Video

Hello! Link to TVOL series doesn't work. Peace to you 🙏

yeah, fascism (=/= "national" socialism) was actually kinda based :0

Are humans outside of nature? The continued frame that there are things/life outside of "nature", that nature is some noun thing other than us, other than what human create, is Horizon 1 thinking. Horizon 3 is understanding that all is nature, and nothing is outside of nature... the issue is whether our practices are functional or dysfunctional to healthy commoning. All technologies are 100% natural; are they dysfunctional or functional/harmonious to our shared ecologies? That's the Horizon 3 ethical question. Re: top down vs bottom up... all is lost if the human-scale, intimate engagement is lost or ignored. Regional planning can arise from bottom-up grounded experiences. Cartesian a priori top-down forcing of theory onto life is the road to hell filled with "good intentions".

Incredible chat, all who listen for sure, will search out the book. Every place implementing this, will need to have monthly youtube podcasts. People need to see how this system could work. What a legacy you gentlemen are bringing, birthing in. A positive output into the world. Shining continually on, very full moon, every star, every sun. Blessings to you both.

Thanks for this comprehensive and crucial work! Beautifully said and done! ❤

Seems very valuable thinking to me

This form of collaboration being discussed is a very limited form of cooperation, in that it is cooperation by some to exploit others. That is not a viable long term solution. Cooperation has to include all. Nothing less is survivable, long term. None of this addresses the fundamental issue, that markets value abundance of anything at zero (think of air, arguably the most important commodity for any of us, yet of zero market value due to universal abundance). Most people need an abundance of basic necessities. Advanced automation gives us the capacity to deliver an abundance of the necessities of life to all, but there is zero market incentive to achieve such abundance, because the market value of such commodities will drop to zero by definition. This is a fundamental orthogonality in terms of human needs and market incentives. We need fundamental reform of the economic system, and whatever we do has to maximise freedom (responsibly expressed), and also maximise the computational and awareness capacities of human agents - which central control of any sort cannot do. So we need distributed and diverse systems, for systemic resilience, which is not what the existing market system is optimised to deliver. There are multiple other incentives in markets that are deeply problematic, like the incentive to shift the real costs of doing things in time and space such that they are not paid by the enterprise, but are picked up by someone else, allowing for extra profit in the here and now. There are so many levels at which this is happening right now, it is actually terrifying.

I really would like to interview you David. I also started a NPO to a few years ago, before learning about you. It's called Prosocialise Foundation. I have also started a podcast recently. I have tried to contact you on LinkedIn and I'm pretty sure through Prosocial World too.

Anybody can radically prosocialise their city by getting 100 people to join an altruistic network. The other very simple action everyone can take is to raise awareness about fundamental human needs. Most people are completely unaware of the fact that humans have emotional needs without which anyone will develop pathologies and become either a burden or a danger to society. This makes it clear why it is of interest to everyone to see to meet everyone's needs. It also creates an objective scientific goal everyone on the planet can get behind.

this supports something I've been considering, that the creation stories were about the creation of language.

Great stuff, but it seems clear to me that Freedom needs to be explicitly clustered with Responsibility, Creativity and Acceptance/Respect. They are all part of the same thing. Freedom requires responsibility, if it is not to break some of the essential constraints required for the existing of complexity of some system at that level. Freedom expressed in reality results in both creativity and diversity, and the existence of diversity demands acceptance and respect. It seems to me to be critically important that those aspects are explicitly seen and expressed as aspects of the same thing.

Wilson gets on his soapbox at the 10 minute mark. Had to switch off. I'll just buy and read Sober's book without further ado.

Ah, so a lot of my non-alignment with society is apparently because my brain thinks like an egalitarian hunter-gatherer by default... interesting.

Ok done ✅✅✅✅✅👍👍

David, I run the Prosocialise Foundation and a show call Human Needs and am writing to you on LinkedIn and by email because I would like to interview you on my show. Are you getting my emails?

Out of my ignorance, the heat map of pro sociology made me think of viral contamination maps. Coming from marketing, the idea of a package of ideas behaving virally sounds familiar. Maybe the specifics of viral evolution can be an helping grid for propagations of idea.. probably preaching the choir.

how somebody comment 1 year ago?

I watched the video. Your CZcams video is good but there are some problems in the video.

