Relationships are coevolutionary loops (2023)
Bug-logging & iterative relationship design
- Several commenters liked the idea of treating the relationship like software: routines as “code,” a shared board as a “bug log,” and recurring retrospectives to improve life together.
- Others described similar practices: monthly planning, reviewing missed tasks, and annual photo albums as ways to co‑create and reflect on a shared life.
- One person noted their relationship still ended despite strong logistics and support, tying this to missing deeper intellectual and generative conversation.
How often to surface problems
- Some argued that if you have enough issues for a weekly list, the relationship may be unhealthy, and scheduled retros invite nitpicking and inflation of trivial annoyances.
- Others countered that dealing with small issues early prevents resentment, and that “problem rate” is couple‑dependent; frequent, honest feedback can be healthy if both partners are aligned and kind.
- There was also emphasis on learning to let genuinely small things go.
Coevolution, strangeness, and enabling growth
- Commenters resonated with the idea that people “come into themselves” partly through someone who is curious about and supportive of their core strangeness.
- Examples included partners who helped each other unmask autistic traits and grow in self‑understanding, and the sense of being “lucky” to find someone compatible enough for mutual evolution.
- Others argued some eccentrics develop without such support, or even in reaction to bullying and repression.
Reductionism and “biological machine” debate
- A long subthread debated whether humans are best understood as “biological machines/computers” processing inputs to outputs.
- Physicalist/reductionist views framed this as empirically supported and compatible with wonder.
- Critics saw this as over‑reductive, potentially arrogance‑inducing or thought‑terminating, and questioned the computer metaphor’s usefulness for lived experience, free will, and consciousness.
Dating culture, authenticity, and social context
- Several criticized “pickup” and status‑driven advice that promotes contorting oneself to be liked, arguing it obscures whether partners like the real person.
- Emphasis was placed on honesty with oneself, empathy, and meeting people in contexts where they don’t have to perform.
- Some blamed broader culture—promiscuity, school, the internet, inequality, weakened communities—for undermining stable coevolutionary relationships, while others stressed globalization’s benefits and the loss of traditional support structures.
- Philosophical references (e.g., dialogical and relational ontology) were noted as helpful lenses for understanding the article’s themes.