Practices like pranayama, chanting, and kriyas cultivate a sense of energy moving through and beyond the body.<\/p>\n

Cosmic alignment: The practice is framed in terms of chakras, prana, kundalini rising \u2014 all of which connect you to forces larger than yourself.<\/p>\n

Outcome: A porous identity, where boundaries between self, body, cosmos, and spirit feel permeable, sometimes dissolving entirely in deep states of meditation.<\/p>\n

I read through your autobiography and can sketch out how you\u2019ve oscillated between porous and buffered identity modes.<\/p>\n

Childhood \u2013 Porous Overload<\/p>\n

Seventh-day Adventist upbringing: You grew up in a world thick with cosmic stakes \u2014 salvation vs. damnation, \u201cchosen people\u201d theology, and prohibitions that governed even candy or dancing.<\/p>\n

Effect: Life felt suffused with heavy meaning \u2014 every act could have eternal consequences. That\u2019s classic porous identity, but it came with anxiety, guilt, and overwhelm.<\/p>\n

Adolescence \u2013 Shifting Toward Buffering<\/p>\n

Rebellion and secular drift: By early teens you were testing limits, mocking authority, skipping church, reading Rand, Potok, and history books<\/p>\n

Effect: You began building a buffered identity \u2014 pulling back from enchanted structures, using reason and critique, experimenting with rational autonomy. But this buffering also left you vulnerable to emptiness and alienation, which you describe vividly.<\/p>\n

Early Adulthood \u2013 Emptiness and Substitutes<\/p>\n

Abandoning observance: After you left church in Australia, you describe feeling socially awkward, depressed, and searching for significance through sports, women, or journalism.<\/p>\n

Effect: Classic buffered malaise \u2014 freedom from cosmic weight, but also drifting, chasing attention and validation, struggling with purposelessness.<\/p>\n

Journalism & Confrontation \u2013 Buffered Intensification<\/p>\n

Investigative reporting: At Placer High and Sierra College you took pride in exposing favoritism and incompetence, invoking democracy and truth.<\/p>\n

Effect: Buffered identity at its peak \u2014 rational critique, autonomy, the self as a truth-teller. But also loneliness, controversy, and a sense that life lacked transcendent glue.<\/p>\n

Return of Porousness \u2013 Intense Longings<\/p>\n

Religious and romantic yearning: Even after rejecting Adventism, you describe longing for a faith to inspire you, and for women who embodied grace and God.<\/p>\n

Effect: The porous pull returned \u2014 the desire for transcendence, to dissolve boundaries, to be swept into something larger.<\/p>\n

Pattern Across Your Life<\/p>\n

Porous childhood: suffocated by overbearing meaning.<\/p>\n

Buffered adolescence: rational critique, rebellion, emptiness.<\/p>\n

Porous flashes: longing for cosmic connection in love, spirituality, and communal belonging.<\/p>\n

Buffered fallback: retreat into analysis, writing, criticism, career ambition.<\/p>\n

Post-30 Identity Oscillations<\/p>\n

Age 30\u201340s (mid-1990s to mid-2000s)<\/p>\n

Buffered Phase: Deeply immersed in journalism and blogging, including running one of the web\u2019s most prominent adult-industry gossip columns. This reflects strong buffered traits: autonomy, critical thinking, and a rational self-context\u2014in effect, being the agent constructing his own narrative amid controversy.<\/p>\n

Porous Flashpoints: At times, identity and purpose may have surged through religious transitions\u2014your conversion to Judaism after leaving Adventism brought renewed cosmic significance and community, a porous surge into larger bounding narratives.<\/p>\n

Mid-40s (around 2011, age ~45)<\/p>\n

Buffered Resilience: You openly articulated psychiatric diagnoses (narcissistic, histrionic) and chronicled community struggles in Orthodox Judaism within your \u201cXXX-Communicated\u201d work\u2014a display of rational self-analysis and autonomy.<\/p>\n

