Hi Mary, this is Natalie from MHNT '23. What an edifying week of study and discussion that was. I found the texts challenging but prior experience with McLuhan and Girard was a helpful frame. It felt like a year of grad school in one week. Thank you so much for your efforts putting it on!
The syllabus is basically the Tech Right cipher. It's cool to see fellow travelers who have clearly done their reading taking the reigns in DC. I'm a bit envious of DOGE gang going creative mode.
However, I like my hometown life and am working towards financial independence so that I don't have to work for a long while after we start having kids in a few years.
I'm always open to network with frens and try to help out Americans looking for a solid software job!
I love Mike Judge's work except have never tried Beavis and Butthead.
Yeah... tech self selects for some anti-social traits including "Master of the Universe Syndrome." Like many others I got into software for the thrill of building things "from scratch" with pure power of intellect. It's a high.
Probably rewards hypomanic individuals even more than the standard American cult of capitalism does.
Megalomaniacs should not be the leaders in a healthy society. But what is the alternative?
The tech bro revolutionary guard is destroying the anti-white patronage system which is a good thing.
The ideal outcome is that long term protections for the republic are installed. Ending birthright citizenship and getting a solid Supreme Court verdict for it. Enshrining the right to free association in a similar way.
I'm aware that we are also going to get Techno Feudalism. That was going to happen anyway though. I'm not an accelerationist myself, but what else are you going to do? Stand athwart history and yell, 'stop'?
Please find another essay on the topic of how the Orange Oaf aka the Trumpen-Fuhrer is defining who is or who is not a patriotic American. And what to do with them!
Course looks incredible. As an admirer, please consider something similar on Substack or another digital platform. Shame to limit these important topics only to those who have the time to attend in early June.
"some solvent force appears to have washed away our ability to describe in familiar terms what we’re about, or our ability to place our trust in anything at all - and now we find ourselves urgently in need of foundations." Mary, if it's not yet on your radar, I recommend you check out First Principles & First Values -- 'a new story of value for our times' -- by controversial Jewish author Marc Gafni. I think you'll find much there that you'll resonate with, as it's an attempt to articulate the foundations of a new worldview that integrates the best of premodern, modern, and postmodern thought. It does so by setting out a universal set of values that can be validated by both science and the wisdom traditions, it's quite the tour de force.
Technology is merely a tool. To try to turn it into a destiny for humanity is to attempt to build a new eutopia, which always turn out to be dystopic. If evolution is more than a theory, which I doubt, it has to occur gradually over a huge span of years. If humanity thinks it can take command of evolution to boost itself into a transhuman superman, it guarantees a dystopian future.
The marrying of humanity to computers is an impossible task. It is mistaking science fiction for reality.
You make valid points, but one has to realise that much of the current mood is a reaction to those who would impose mechanistic solutions from above. Of course, some government is necessary, but human progress is best pursued through the wisdom of crowds, not the planning of other people's lives by distant minions of the WEF who would rather abscond to cook food for their friends on the AGA cooker in their parent's country cottage, than be caught dead at the weekend in a 15 minute city.
ARC is about restoring the ergonomics of organic human social systems. Government by its very nature, seeks to impose mechanistic systems on those it governs.
Crowds can have no wisdom. They have nothing with which to think. Only individuals can think. And crowds in the form of collected individuals are, like individuals, as likely to make poor decisions as good ones.
You make valid points, but in order for the wisdom of crowds to be effective, four key principles need to be in effect. 1) Diversity of Opinion. 2) Independence. People's opinions have to be formed independently, without undue influence from the group. 3) Decentralization – Individuals should have access to local or specialized knowledge rather than relying on a central authority. 4) Aggregation.
The Wisdom of Crowds generally succeeds against small teams of handpicked experts specifically because the experts are prone to failing to adhere to the four principles and fall prey to group think, herd mentality and information cascades of compounded errors or assumptions.
Basically, the Wisdom of Crowds refers to the iterative power of decentralised distributed networks. The organic nature of human societies means they can try thousands of different solutions to the same problem when governments usually try less than five and generally opt for the least worst option.
The exceptions are a few rare circumstances in the engineering and hard science fields, particularly in closed systems or when looking at less complex issues.
The key to understanding evolution is recognising the relevance of duplicon transposition, which only occurs in a few species of hominids. It gives a window into evolution which is (relatively speaking) sped up.
