empathy

The Great Decentralization

~ Chuck Pezeshki ~ 1 Comment

Braden on a wall, outside Las Vegas

In crazy times like now, some small cohort of people not swept up in the mania are scratching their heads, and saying “why is this happening?” We have a time in human history where wars (though they still exist) are few, technology is still making large advances (at least in certain sectors) and people are faced with unimaginable abundance. I look at my own experience with something as common as hard liquor as proof (no pun intended.) 40 years ago, buying a bottle of cognac was an unheard-of feat, and if you wanted selection, there were only a handful of stores in the country where you could find anything other than the primary brands of Hennessy or Courvoisier. Now, you can walk into almost any well-stocked liquor store and find dozens of brands. And don’t even go near the bourbon aisle. Hundreds of producers’ products line the shelves.

This explosion of selection directly maps to diversification in the information space. Whiskey is simple, of course — the financial incentive sprung up as people learned more about it, and as people indeed learned more about it, they started applying variations in taste, cocktails, and the proliferation of insights from the Internet to the problem. Such a supply is maintained only within the context of the information ecosystem that is created. If you have no insight or knowledge, you likely won’t lay out the money for a brand with no recognition. And it’s not long until that more complex ecosystem collapses, leaving you with just the bottom shelf in the liquor store.

All ecosystems are maintained under similar pretexts. Human societies are no different. Different societies have solved different versions of this problem of maintaining information complexity throughout time. I wrote earlier about how one of the first societies to run up against information complexity demands — China — managed this through the development of a professional class, primarily filled with autists, and screened by a complicated test on Chinese poetry, that allowed some modest social mobility. Anyone could take the test — but few would pass.

To reiterate — societies are maintained through quantity of reliable and valid information, with appropriate levels of information complexity, that when grounded in reality, allows that information to propagate across the society and be accepted as truth. Some level of validation of information by all participating members in a society is also necessary. Though not everyone in a given society can be responsible for knowing all truths, at least some of those truths must be verifiable, and tangible.

And herein lies the rub. Increasingly complex human societies (we are in one in the USA) require increasingly complex relational dynamics as well. It’s a closed loop — increasingly complex relational dynamics produce that information that the society needs to hold itself together. If those relational modes do not exist, no society, with a certain population quantity and density, can expect to hold together.

The memetic physics will tear it apart. Confusion will literally be its epitaph. Brainworms, or more specifically prions, is caused by cannibalism. It’s called Kuru. Here you go.

In a complex society, high levels of knowledge sophistication are demanded by the differentiated peoples in a given society. High levels of knowledge sophistication imply a fractal structure inside that knowledge, purely from the overlap of different circumstances that characterize any given member of that society. This knowledge inherently needs to be generated in two ways.

The first is by institutions in that society. The problem comes in with the structure of these institutions, and their robustness in the face of uncertainty. There is no way that all institutions can get all things correctly. But the problem exists that such institutions believe that they can. And if they have no fundamental epistemic humility, then far too often, the institutions will get things WRONG — and that destroys the faith that the larger body politic has in those institutions.

Further, institutions, due to their emergent hierarchical dynamics, as well as resource needs, will always be prone to capture by the powers-that-be. If the baseline guiding principles of a society are not egalitarian, with a commitment to upward social mobility and welfare of ALL its citizens, it won’t be long until these institutions are weaponized to advance the interests of elites inside a given society. I’ve written extensively about this. There is no better example than the COVID times, when elites ordered wholesale destruction of parts of the economy, and moved into servitude other parts, because of their paranoia of getting a virus that early on established itself as no threat (other than a bad flu) to the vast majority of the population.

This was dramatically reinforced by an entirely co-opted other caste — the various mainline journalistic institutions of our time — who sided with the elites in the various prescribed interventions. The various journalists and institutions piled award upon award against people who both committed crimes against humanity (like Tony Fauci) as well as the journalists who lionized them (e.g. Ed Yong.). Most of these people on the downstream side of the beneficiary equation still hold on to their power and privilege today. Elites may eat their own, but they never completely abandon them unless they’re on the dinner table. (See the discussion on Kuru above.)