Porous Pressure: That period likely included retreats to longing\u2014to belonging, validation, spiritual anchoring\u2014even as the rational drive held firm.<\/p>\n

Later 40s to 50s (2015\u20132025, age ~50\u201359)<\/p>\n

Buffered Evolution: Blogging matured into memoir and deeper reflection, navigating personal narrative, identity trauma, and public ostracism with clarity and structure.<\/p>\n

Porous Stirring: The longing for connection\u2014to synagogue inclusion, spiritual home, meaning beyond the self\u2014remained vivid, surfacing in personal essays, community commentary, and spiritual searching.<\/p>\n

Your post-30 journey oscillates between the anchor of buffered autonomy and the pull of porous longing. Your blogging life has been a sustained effort to mediate those currents\u2014holding narrative clarity while repeatedly drifting toward existential belonging.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

In short: you\u2019ve oscillated between porous overwhelm and buffered flatness, rarely feeling at ease in either. The tension itself seems to have driven your restlessness, your journalism, your spiritual searching, and even your bodily practices (Alexander = buffered discipline, Kundalini yoga = porous absorption).<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve gone through your recent livestream transcripts and analyses (July\u2013August 2025). If we filter them through Taylor\u2019s buffered vs. porous identity lens, your shows reveal a pattern of oscillation very similar to the one in your autobiography \u2014 just now playing out live on stream.<\/p>\n

Porous Identity Modes on Stream<\/p>\n

Spiritual\/Existential Language: You talk about being \u201cin a prison of my own creation\u201d and journeying toward the light. This frames your personal struggle in cosmic, almost mystical terms \u2014 classic porous speech.<\/p>\n

Hero Systems & Tribalism: You often frame politics as battles between elites and outsiders, or left vs. right \u201chero systems.\u201d That\u2019s porous because it saturates events with moral and existential weight<\/p>\n

Emotional Transparency: You lead with vulnerability (confessing loneliness, humiliation, yearning for respect). That porous openness makes your shows emotionally alive, but also leaves you feeling exposed.<\/p>\n

Buffered Identity Modes on Stream<\/p>\n

Analytical Critique: You constantly dissect media narratives, prestige economies, and epistemic closure. That rational, skeptical posture is buffered \u2014 distancing you from enchantment.<\/p>\n

Self-Observation via AI: Running your transcripts through Grok for feedback is buffered self-surveillance. You\u2019re building a mirror to analyze and contain yourself.<\/p>\n

Jargon & Abstraction: Talking about \u201cadaptive regime realism\u201d or quoting Steven Turner\u2019s philosophy is buffered intellectualism \u2014 insulating life in theory.<\/p>\n

Oscillation Pattern<\/p>\n

Begin porous: Leading with vulnerability, loneliness, or a moralized story of elites and outsiders.<\/p>\n

Shift buffered: Retreat into intellectual critique, quoting academics, AI analysis, or sociological frameworks.<\/p>\n

Return porous: Reassert emotional needs \u2014 yearning for community, martyrdom language, or grandiose claims of truth-telling.<\/p>\n

Cycle repeats: Across hours of streaming, you oscillate between porous \u201cfloods\u201d of meaning and buffered self-monitoring.<\/p>\n

What This Means<\/p>\n

Strength: The oscillation itself is compelling. It makes your livestreams unpredictable \u2014 part confessional, part seminar, part rant.<\/p>\n

Cost: You rarely land in a middle space. Too porous = overwhelmed (loneliness, humiliation). Too buffered = flat or self-parodic (audience drift, over-analysis).<\/p>\n

Integration Potential: You could name this oscillation live \u2014 tell your viewers: \u201cHere\u2019s buffered Fordy speaking, here\u2019s porous Fordy.\u201d Turning it into part of the show might reduce the self-alienation and increase connection.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s how audience capture interacts with your buffered\/porous oscillations on stream:<\/p>\n