I tried posting a comment about how people can easily catalyze a paradigm shift in their town/city but it seems the algorithm considered it spam. All it takes is getting 100 people to join and make an offer in an altruistic network to kickstart it. I think the algorithm blocks my posts when I suggest a specific network so I won't do that. Anyway, please try to improve your audio. I can barely hear your guest even wearing earphones

Hope for 50 yrs and the continual creation of that...... is the book thats needed to be written, specifically speaking on the topics you discussed. For the last 50 yrs showed very little visibility in progress. Not sarcastic or pessimistically flippant this writing, just pointing reality, defunding, lack of community, personal time to get involved, trust in policy and those who implement, motivation, a million other points - blocked so much progress. Hope...... people think Obama promises. Needs a part two and more penetrating questions leading to practical implementation. But a great start, great mind, dare I say...... HOPE.

Some interesting analogies, but overall a complete misunderstanding of the knowledge domain. Textbooks do not represent high quality data. Textbooks generally contain historical snapshots of science. At best they represent a widely accepted 20-100 year old teaching standard that the average university professor can live with, even if he or she knows better. The difference between AI and the average professor is that AI lives exclusively in a knowledge model of the world and it can not check that model against reality. Even average professors can and above average science professors do. That's how science evolves to the better over time. We do have examples of human knowledge domains that are mostly stuck inside themselves, though: theology and to large extent also philosophy. Neither has evolved to the better in thousands of year, which shows just how dangerous reliance on textbook "knowledge" is, if it isn't challenged by empiricism.

Great lecture! Thanks for recording and making it available!

This'd be good for Bret Weinstine Darkhorse Podcast to discuss with the author, TOO. But actually BOTH or separately wd B great as well. Cheers 🍻

Anyone can catalyze a paradigm shift simply by getting 100 people in their city to join an altruistic network such as Sharebay. That is the single most effective action that EVERYONE can accomplish. We must end the requirement to sacrifice the long term common good for the short term advantage to be competitive and earn a living. We have to do this in a decentralized way to avoid concentrations of power that always become corrupt. We will do this we citizen led altruistic networks along with continuous raising awareness about fundamental emotional and physical needs and the understanding that every human will be a benefit to society if their needs are met, or will be a burden/danger to society if their needs aren't met.

fascinating

I agree whole heartedly with the comment that the neo liberal paradigm is the aberration. My grandfather started several businesses in the 40's and 50's. He had deep convictions about his responsibilities to the employees and the community. One of the ways this was expressed was in very generous profit sharing. At that time in our history many companies had generous profit sharing (CDP2) Now this is a rare thing.

Please improve your audio. I'm using earphones and still barely can the conversation

My semen is straight up magic no lie 💀

I'm so glad you have a show David. I just started one too called Human Needs. I would love to have you on. I too have a foundation call Prosocialise Foundation and used to say my profession was paradigm shift catalyst. All this before discovering your work. I have a very precise method for fostering prosocial behavior very different from yours and would really enjoy talking about it with you.

It's truly amazing to witness the emergence of a new paradigm through this discussion. The fact that I can access such enriching content from these professors without being in a university setting is incredible. Thank you for making this learning accessible to all!

Thank you for this David, it helps me understand better some of what has been discussed and even my own personal journey a little better. 🙏

