Just brainstorming questions (I don’t know if any are worth answering):
How do you identify whether something is a true bound on progress vs a hurdle?
Are bounds and hurdles both technically finite? I would imagine a bound is something like using violence to try to resolve disagreements. I could also imagine that someone with the idea of using violence in disagreements might be taught better without getting into a violent conflict. E.g., their taught things that they want learn and that leads to learning about peaceful ideas.
How long would it take for someone making unbounded progress to get around to learning philosophy if their starting field was very remote from philosophy? Philosophy comes up immediately and all the time in everyday decisions but does that mean that a common sense person would specific non-philosophy aspirations would still come to philosophy quickly. Some who wanted to be a great home-builder might be able to make a lot of progress by learning skills in their profession and leveling up to higher-order careers for a while without necessarily getting into philosophy.
Are there people making unbounded progress in math, science, medicine, business who might not get CF in a current human lifespan? Or, is it unrealistic to expect that any displine to be independent enough of philosophy for it to be missed for decades? Is everybody only making bounded progress? How much bounded progress would turn into unbounded progress if people had much longer to live?