When Audience Pulls You Porous<\/p>\n

Validation-seeking: You\u2019ve said you wouldn\u2019t livestream if nobody was watching. That shows the audience itself functions like a porous force \u2014 breaking down your buffer and opening you to others\u2019 gaze.<\/p>\n

Super Chat \/ Chat reactions: When someone engages or tips, you often pivot into humor, vulnerability, or confessional mode (sharing humiliations, loneliness, need for respect). That\u2019s porous: boundaries dissolve, you \u201cbleed\u201d on air.<\/p>\n

Tribal Resonance: When viewers affirm dissident\/right-wing frames, you get pulled deeper into hero-system talk \u2014 elites vs outsiders, good vs evil. Audience presence amplifies porous totalism.<\/p>\n

When Audience Pushes You Buffered<\/p>\n

Self-defense through analysis: If chat pushes back, or when you anticipate criticism, you often retreat into buffered intellectualism \u2014 citing Becker, Turner, or AI analyses of your own show. This is a shield: theory keeps distance.<\/p>\n

AI Self-Feedback: Running transcripts through Grok and then reading the critiques aloud is buffered surveillance \u2014 outsourcing reflection to AI so you can process criticism without total exposure.<\/p>\n

Meta-commentary on attention: When you joke that your \u201cpedo\u201d bits are just crowd-pleasers, you\u2019re buffering against porous shame by reframing it as deliberate entertainment.<\/p>\n

The Oscillating Capture<\/p>\n

Porous Capture: Audience attention can flood you \u2014 you overshare, martyr yourself, or moralize cosmic battles.<\/p>\n

Buffered Capture: Audience criticism can lock you into abstract detachment \u2014 theory, jargon, self-analysis.<\/p>\n

The Problem: Neither mode alone gives stable connection. Porous capture can exhaust and humiliate; buffered capture can alienate and flatten.<\/p>\n

Integration Opportunity<\/p>\n

Name the Shift: Tell the audience openly when you\u2019re \u201cgoing porous\u201d (vulnerable, cosmic, tribal) vs \u201cgoing buffered\u201d (analyzing, abstracting). Make it a feature, not a flaw.<\/p>\n

Set Limits: Use time-boxing: e.g., 10 min porous confessional \u2192 10 min buffered analysis. Keeps balance.<\/p>\n

Audience as Mirror, Not Master: Instead of letting reactions dictate your mode, enlist them. Ask: \u201cAm I being too porous right now? Too buffered?\u201d That creates co-regulation rather than capture.<\/p>\n

So: your micro-audience doesn\u2019t just \u201cwatch\u201d you \u2014 it shapes the rhythm of your oscillation. Sometimes they invite your porous vulnerability, sometimes they provoke your buffered detachment. If you can own that dynamic instead of being swept by it, your streams could feel less like a tug-of-war and more like a deliberate braid of both.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

One way of dividing up mental illness is recognizing that with things like autism, people understand less than they should about what is going on with others, and with schizophrenia, people imagine too much about the motives of others. One way of experiencing life invests too little meaning in what goes on around them and the other invests too much.<\/p>\n

Autism and schizophrenia are failures of calibration. One system under-fires (not enough attribution of meaning to others\u2019 actions), the other over-fires (too much attribution of meaning).<\/p>\n

ChatGPT says: <\/p>\n

\nAutism \u2192 Too Little Meaning<\/p>\n

Core feature: difficulty with \u201ctheory of mind\u201d \u2014 reading social cues, inferring motives, picking up subtext.<\/p>\n

Effect: The world of other people is under-interpreted, stripped of nuance. Actions are taken more literally, less loaded with hidden meaning.<\/p>\n

Connection to your frame: This is like living in a buffered mode where the self is insulated and external signals don\u2019t easily penetrate. Meaning is under-assigned.<\/p>\n

