This tracks with something I’ve been thinking about in terms of antagonistic and non-antagonistic social environments, where non-antagonistic ones are marked by trust, good intent, respect for boundaries, limited/benign power moves (scoring points by “outplaying” others socially). Generally marked by the kind of games the norms enforce; do they tend towards positive or zero/negative sum games? Also marked by how conflicts are resolved—subterfuge or mutual attempts at synthesis? Is it possible to “go meta” (or “go back channel”) and resolve a situation?
I like how you’re pointing at them being separate equilibria, with “light worlds” actively needing to defend themselves in order to stave off corruption. I’ve though in terms of bubbles for personal change, where people can safely take the risk of shifting between stable personality-equilibria, temporarily becoming frailer while exploring emotions, non-coercive motivations, shame, and similar. These bubbles serve as a kind of incubator, with people coming out on the other side with an updated robust personality-equilibria, ready to spread light to the dark world.
If we only spread the light world, without hardening it or making it antifragile, I see a risk that any darkness would spread like wildfire. Defence against the dark arts is needed, shadow-world-compatible behaviour patterns that reduce vulnerability while avoiding the increase of shittyness. Power literacy comes to mind, equipping people to spot power games and subterfuge. Curious to explore this more.
The prion metaphor reminds me of the concept of egregores/intersubjective parasites, or self-propagating meme-packages gliding through the social spheres. Combined with the notion of “trapped prior” and “inadequate equilibria”, I think a lot of the effect is explained.
This tracks with something I’ve been thinking about in terms of antagonistic and non-antagonistic social environments, where non-antagonistic ones are marked by trust, good intent, respect for boundaries, limited/benign power moves (scoring points by “outplaying” others socially). Generally marked by the kind of games the norms enforce; do they tend towards positive or zero/negative sum games? Also marked by how conflicts are resolved—subterfuge or mutual attempts at synthesis? Is it possible to “go meta” (or “go back channel”) and resolve a situation?
I like how you’re pointing at them being separate equilibria, with “light worlds” actively needing to defend themselves in order to stave off corruption. I’ve though in terms of bubbles for personal change, where people can safely take the risk of shifting between stable personality-equilibria, temporarily becoming frailer while exploring emotions, non-coercive motivations, shame, and similar. These bubbles serve as a kind of incubator, with people coming out on the other side with an updated robust personality-equilibria, ready to spread light to the dark world.
If we only spread the light world, without hardening it or making it antifragile, I see a risk that any darkness would spread like wildfire. Defence against the dark arts is needed, shadow-world-compatible behaviour patterns that reduce vulnerability while avoiding the increase of shittyness. Power literacy comes to mind, equipping people to spot power games and subterfuge. Curious to explore this more.
The prion metaphor reminds me of the concept of egregores/intersubjective parasites, or self-propagating meme-packages gliding through the social spheres. Combined with the notion of “trapped prior” and “inadequate equilibria”, I think a lot of the effect is explained.
Related:
Trapped Priors—https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/trapped-priors-as-a-basic-problem
Intersubjective parasitology (egregores) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7FGcpVR2hE
Tea Club < Football Team (on the membrane between dark and light) - https://honestliving.substack.com/p/tea-club-football-team
On power dynamics—https://lessfoolish.substack.com/p/chillin-with-goofies-a-spiritual