We are now living in the after-times of these two historic institutional collapses — medicine, and journalism. The result for society is that we no longer have the information structure for easy recovery.

The second has to lie in development and appropriate development of agency, and its corollary in connection, empathy among its members. No society can completely rely on institutions, that can, and have been captured at various times by elites for various reasons, both nefarious as well as self-protective.

But in the last thirty years, especially, we’ve seen across-the-spectrum decay of both mission and execution of educating young people to the role of citizens that will both maintain the status quo of our country, as well as advance its interests and destiny. This lack of development will lead to follow-on consequences in time. We’ll have, percentage-wise, a larger and larger group of people who will inherit a large, complex machine, but will not know, nor understand the complexity consequences of pulling its various levers. The USA’s current population is somewhere in the neighborhood of 320 million people — its information quantity and complexity needs are immense. We are failing in so many ways, when we look to the basic literacy AND psychosocial maturity to run such an enterprise.

What the memetics tell us is that if we cannot generate the next class of people to inherit, tinker, and improve the current societal structures, then we will proceed down the social complexity ladder – the Great Decentralization. The Great Decentralization means that society must index itself to smaller scales, of people, space, and prosperity in order to be able to function coherently. The responsible government organs must scale down, in order to function at all — because the information flow into those organs cannot support a larger functioning scale. If you want a global society, it has to be composed of enough citizens who can operate at that scale. And so on down the track. We obviously do not have that at the current time. And that means society will downshift to generate political organs that operate without such corruption that makes homeostasis possible. National government doesn’t work? Step down to state government. State government doesn’t work? You get the idea.

The problem arises when you end up in a place where supra-scale informal organizations (like cartels) gain enough power and organizational control that they are competing with formal government bodies. This has already happened in Mexico, which by any definition is a failed state. It’s arguably happened in regions of the US along the Mexican border.

And psychopaths will drive that process. You don’t need to be a complex society to use a jet engine — but you definitely need one if you want to create one in the first place. So clever psychopaths will figure out how to disrupt those complex relational patterns to get us down where we’re feeling the pain. Short version — inspirational leaders take us up the complexity ladder. Psychopaths take us down.

What does ‘downwards’ really mean? We sit close to the apex of what a Performance-based/Legalistic society can be. Downwards means following the v-Memes — more Legalism, more Authoritarianism, and most importantly, especially for the two ends of the demographic age distribution, more Tribalism. The problem with this is that our wealth is NOT, as often condemned by our own corrupt intelligentsia, the result of colonial exploitation. It’s the result of innovation and hard work, by that group of individuals aged 20-60, which relies on advanced relational modes in order to keep going. These are the modes of independent relational development discussed ad nauseam on this blog. People must be able to meet other people (the whole freedom of association thing) and make their own decisions about whether to trust them or not. That trust, besides creating things like friendships, also vastly accelerates economic engines. Deals may have contracts, but if the contract is written up after the handshake, the ability to radically increase monetary tempo presents itself.

And when that collapses, first we lose the ability to support an elevated standard of living, which includes societal and social cohesion for people in this country. But worse — as we move back down the scale to overt Tribalism, we not only lose the standard of living. We lose the ability to support the people here in the first place.

The way societies re-equilibrate after such social decay is mass death. A great recent example of this is the Hutu-Tutsi genocide in Rwanda. Short version — after the two sides killed off 10-15% of the population, and drove out another 20%, peace returned, and now Rwanda is stable. It is hard for people to wrap their heads around loss of 30% of the population of the country. Such large numbers, contrary to belief, do not scale well inside the heads of most people. The short version is this — it is a full-on massacre.

All this sets the stage for smaller governance structures, inside smaller populations of humans. The Internet has scrambled much of this through the Death of Geography. Now, more than ever, it is easier to fall into a variety of tribes NOT based on geography, but instead, built on memetic foundations. You can find who you agree with far more easily. But that is not in the interest of the psychosocial development of our own country. Finding people who you instantly agree with doesn’t force relational growth. And with the Left’s declaration of being a law unto themselves, now if you are a compromiser, you end up in the ‘outcast’ category. That elevates the Immiseration class, and overall unhappiness is never in the interest of productivity.