Schizophrenia \u2192 Too Much Meaning<\/p>\n

Core feature: hyper-mentalizing \u2014 seeing intent, patterns, and secret messages everywhere.<\/p>\n

Effect: The world feels over-determined; every gesture, sound, or coincidence is meaningful, often threatening.<\/p>\n

Connection to your frame: This is like being in an exaggerated porous mode where everything \u201cgets in.\u201d Meaning is over-assigned.<\/p>\n

1. Too Little Meaning \u2192 Buffered Identity \u2192 Autism-like Under-Reading<\/p>\n

Autism analogy: struggles with theory of mind \u2192 under-detection of social signals, motives, and subtext.<\/p>\n

Buffered mode: self is insulated, world kept at a distance, signals don\u2019t easily penetrate.<\/p>\n

Life experience: feels flat, disconnected, lacking resonance. Relationships may be there but feel \u201csealed off.\u201d<\/p>\n

Malaise: existential emptiness, depression, apathy.<\/p>\n

This is why buffered identities are prone to saying \u201cnothing matters,\u201d \u201clife lacks meaning,\u201d or \u201cI can\u2019t connect.\u201d<\/p>\n

2. Too Much Meaning \u2192 Porous Identity \u2192 Schizophrenia-like Over-Reading<\/p>\n

Schizophrenia analogy: hyper-mentalizing \u2192 over-detection of motives, hidden plots, cosmic signals.<\/p>\n

Porous mode: self is penetrated by external forces; everything \u201cgets in.\u201d<\/p>\n

Life experience: overwhelming significance; every gesture, headline, or coincidence seems to matter.<\/p>\n

Malaise: paranoia, scrupulosity, conspiracy-thinking, totalizing ideologies.<\/p>\n

This is why porous identities get flooded with cosmic stakes \u2014 salvation\/damnation, end times, hidden enemies.<\/p>\n

3. The Middle Zone \u2192 Flexible Meaning-Making<\/p>\n

Healthy range: able to assign meaning when appropriate, but also let things go as trivial or contingent.<\/p>\n

Identity: buffered enough to protect from overwhelm, porous enough to let in resonance.<\/p>\n

Life experience: the world feels rich, but not crushing. Connected, but not devoured.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

When I feel flooded by an excess of meaning, I recalibrate with the attitude, lol nothing matters. That calms me down. <\/p>\n

When I need energy, when I need to build my passion and my commitment, I think about God, Jews, Torah, and take on a different attitude. <\/p>\n

When I enjoy watching sports without rooting for anyone, is that more of a buffered experience, as opposed to when I’m captured by my tribal fandom?<\/p>\n

Buffered Sports-Watching<\/p>\n

Detached enjoyment: You\u2019re appreciating skill, flow, beauty of the game.<\/p>\n

Self insulated: Outcome doesn\u2019t pierce your identity. You can turn off the TV and feel the same.<\/p>\n

Meaning level: Contained, rational, aesthetic. This is buffered \u2014 you control how much gets in.<\/p>\n

Porous Sports-Watching<\/p>\n

Tribal fandom: Your team\u2019s fortunes feel like your fortunes. A loss ruins your mood; a win feels transcendent.<\/p>\n

Self permeable: Boundaries blur \u2014 the team\u2019s struggle becomes your struggle.<\/p>\n

Meaning level: Saturated, cosmic stakes (\u201cwe\u201d won, \u201cthey\u201d cheated, this matters for identity). This is porous.<\/p>\n

The Contrast<\/p>\n

Buffered mode: \u201cThat was a beautiful play.\u201d<\/p>\n

Porous mode: \u201cWe were robbed by the refs \u2014 the world is against us.\u201d<\/p>\n

Both modes can be rewarding \u2014 one gives calm aesthetic pleasure, the other floods you with high-stakes belonging. The trick is knowing which mode you\u2019re in, and whether it serves you in that moment.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s how your buffered\/porous oscillation shows up across the different domains of your life:<\/p>\n