Great work. Just one thing I see as delivering a more general case - the definition of life. The most accurate and useful definition I have been able to come up with, is that life is systems capable of using some set of mechanisms to search the space of possible systems for the survivable. Simplified down to "Life is Survivable Search". The classical mechanism of replication with variation is just one particular form of search. We now have many more available to us. Search has some interesting aspects that recurs through all dimensions. Part of search is going beyond the known, into the unknown, and the unknown-unknown. That requires degrees of freedom. But maintaining structure requires constraints on freedom. Any fully free agent is destructive of structure by definition. So there is a sweet zone for freedom, where there is sufficient to deliver search that is able to survive the variations that happen with time in open complex systems; and not so much freedom as to destroy the sets of constraints that make complexity at that set of levels possible. Think of the Greek concept of the virtue of the mean - between the vices of excess and deficiency. At our level of complexity, freedom demands responsibility if it is to survive long term. An aspect of evolving systems, is that each new level of complexity is actually built upon and sustained by a new level of cooperation. Anything that cheats on that cooperation puts the entire level of complexity at risk. If you think about our bodies, they are composed of billions of cells, cooperating. If any subset of that cooperative stops communicating adequately with its neighbours, and starts to replicate and grow without regard to the rest, then we have a name for that - cancer. And from the perspective of the cancer cells, it all seems to go very well, right up to the point that everything dies. Most of the financial and political and legal systems currently in place can be accurately characterised as cancerous, as they are built on exactly the overly simplistic notion that underlies neoclassical economics. Any system based in competition, without a firm cooperative base, must be destructive of complexity, must drive systems to some local minima on the available complexity landscape, from which there is no escape without cooperation. Cooperation is actually fundamental to the survival of complex systems, all levels, all domains, and that gets very complex very quickly, as at every level the survival of that level of complexity demands an evolving ecosystem of cheat detection and mitigation systems, at the same time as it demands cooperation in diversity, as delivering the greatest probability of long term survival. The simplistic notion, encoded into our economic and political systems, that competition can solve all classes of problems, is not simply wrong - it is wrong at the level of existential level risk. The notion that all classes of value can be usefully encoded into a single metric, is also wrong, to a degree that delivers existential level risk.

The most problematic sector of the economy is finance/money. This is affirmed by Steve Keen when he says: "The reason neo-classical macro ignores money, debt and banks is because if they didn't they would have to admit that they destabilize the economy." The operant concept involving money, debt and banks that creates and re-inforces the anomalies of the current paradigm is Debt as in the burden to repay Only as the sole form and vehicle for the creation and distribution of new money. Find the strategic points in the economic process to most efficaciously implement the new paradigm and its reality changing and beneficial effects have always been winners. Further tip, new paradigms have always been in complete conceptual opposition to the current one, so the opposite concept to Debt as in the burden to repay ONLY would logically be Monetary Gifting. So, integrating the new paradigm of Monetary Gifting into the Debt Only based system would seem to be the correct course of action.

Niklas Luhmann...system theory...

Context matters. Gee, who knew?

For anyone familiar with and interested in the vision and mission of ProSocial World, the chances may be good that you have already recognized the importance of this partnership between professors Snower and Wilson. For new visitors arriving with a general interest in the subject of the title announcement, but wondering whether to budget the time and attention to explore further? Budget the time! That said . . . as rich, exciting and promising as the implications of this excellent introductory discussion are - and the papers to which it refers, of course - there are also two reciprocal, interpenetrating and very expansive challenges to realization: the extent to which the redesign of both governance/political and econo-financial/monetary institutions is implicated. The importance of considering what 'catalytic' processes might facilitate a timely realization of this could hardly be overstated. For anyone interested, I've also offered some further thoughts about context, challenges and opportunities in these two blog posts: www.theimperativereport.com/rethinking-the-theoretical-foundations-of-economics www.theimperativereport.com/advancing-toward-the-noosphere

