I came across an article that was comparing and contrasting different 'views' of what's wrong with the world. Towards this end, it decomposed most theorists' solutions into the following three categories:
Incremental Approach: The problems of the world are caused by inefficiencies, inaccuracies, and misunderstandings. Thus they can be solved by incremental improvements and optimizations: a little here, a little there.
Radical Approach: The problems of the world are in its foundation and emerge from its core. Thus they can only be solved through radical change at every level.
Dominant Approach: The world is how it is, and that is how it ought to be.
Needless to say, there are very few dominant theorists out there, so the article set them aside and proceeded to compare and contrast the incremental and radical approaches (Ex:"do you want to fix the government, or overthrow it? Are you a capitalist or a socialist? Etc.").
At the time, I didn't really think much of this. Of course there's almost nobody who thinks the world is the way it ought to be; it's a proposterous, myopic, and complacent understanding, the sort of position that could only be assumed by a person of great privilege who is ignorant to the harsher realities of life.
Oddly enough though, it was the dominant [1] approach that continued to nag at my doorstep, there long after the others had faded into the spectrum of building the world up or burning it all down. With some patience, the approach began to reveal its uses, insights [2] that could not be found through the other approaches.
[1]The term 'dominant' here may be confusing. The reason it's referred to as dominant is because it serves as a default that the other approaches override, and even the largest imagined moralizing systems end up covering only tiny slivers of reality.
The other reason I refer to it as 'dominant' is because its relationship is similar to the mathematical concept of domination: irrespective of the handicap it is given, eventually there is a point beyond which it simply makes more sense than either of the alternatives.
[2]I am giving it my attention because it is neglected, overlooked, and frequently scorned. My hope is that you might find it instructive and interesting, and perhaps get some use out of it as well.