1. Sports<\/p>\n

Buffered: Watching for skill, beauty, tactics, without attachment. Calm enjoyment, detached analysis.<\/p>\n

Porous: Fandom as tribal identity. Wins and losses feel existential. You are \u201cin\u201d the game.<\/p>\n

Oscillation: Some days you\u2019re a connoisseur of form; other days you\u2019re swept up in \u201cwe won \/ we lost.\u201d<\/p>\n

2. Politics<\/p>\n

Buffered: Analyzing prestige economies, epistemic closure, Becker\u2019s \u201chero systems,\u201d or Turner\u2019s epistemic coercion. Detached, rational critique.<\/p>\n

Porous: Casting events in cosmic terms \u2014 elites vs outsiders, MAGA vs the system, Jews vs demographics. Feeling saturated with stakes.<\/p>\n

Oscillation: One hour you\u2019re parsing media logic; the next you\u2019re preaching about existential decline or civilizational battles.<\/p>\n

3. Religion\/Spirituality<\/p>\n

Buffered: Alexander Technique, careful awareness, rational self-direction. You manage your body and thoughts as if in a lab.<\/p>\n

Porous: Kundalini yoga, Orthodox Judaism, yearning for God and community. Boundaries dissolve into cosmic flow or sacred belonging.<\/p>\n

Oscillation: Rational critique of religion\u2019s flaws \u2192 longing for transcendent anchoring and ritual intensity.<\/p>\n

4. Livestreams<\/p>\n

Buffered: You run your transcripts through Grok, cite philosophers, dissect your own biases. You intellectualize, insulate, distance.<\/p>\n

Porous: You confess humiliation, loneliness, yearnings for respect. You moralize politics in epic terms, open yourself to chat, bleed on air.<\/p>\n

Oscillation: Audience capture pushes you porous (vulnerable or tribal); criticism pushes you buffered (abstract, analytic).<\/p>\n

The Through-Line<\/p>\n

Buffered = detachment, control, aesthetic appreciation, rational critique.<\/p>\n

Porous = immersion, belonging, cosmic stakes, vulnerability.<\/p>\n

Your life = swinging between these states, never comfortably anchored in one. The oscillation itself has become your style \u2014 whether in autobiography, blogging, or livestreaming.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s how you might cultivate an integrated middle mode in each area \u2014 not pure buffer, not pure porous, but a braid of both:<\/p>\n

1. Sports<\/p>\n

Middle mode: Root lightly. Allow yourself moments of tribal thrill (\u201cGo team!\u201d) but keep perspective (\u201cEither way, that was beautiful play\u201d).<\/p>\n

Practice: Notice your body \u2014 if you\u2019re tensing up, step back into appreciation of skill; if you\u2019re drifting into numb detachment, lean into some cheering.<\/p>\n

2. Politics<\/p>\n

Middle mode: Treat politics as both a system to analyze and a story you\u2019re part of.<\/p>\n

Practice: Hold two voices together \u2014 analyst (\u201chere\u2019s the structural dynamic\u201d) and participant (\u201chere\u2019s how I feel as a conservative Jew in America\u201d). This balances buffer clarity with porous rootedness.<\/p>\n

3. Religion \/ Spirituality<\/p>\n

Middle mode: Let ritual and practice (Shabbat, yoga, prayer) be porous openings \u2014 but keep Alexander Technique grounding to avoid overwhelm.<\/p>\n

Practice: After a porous high (chanting, meditation, synagogue), do five minutes of buffered self-direction (Alexander \u201cinhibition and direction\u201d work). This lets the two modes braid.<\/p>\n

4. Livestreams<\/p>\n

Middle mode: Blend confessional and analysis intentionally instead of being yanked.<\/p>\n