The last presidential election was a huge moment in the Great Decentralization, in that a voter received an opportunity to choose one of two paths towards how this might happen. One the one side was the Democratic candidate, who promised “more of the same”. But what was more of the same? As we are now finding out, the secret coalition that drove much of Democratic politics in the last four years was centered around federal budgets diverted to serving the NGO-DEI-Industrial Complex, driven on the surface by LGBTQ activists and various absurdist social issues, like trans-ing children (which further disqualified the institutional veracity of the medical community) as well as funding the dumping of illegal aliens into the US. During the Biden years, through illegal immigration, population increased somewhere between 8%-10%. No real attempt was made regarding fiscal responsibility, or even any understandable larger economic policy for the country. In short, the Democratic path toward decentralization was going to be collapse and anarchy. And somehow, the elites in this country, virtue signaling all the way, were going to come out on top of all of it.

On the other side was the loosely held coalition of MAGA, true centrists, and cast-offs from the political Left that had gotten to the point of not being able to stomach the various unhinged dogmas generated by the radical Left of the Democratic Party. This coalition had at its front Donald Trump, a moderate Republican, whose claim to fame was abrasive authenticity. Trump declared his path to decentralization as one focused on removal and shrinkage of the larger federal government, as well as removal of the 10% of the illegally imported population, demographically targeted to win elections in swing states that were augmented during the Biden years, in order to change seat allocation in the House of Representatives.

As I chose whom to vote for, foremost in my mind at this fork in the road, I was, and am still concerned about environmental issues and young people — my two primary political foci. I came to the conclusion that a Harris/Walz administration would be far worse for both. Regarding environmental issues, a Harris/Walz ticket would likely spawn a new Cabinet office dedicated to manipulation of the public over Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), with tons of money being diverted from the government into Degrowth philosophies. And that would harm the second primary concern of my politics — the future of young people.

Lest ye think I was naive, I knew that the Republican Party would still engage in their own historic excesses, of handing out favors to its mainline political supporters. But that’s a devil, policy-wise that I did know, and knew how to fight.

What has surprised me about the Great Decentralization is two-fold. First is the uncovering of the vast NGO-funded mechanisms that were already extant in the federal government that I was unaware of. The short version was that the federal government had already handed off, through some version of direct aid or block grants, vast governmental real estate to the states, under the aegis of charity and social services. With most of the standard federal oversight mechanisms removed, these funds immediately became captured, both legally and illegally, by supporters of the Left. The Somali daycare scandal is a hallmark, though I believe we will discover much more fraud throughout the social welfare system as time goes by.

The second has been the emergence of the anarchist/chaos-bent Left, whose response to being defunded on all fronts has led to chaotic violence in the name of First Amendment protest, and high-profile societal disruption. The Minnesota insurgency against ICE is a premier example, though as this piece is being written, evidence is coming to light that there have been multiple conspiratorial networks, based on the same organizational structures, being erected across the United States.

All is not yet lost. It’s important to remember and realize that even the ICE protests in Minneapolis are geographically limited, and their presence is causing tremendous economic harm to local constituents. Such harm serves as a deterrent for other municipalities with disruptive entities to double down on promoting the chaos, as Minnesota elected officials have done. And while it looks like the anti-ICE actions have potential for being nationally contagious (figuring out the racket is always the first challenge of conspirators) as time goes on, it seems increasingly unlikely, save as screaming about it as a potential election issue. Talk is, as it always is, cheap. And far better than facing a RICO rap, which I expect we’ll see coming down the pike for individuals like MN Lt. Governor Peggy Flanagan, who actively participated in the Signal network for tracking and doxxing ICE agents.

The Great Decentralization, however, will continue. There is (outside my ridiculous blog) poor understanding of the social physics, or even acknowledgement that such social physics even exist. And until we can talk about root cause — which directly gets to the issue of psychosocial developmental issues across society, such as how to build identity and responsibility for larger society inside its citizenry, we are stuck on the lowest energy path for a society.

And that ain’t pretty.

