The Middle Layer: Three Intermediate Causes of the Metacrisis
Here I want to talk more about the middle layer, and the three intermediate causes of the metacrisis: collective action problems, principal-agent problems and value misperception.
When you look closely, I would suggest that that all the problems at the “intermediate” layer of the metacrisis come down to three issues:
Collective action problems aka coordination problems, prisoner’s dilemma, multi-polar traps, Moloch, races to the bottom. These are cases, like arms races: even if every state wants to restrict some dangerous technology (e.g. powerful AI or nuclear weapons) — or at least would be willing if all others did — because there is a risk that another state will speed up (and do so secretly) then everyone speeds up.
Externalities & Principal agent problems aka perverse incentives, externalities etc. this is where the system (be that the market, democracy, the bureaucracy) mis-incentivizes for the result it wants leading to the over or under production of some important good. e.g. market capitalism rewards financial profit but fails to include externalized costs like pollution. Or you pay people capture rats or pollution and this leads some people to farm rats or create pollution so they can get paid for turning it in.
Mis-perception of value: we mis-perceive the value of things. We think a tree is more valuable dead than alive, that uploading our minds to machines is the way to go, that eating donuts is good for me etc.
Regarding the metacrisis (and social problems in general) all three are relevant. However, collective action problems are generally by far the most significant — and hardest to address.
Rufus, since this seems to be the most recent post (from Sept last year) related to the topic of Collective Action, at least in what I’m seeing in these posts using the search bar, how has this discussion related to collective action developed since last September? As I mentioned to you after the conference last year, and recently during the course just completed, if there is not yet any tent for focusing in on this particular set of issues, I’d be happy to create one with you, since there is rich territory to explore here. I’ve begun exploring this most directly in relation to the IDGs, and the way the current structures of the UN nation-based framework for addressing global problems and meeting SDG targets are actually major part of the problem due to way the structures themselves make it near impossible to address collective action bottlenecks that need to be addressed in order to achieve anything like the SDGs, without even getting into whether the SDGs themselves, even in combo with the IDGs, are not themselves also part of the problem creating even deeper bottlenecks due to the inner/outer split manifested by the need for IDGs to address the problem with achieving the SDGs, etc., etc. In any case, would love to connect with you and others within Second Renaissance space interested in deep diving the way addressing your intermediate layer, with focus on collective action problems, is absolutely essential to operationalizing any ACTION to shift the paradigm for tackling “root layer” realities. Cheers,
Nothing is being done to tackle this problem, because this group of people is fundamentally committed to epistemological and ontological pluralism. And yet there cannot be two solutions to these problems at the root layer, let alone 20. There cannot be two ways to resolve the crisis in cosmology, with a solution which also resolves the Hard Problem of Consciousness, and the Measurement Problem in QM. There cannot be two ways to take all these puzzle pieces and construct a coherent picture of the whole. There cannot be two ways to integrate all this.
As things stand physicalism remains dominant, even though it is totally inadequate. It gets away with this because the anti-reductionist opposition is fragmented into groups which are defending equally inadequate alternatives – primarily panpsychism and idealism. Collectively, we like this situation, because it allows everybody to believe whatever nonsense they fancy. This is the root cause of the “meaning crisis”, because it makes collective meaning-making impossible. And yet here we are, on a forum supposedly dedicated to leading the way to the next great advance in human cultural evolution, and the entire group treats the core cause of the problem as something to be treasured. So all they can do is have endless meetings and produce white papers discussing how they might move forwards as a group, without ever committing to resolving the foundational problem which keeps the group itself as fragmented as Western society in general.
Your name suggests you are interested in QM. Would you like to discuss the Measurement Problem? Because key to all of this is resolving that problem, and none of the current options is correct (that is why there is no consensus on the interpretation of QM).
I’d welcome you to the forum, but I’m not sure how welcome here I am myself.
A brief perusal of this forum will show that the members of this forum hold many different views, and are typically able to express disagreement in a constructive way. Why are you posting here if you feel if it’s such a waste of time?
A brief perusal of this forum will show that the members of this forum hold many different views, and are typically able to express disagreement in a constructive way.
What is constructive about it? I see nothing being constructed. What I see is endless discussion about how to bring about a revolutionary change in Western thinking, but no actual changes in thinking taking place among the people in the group.
Why are you posting here if you feel if it’s such a waste of time?
Because the stated goal of this forum is the most important thing in the world. I am posting in here in an attempt to provoke new thoughts in enough members to break the deadlock. It may only take two or three people to break ranks in order to make it easier for others to follow.
There can be no new integration – no new foundation for Western intellectual and spiritual life – unless people are able and willing to accept that their current worldview is not adequate. And when I say “not adequate” I do not mean it doesn’t seem to be working for them. I mean it does not and cannot work as a foundation for collective meaning-making in the future.
I have been mulling with @JonahW doing a prototype course on collective action – what is it, what are the challenges, how we have addressed it and had breakthroughs in the past etc.
That would be amazing. If you want to boot a new thread on Collective Action Course i can post there.