Where most people go wrong is in assuming that genetic mutations necessarily lead to great leap forward. In reality, they probably accumulate and spread within populations before they are ever really of relevance to the species. The key is likely niche adaption, leading to selection factors which can rapidly optimise the genome within the space of at least a double digits worth of generations. It's not speciation or gradation, but a process which probably tends more towards the former than the latter.
The reason why human evolution is so salient in highlighting this likely mechanic, is because duplicon transposition selects from within the existing human genome to copy, effectively drastically increasing the likelihood that a major positive mutation will be selected spread and sit dormant until niche adaption activates its benefit to the organism. Unfortunately the same process is also a contributor to some pretty awful hereditary conditions.
Let me give you an example from human history. When some Conquistadors settled in the Andes, they found their Spanish wives couldn't bear children at those altitudes, likely because of the effects of high-altitude hypoxia on fertility. They had to take native wives to breed. My point would be this- the native Quechua and Aymara couldn't have evolved the capacity for greater lung capacity or haemoglobin levels over a few thousand years, or even several tens of thousands of years, using commonly conceived notions of evolution.
Instead, the capacity had to have remained dormant (but not necessarily inactive) in their genome for an unknown much broader span of history, waiting for the right niche adaption and selection pressures to activate the needs for other parts of their genome to optimise to make the most of an existing positive mutation. Evolution is not a gradual process, but rather one of long fits and massive starts.
Duplicons as a word is in common usage within the field of genetics- although sometimes the term duplication-driven transposition is substituted, terminologically speaking.
"I am pessimistic about there being effective political solutions to our Western malaise. I have never read Spengler’s Decline of the West but the idea that every civilisation will eventually – sooner or later - fall apart seems axiomatic... and borne out by history. The laws of entropy will apply...why would an exception be made of Western Liberalism? ....There are two fundamental ways of thinking about politics....a limited conception and a grandiose one. Due to the dominance of the grandiose conception in the modern era, we in the West have been schooled into an expectation that there is a political solution to every social problem. There isn’t... but the expectation can lead people - especially the most politically engaged kind - down some big rabbit holes.
The biggest problem - as I see it - is bureaucracy. Nobody really has any idea how to run an advanced urban society without it. What could realistically be done about the general Kafkaesqueness of the interface between us as individuals and any kind of system?
Graham, of course the Laws of Entropy will apply, but maybe--just maybe--we can extend the time frame of that disintegration out a few decades/centuries.
I agree with your optimism, but one of things we need to consider is the ever increasing insistence upon adding complexity. Would Brunel have built a one hundred million pound bat tunnel? Probably not.
I think most people misapply or misread Tainter on The Collapse of Complex Societies. Yes, there are products which are overengineered, but more broadly the best analogy I can think of is for our current quandary is being told to attend a meeting to solve staff parking issues whilst the factory is on fire.
These are vital topics moving ahead. I understand why capping it to a limited number is essential for engagement. However, it is important that we create a way to discuss them online. Could we have access to the readings by paying a small fee? As well, while ARC is inspirational, it is the everyday people around the world who are aligned with, "We don’t want to abandon the achievements of modernity, but we are uncomfortably aware that many have been won at the cost of destroying our shared sociocultural common" that require more concrete direction on - what now. Not everyone is able to be a leader. Despite the stress and limited time, I believe people are starting to care deeply, but they need local groups. Most vitally, we can capitalize on the ARC sessions on YT that inspire people, but who are unsure what to do next. We must leverage this critical junction in our society, and our culture . Is it doable to consider an online event for those interested in leading, but who do not have the tools? I realize this is beyond what you've stated here, and yet, I hope it is something worth while considering.
Having run similar seminars, I can tell you that there is no secrecy around the syllabus. I would imagine if you write to the organizers, they would be happy to share the reading list. You could probably also come up with it yourself because it sounds like they are reading pretty basic foundational works. And what better platform than Substack to discuss these kinds of things on? Or if you are talking about leading a local discussion group, that’s the kind of thing any homeschool parent could do. We have groups like this through Beatrice Institute in Pittsburgh, but anybody can read Mary’s essays or something more foundational and gather a group to discuss every couple weeks.
Mary's criticism of the venue is accurate. The amphitheater of Herod Atticus in Greece can accommodate 5000 people and doesn't express the nomos of the airport.
Norman Foster's blueprint for the modern airport was actually an impressive feat, when compared to previous layouts and designs- but one does wonder why on Earth the concept has proliferated into so many other public areas? Perhaps the retail outlet rents are simply too irresistible.