Quickie Post — Raising the Next Generation of High Agency Engineers

~ Chuck Pezeshki ~ 2 Comments

Road Trip — outside Winnemucca, NV, December 2024

The LA fires are burning, and while I should be writing something about that, I just can’t yet. Yes, it is a memetic shitshow. Yes, DEI is a problem (though only for a mix of reasons that most people are unaware of) and yes, I think most of it could have been avoided.

But I feel like a little positive writing today. And hey — you get what you pay for!

One of the more positive snippets of news in the last couple of weeks is Elon Musk’s interest in starting the Texas Institute of Technology and Science (TITS). He was prompted to discuss this (seems like it was before the latest rape ring scandal in Great Britain) before excrement hit the ventilator. The protagonist was one of Marc Andreessen’s (of a16z fame) General Partners, Katherine Boyle, who daylighted the topic. I proposed myself (still will) to be the founding President of the institution, and if Elon had seen any of my comments, my phone would be ringing. People fundamentally miscast the problem with engineering education and our young people by assuming somehow we have DEI problems, and if we would just double down on higher SAT scores, with maybe a little industrial experience thrown in, we’d fix what ails us. As an engineering educator for nigh on 41 years, eh, not so much.

It’s not that excellence in technical education isn’t needed. It absolutely is. It’s just a classic “and” problem. We need that. We just also need a list of other “ands”. Some of these include exposure to industry practice, including participation in industry throughout their education. No engineering school can reproduce a real factory floor for a lab. Which is why I directly partner with companies like Schweitzer Engineering Labs here in Pullman, running mass collaborations with their factory floor, through the generosity and assistance of plant managers there. I am lucky. Those connections come naturally in my world because many of these individuals are my former students. It helps to have an actor at the VP level when someone will open up their facility for a morning just to have students confront actual problems folks on the manufacturing floor are having. And I’m very clear with the messaging to my students about their obligation to return value to the sponsors. If it costs the company $70K to shut the floor down for a morning so the students can participate, they better deliver somewhere north of that $70K with the completion of their projects in value for the company’s trouble.

What is also important, though, are what people in the education business call the “soft skills” lessons. This is a stupid term, because these skills, such as high agency, data-driven decision making, merging opinions from successful collaborations, and on and on, are far more than just an isolated list of skills. They’re actually the function of psychosocial development and maturity, which needs to be just as deliberate as teaching someone vector calculus. The problem, though, is that these types of skills cannot be taught with a PowerPoint presentation. You have to create experiences that are profoundly disinter mediated (you, the professor, are not in the middle) so that students can act within the confines of their own brains. As my mom used to say “Son, the life will teach you.” Absolutely.

But these spaces and lessons need to at least 80% be intentional out of the environment and situation. That means, just like a really great video game, someone has to know what they are doing. The magic just doesn’t happen. An important tool I use is what I call “meaning matching” — understanding how the different ages — both students and sponsors — find meaning. And then you, as the environment designer, create the interaction scenarios so that both sides remain enfranchised around particular goals, and both develop and get work done. For example, 22 year olds want to demonstrate performance and mastery of engineering, whereas 35 year olds are looking for community. Weaving both these developmental goals around a common objective is the ticket, and is your best ticket to success.

One of the principles which absolutely scares academics is that I will only permit REAL work in our exercises. I want students to solve real problems that people are having. No make-believe. And while these are often more complicated than just canned exercises (I like to make fun of the various competitions we have, like mousetrap cars) they also are vastly more rich from an information richness perspective. The boundaries are fuzzy. And that encourages both exploration — going out and finding things one didn’t know — as well as metacognition — the realization that you’re not going to know everything about a space, but you still have to solve a problem.

Someone’s inherent capacity for this is NOT something any standardized test measures. Nor is likely to do so in the future. That doesn’t mean one should throw all standardized tests into the garbage. It’s not a “but” kind of problem. But one must be open to the broader space if you actually intend to revolutionize engineering education.

Another big one that is chronically neglected is peer-level collaboration with students. We are very comfortable with mentor/mentee relationships, and prioritizing them. And these are very important. Complex behaviors in this environment are often directly passed through emulation (think mimicking) of more sophisticated actors. But that does not teach students one of the most important lessons they must also learn — how to assess their colleagues, as well as their efficacy and veracity of their work. You gotta know who you can trust.