*Promosm* 😓

This is a brilliant contribution, and I love the fact that all this grew from a student's difficulty filling a hole in his course schedule (I had a similar life-changing experience). Very natural science-y. Also like the way Madhavan turns the stereotype of an engineer on its head - though I think the best civil engineers would welcome his way of thinking. It sounds like wicked problems are excellent candidates for immune-system like interventions, which is natural since what better example of a wicked problem than maintenance of bodily health? Very many wicked problems, including the most relevant ones for human society, would I'm sure "contain" (within their indefinable boundaries) continually evolving (in the Darwinian sense) elements. The obvious case is that in bodily health of an infinitude of possible attacking organisms that evolve their own immunity to antibiotics and other forms of treatment. For millennia, "physicians" (not as we know them, but mostly theorists, who left hand-on work to barber-surgeons, chemists, etc.) sought clock-like models of the body and the things that go wrong with it., and were very resistant to the realization that most disease (at least until recently) was caused by microbes. I think what might be called the mother of all wicked problems - the maintenance of a widely, broadly shared and effective worldview that addresses problems at all social levels up to the planetary, if very analogous, and in the age of mass social media, calls for an immune system-like response. Immune systems have their own dangers, but this one would be designed and under the design of a part human, part AI intelligence. Any top level AI control would have to be carefully monitored and understood. ((from Wikipedia: "Explainable AI (XAI), often overlapping with Interpretable AI, or Explainable Machine Learning (XML), either refers to an artificial intelligence (AI) system over which it is possible for humans to retain intellectual oversight, or refers to the methods to achieve this"). There is even such a thing as provable AI - (the antitheses might be "deniable AI" -- the AI that without explicit instructions created what Shoshana Zuboff called "Surveillance Capitalism", or automatic strip-mining of users brains in search of anything of value to squirrel away and use). I began making rudimentary proposals along this line around 2010 - to combat a deluge of disinformation in the form of anonymous chain emails doing much of the work of convincing some part of the population that Barrack Obama was some kind of sinister alien being. I had no audience and was ignored, but I'm heartened to hear that in Taiwan has developed a minister of digital technology, Audrey Tang, who has used responses to disinformation like those I imagined so long ago, which served as part of the immune system for "maintenance of a widely, broadly shared and effective worldview that addresses problems at all social levels - implemented on public service social media - in the service of a sort of literal immune system for the state of Taiwan. It is a little known fact that Taiwan, which got its first case of Covid from a teacher returning from Wuhan China, with this and other methods, contained the pandemic so well that they had around a dozen fatal cases in the first 16 months. Taiwan may be in the forefront of thinking about wicked problems, especially as they affect democracy. Another might be Finland, which shares with Taiwan, the wicked problem of being adjacent to a very aggressive and corrupt vastly larger neighbor that would like to destroy their sovereignty.

Consider this possible insight: Agentive communication (which may tend towards Machiavellian), it what philosophers missed for decades, injected into philosophy by Wittgenstein, Searle, and others in the "linguistic turn" is the most effective way to make things happen. If you totally lack it, then you don't understand promises, commitments, speech acts in general. OTOH, communication "for no particular reason" (at least in the sense of particular action), i.e. gossip, chatter, doing a dump of your daily experience, random observations, driven by a "mere" impulse to externalize what's in your mind (hence honest, non-manipulative) is what can most effectively scale into a common world view, shared in the deep past by the few hundred or few thousand sharers of a language and an evolving world view. In the present, it seems to be the foundation of any worldwide worldview. Question: What is the difference between "conscious evolution" and breeding (as done by farmers and pigeon fanciers)?

What about Freud? He had an adaptive view of culture.

My goodness, didn't know what I wanted to express. Things are surfacing within all of us these days, in so many different ways. Just wrote a short play (never did so before), submitted it to the local theatre. My play involves topics raised in this lecture, so synchronicitic. Wish I had more time and financial security to dive right in to these thoughts. But like the majority of the world, sell my time by hour. Was never wasteful, I just lost a business, as did so many others because of the plandemic. I simply start at the bottom rung again. No crying over spilt milk. Guess, we all learn by necessity like explained here. Powerful powerful teaching was this. Thank you.

I love it. We can honour our children. We can trust them, we can believe in them. We can give freedom. Who is the person that is afraid first? Being brave does not meant to be not afraid. Is to do things even you are afraid.

The summary of the root problem of our paradigm is that we are forced to sacrifice the long term benefit for short term gains so as to win the competition to resources, jobs, clients, land so that we can meet our needs. Keeping it simple helps people be effective and know what to do. Then everybody can spread the word and we can reach all of humanity quickly. If we just raise awareness about fundamental emotional needs, the concept and the needs, that can be enough to catalyze a paradigm shift. A fundamental human need is something that if any of us lack, we will develop pathologies (and therefore become a burden or a danger to everyone else). With this defenition fundamental human needs can be discuvered scientifically. A first good outline of these needs are participation, understanding, idleness, freedom, identity, creativity, affection, protection and subsistence.

that's amazing content.

Thanks!

Listening to this just now gave me an idea. I'm in a small group with a few other participants from the Noosphere class. Just yesterday I suggested a project. To combine some of our writings within a large language model and simply ask it to combine our prosocial behavioral ideas and projects to see what it comes up with. See you in hylo.

A blow mind. You need one person from each country, then each area, then it nodes out further, through all. Wow! So much to take in. Continue to shine this out. Will try and grasp all this as much as I can. Like other newbies, with the free time we must all find within the Social Contract to birth what we can.

Fascinating

Fantastic talk! I loved this book