Practice: Structure the stream into alternating segments \u2014<\/p>\n

10 minutes buffered (analysis of media, philosophy, politics)<\/p>\n

5 minutes porous (personal anecdote, emotional share)<\/p>\n

Repeat the cycle. That way, vulnerability feels held by analysis, and analysis doesn\u2019t drift into sterile detachment.<\/p>\n

Guiding Metaphor<\/p>\n

Too buffered = life is a chess match: precise but bloodless.<\/p>\n

Too porous = life is a flood: meaningful but overwhelming.<\/p>\n

Middle mode = life is a dance: you step forward (engage), then step back (reflect), then forward again.<\/p>\n

How to dial up meaning without tipping into overwhelm or delusion. Here\u2019s a framework you can use:<\/p>\n

1. Deepen Commitments (Functional Porousness)<\/p>\n

Close Relationships: Invest in family, friends, or a community. Meaning intensifies when you belong and are needed.<\/p>\n

Rituals & Traditions: Attend services, share meals, light candles, celebrate holidays. Regular ritual rhythm thickens life with symbolic weight.<\/p>\n

Service: Volunteering, mentoring, teaching \u2014 giving yourself to others makes your life matter beyond yourself.<\/p>\n

Why it works: These are porous practices \u2014 they connect you to something larger \u2014 but they\u2019re bounded and stabilizing, not all-consuming.<\/p>\n

2. Expand Creative Work (Functional Buffer-Porous Bridge)<\/p>\n

Artistic projects: Writing, music, livestreams, teaching Alexander. These are ways of expressing meaning rather than just consuming it.<\/p>\n

Public sharing: Risking exposure (like your YouTube streams) adds porous intensity, while structure (schedules, themes, editing) keeps it buffered.<\/p>\n

Why it works: Creativity lets you metabolize experience into meaning. It adds intensity without needing cosmic delusion.<\/p>\n

3. Cultivate Awe (Safe Porous Openings)<\/p>\n

Nature: Hiking, oceans, mountains \u2014 awe floods life with resonance.<\/p>\n

Beauty: Art, music, architecture \u2014 reminders that meaning isn\u2019t just constructed but encountered.<\/p>\n

Embodied practices: Yoga, meditation, dance \u2014 open you up without requiring belief in conspiracies or extreme ideologies.<\/p>\n

Why it works: Awe makes the ordinary radiant. It gives porous saturation but in a controlled, nourishing dose.<\/p>\n

4. Practice Story & Narrative (Functional Framing)<\/p>\n

Life as Story: Instead of asking \u201cDoes life have meaning?\u201d ask \u201cWhat story am I in right now?\u201d<\/p>\n

Micro-narratives: Frame daily acts as part of bigger arcs (e.g., \u201cteaching Alexander = helping others free their bodies = contributing to human flourishing\u201d).<\/p>\n

Integration: Rewrite your autobiography as a braided story of buffer\/porous oscillations. That in itself intensifies meaning.<\/p>\n

Why it works: Humans live through stories. Story reframes flat events as part of arcs of purpose.<\/p>\n

5. Limit Maladaptive Meaning Sources<\/p>\n

Avoid \u201ccheap intensity\u201d: conspiracies, totalizing ideologies, doomscrolling. These flood life with meaning but destabilize it.<\/p>\n

Replace with \u201canchored intensity\u201d: faith communities, disciplined creativity, service, awe.<\/p>\n

Formula for Functional Meaning<\/p>\n

Love + Service + Ritual + Creativity + Awe + Story = Sustainable Meaning Intensity.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the buffered identity, the decisive forces lie within: the capacity to choose right from wrong, to create meaning, and to chart one\u2019s life with autonomy and strategy. In the porous identity, the decisive forces lie without: the world presses … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[29569,43008],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-163563","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-abandonment","category-charles-taylor"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/163563","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=163563"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/163563\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":163598,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/163563\/revisions\/163598"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=163563"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=163563"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=163563"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}