The end product that everyone wants is almost meta-the same — a mature, aware, independent individual that can act in the context of group benefit, while also working alone when need be. The term for that is agency, and as I’ve written elsewhere on this blog, agency is self-empathy — being connected on multiple levels with oneself. Which then manifests as actual connections with others, in a high-coherence information transfer mode. Short version — you’re being honest and reflective with yourself, as well as assessing what others told you. That’s how you make complex systems with millions of parts fit together and actually work.

The problem with education like this is that this has basically nothing to do with the current psychosocial DNA of our current university system. Students aren’t just told how to think. They are told how to relate to others (the whole DEI scam) and are hobbled in having productive experiences where they discover stuff on their own. Students now are more obedient than they have ever been. But the end result of such obedience is that students only trade their agency for a lack of responsibility. It’s the natural bargain. And you end up with entire institutions of compromised young folks. And the ones with natural victim/psychopathic tendencies? They float to the top, ready to be waved as flags of dysfunction by those that want our young people to fail. Most young people really are not the problem one sees in the press. But we, as a larger set of institutions, have failed in understanding the challenges involved in raising responsible young people. Instead, we’ve devolved to leading with fatuous efforts about declaring one’s pronouns.

Getting to people wanting to shatter the paradigm (like Elon) is also challenging. Outside-the-box thinkers like me really don’t have any meaningful access to reform-minded individuals, who are largely trapped inside a box of people who are status-driven. No one really wants to change the order of the status line-up, while at the same time, people expect these leaders to be the best. They aren’t — they’re a function of their v-Meme NA more than anyone. So it’s a self-reinforcing trap. It is very frustrating to listen to these people, trapped in their high-status bubble, wondering out loud on social media about problems that they believe haven’t been confronted, largely because the elites haven’t confronted them. Just a word, both Kathryn and Elon — we ain’t many. But there are a handful of us that have been thinking outside the box — and have a success portfolio to prove it works.

Which brings me to developing agency in young people. My X pal, A.J. Kay, just last week, proposed pondering the two categories of Discipline and Control, as a way of doing a self-reflection on one’s growth as a person. I thought this was great. The definition of level of Discipline is the ability to force one to do an activity that is prosocial/beneficial, even when you don’t want to. And Control is just the direct opposite — your ability to not execute behaviors that your brain wants to do for self-satisfaction. I had the students make the two columns and list theirs, then share with the group of students at their table (usually 4-5).

There is only good news here — the students almost uniformly tagged their eating, exercise, sleep and screen time as things they needed to practice. Things like “getting to bed on time” and “not sleeping in” figured prominently, as well as “cooking at home four times a week” (kinda scary when you think about it.) Exercise was almost included at a particular tempo (many students said 4-5 times a week) and certainly justified the expense we’ve put into recreational facilities for fitness. There was a little more advanced behavior as far as assignment completion as well. Overall, I left a little more hopeful. We didn’t quite get to eliminating sugary drinks. But I’ll take it.

The class I performed this exercise in was our introductory design class, where we will cover things like empathy interviews with customers as well as structured problem solving design processes (we are a big LEAN shop.) If you ask how this fits into engineering education, I myself believe in a bildung approach to education. We cannot expect our engineering students to be high performance individuals, while at the same time to act ethically without appropriate internal development. I plan on doing this exact exercise at the end of the semester to see how their personal goals evolve.

Stay tuned!

P.S. For those interested in a deeper dive on how the brain actually learns and retains complex information, read this piece.

Quickie Post — Weaponized Empathy

~ Chuck Pezeshki ~ 4 Comments
Sharing a lovely bottle of Sancerre with my 14 year old son at L’Express, in Montreal

One of the terms that gets batted around quite a bit lately is the phrase ‘weaponized empathy’. I’ve been talking about ‘empathy as a weapon‘ for a while, but I think it was my Twitter/X pal, Theo Jordan (@Theo_TJ_Jordan) who certainly rearranged the word order.

