Very interesting article. I’m taking a lot away from it, and it’s largely making sense. One reservation - I’m not convinced we can cross collective action problems with a strictly transactional mindset. I think a defining feature of solving collective action is that from a little “i” perspective, we need to put in more than we take out.
This is how the larger “I” grows in health and vibrancy. It also grounds us in longer view perspectives rather than individual immediacy.
So I’m not convinced even millions of agents transacting on our behalf can cross a threshold of extractive vs generative outcomes.
Curious to hear how you might think of that? I recognise the attractive proposition in market economics that promises perfect outcomes given perfect information, but I’m not sure…
I agree with the direction of your comment Dan, it feels like the hypothesis in this article pushes toward a world of disengaged individuals with agents making decisions on their behalf in various situations, when the process of engagement and debate by humans is really important to the end outcome
Great piece! Really excited about the work you’re doing at CIP.
I’m curious how you think about actionable experiments that we can run in irl settings.
Very interesting article. I’m taking a lot away from it, and it’s largely making sense. One reservation - I’m not convinced we can cross collective action problems with a strictly transactional mindset. I think a defining feature of solving collective action is that from a little “i” perspective, we need to put in more than we take out.
This is how the larger “I” grows in health and vibrancy. It also grounds us in longer view perspectives rather than individual immediacy.
So I’m not convinced even millions of agents transacting on our behalf can cross a threshold of extractive vs generative outcomes.
Curious to hear how you might think of that? I recognise the attractive proposition in market economics that promises perfect outcomes given perfect information, but I’m not sure…
I agree with the direction of your comment Dan, it feels like the hypothesis in this article pushes toward a world of disengaged individuals with agents making decisions on their behalf in various situations, when the process of engagement and debate by humans is really important to the end outcome