What does ‘weaponized empathy’ really mean, though? Most people misunderstand the basic core — empathy — as wanting to give someone a hug, or rather, your predilection to give someone a hug, if you’re slightly more evolved. This is not what it means at all.

I created a modified version of Frans de Waal’s empathy pyramid that folded in my understanding as far as what happens when you put all the researched areas of connection together. These are represented in my own Empathy Pyramid. Short version of a long story (like the rest of this blog!) the stuff at the bottom is fired by the base of our autonomic nervous system, and it goes up from there in complexity, and utilizing the later evolved parts of the brain. The realization of the blocks on the side were one of those “angels singing” moments when my brain makes up for torturing me the other 98% of the time.

What empathy REALLY is is some version of coherence matching of brain states. I’ve written a TON about this already. If you see someone yawn, you yawn. If you see someone crying, you feel sad. If you’re more evolved, you read other people’s faces and body language and attempt to predict what has upset them. This is really NOT novel. Honest researchers have been studying this since forever (everyone knows, for example, that a big hunk of communication is nonverbal, amirite?) 

But the problem is that empathy research ALSO attracts more than its share of psychopaths. They’re looking to make things more confusing, because they’re anti-empathetic. And like it or not, academia houses a lot of these people. For reasons, mostly emergent. Meaning that “it’s the way we do things around here in our rigid, pathological, title-driven hierarchy.” How the hell do you think we can spend so much time grading young people if we weren’t against empathy? We’d understand too much about our young people’s predicaments. 

But back to weaponized empathy. Weaponized empathy is when you have an actual empathetic sense, but instead of really connecting and feeling someone else’s pain, or predicting how someone else might be thinking in a given space, you sneak in, and you use that knowledge to twist the knife. And the knife is best twisted at the bottom of the empathy pyramid, deep in the brain’s core survival and emotional functions.

How does that work? The more sophisticated are familiar with the range of mental models of their targets, and then manipulate them directly with their virtues, hopes and dreams. It’s like the trolley problem, where you set people up to pull the switch to murder the grandma of your choice, instead of theirs. Or you get them convinced to tie everyone up, and reverse the trolley so it goes over both tracks.

The relationally disruptive in the world — the Axis II/Cluster Bs and Cs of the world — are the best at this. They do it because it provides clarity for them to manipulate situations as THEY see fit. Take the current sadness of the October 7 Hamas attack against Israel, originating from the Gaza Strip. All of it is a wildly sad and crazy situation, because there is a larger history of Authoritarian v-Meme provocations on both sides that have degenerated this entire coupled social system (Israel and the Gaza Strip) into a pre-medieval developmental state, where raping women and killing children is just part of the deal.

But the weaponized empathy part is taking how you feel about something as raw as Palestinian children being killed in bombing attacks, and then distorting the reality that what is going on is a genocide. Look folks — it’s appalling. It’s terrible. But killing even 20K folks, in a nation of 2 million, isn’t genocide. That’s weaponized empathy at work.

Weaponized empathy lays a black-and-white, splitting pallor on complex issues, in an attempt by the manipulator to take their side. They connect with you, and understand your own personal biases, then use those biases against you to flip your brain. And they can do that with material that is factually true, factually false, or somewhere in between. It affects your core because the smart wielders of weaponized empathy know that they’ve got to get down to YOUR base level — the deeper in the brain the connection, the better. 

I just wrote a (for me) somewhat simpler piece on the complex issue of transgenderism, which lays out the case that some transgender folks have honest problems, while others manifest either Borderline Personality Disorder or Anti-social Personality Disorder. You can read it and decide if it’s fair-minded or not. But someone interested in using weaponized empathy will distort this current societal travail and tell you things like this is the same as the Civil Rights movement, or more recently, LGB rights. It is preposterous. Jim Crow in the past was NOT the same as transhumanism today.

But if you believe that it is, it’s because a psychopath has weaponized your own empathy, your own ability to connect with others, whether emotionally or predictively, against you. And if reading this makes you irrational toward my argument, then you’ve been brain-wormed.

And that’s the power of weaponized empathy. Especially in a space where we are really fighting memetic wars.