Thank you Mary. Your contribution at ARC was sparkling. And ARC itself the best set of speeches I've ever heard, and I've heard a few including for the Gospel as Public Truth process, an age ago. Lesslie Newbigin used to ask: "What is Britain for?" I never heard a good enough answer, other than the Westminster Shorter Catechism.
I loved your thoughts and especially our optimism about AI and the potential for us to use this moment to emphasize what is uniquely human and cannot be part of a machine.
Hi Mary, this is Natalie from MHNT '23. What an edifying week of study and discussion that was. I found the texts challenging but prior experience with McLuhan and Girard was a helpful frame. It felt like a year of grad school in one week. Thank you so much for your efforts putting it on!
The syllabus is basically the Tech Right cipher. It's cool to see fellow travelers who have clearly done their reading taking the reigns in DC. I'm a bit envious of DOGE gang going creative mode.
However, I like my hometown life and am working towards financial independence so that I don't have to work for a long while after we start having kids in a few years.
I'm always open to network with frens and try to help out Americans looking for a solid software job!
Are you familiar with the movie Beavis & Butthead Do America.
It is an accurate description of the adolescent mentality that mis-informs The DOGE gang.
Your choice of the word gang is therefore very appropriate!
I love Mike Judge's work except have never tried Beavis and Butthead.
Yeah... tech self selects for some anti-social traits including "Master of the Universe Syndrome." Like many others I got into software for the thrill of building things "from scratch" with pure power of intellect. It's a high.
Probably rewards hypomanic individuals even more than the standard American cult of capitalism does.
Megalomaniacs should not be the leaders in a healthy society. But what is the alternative?
The tech bro revolutionary guard is destroying the anti-white patronage system which is a good thing.
The ideal outcome is that long term protections for the republic are installed. Ending birthright citizenship and getting a solid Supreme Court verdict for it. Enshrining the right to free association in a similar way.
I'm aware that we are also going to get Techno Feudalism. That was going to happen anyway though. I'm not an accelerationist myself, but what else are you going to do? Stand athwart history and yell, 'stop'?
Please find another essay on the topic of how the Orange Oaf aka the Trumpen-Fuhrer is defining who is or who is not a patriotic American. And what to do with them!
http://tomdispatch.com/an-all-american-nightmare
And check out the worse than completely horrible book UNHUMANS by Jack Posobiec which was endorsed by J D Vance.
It is reviewed on the Mother Jones website.
Course looks incredible. As an admirer, please consider something similar on Substack or another digital platform. Shame to limit these important topics only to those who have the time to attend in early June.
"some solvent force appears to have washed away our ability to describe in familiar terms what we’re about, or our ability to place our trust in anything at all - and now we find ourselves urgently in need of foundations." Mary, if it's not yet on your radar, I recommend you check out First Principles & First Values -- 'a new story of value for our times' -- by controversial Jewish author Marc Gafni. I think you'll find much there that you'll resonate with, as it's an attempt to articulate the foundations of a new worldview that integrates the best of premodern, modern, and postmodern thought. It does so by setting out a universal set of values that can be validated by both science and the wisdom traditions, it's quite the tour de force.
Technology is merely a tool. To try to turn it into a destiny for humanity is to attempt to build a new eutopia, which always turn out to be dystopic. If evolution is more than a theory, which I doubt, it has to occur gradually over a huge span of years. If humanity thinks it can take command of evolution to boost itself into a transhuman superman, it guarantees a dystopian future.
The marrying of humanity to computers is an impossible task. It is mistaking science fiction for reality.
You make valid points, but one has to realise that much of the current mood is a reaction to those who would impose mechanistic solutions from above. Of course, some government is necessary, but human progress is best pursued through the wisdom of crowds, not the planning of other people's lives by distant minions of the WEF who would rather abscond to cook food for their friends on the AGA cooker in their parent's country cottage, than be caught dead at the weekend in a 15 minute city.
ARC is about restoring the ergonomics of organic human social systems. Government by its very nature, seeks to impose mechanistic systems on those it governs.
Crowds can have no wisdom. They have nothing with which to think. Only individuals can think. And crowds in the form of collected individuals are, like individuals, as likely to make poor decisions as good ones.
You make valid points, but in order for the wisdom of crowds to be effective, four key principles need to be in effect. 1) Diversity of Opinion. 2) Independence. People's opinions have to be formed independently, without undue influence from the group. 3) Decentralization – Individuals should have access to local or specialized knowledge rather than relying on a central authority. 4) Aggregation.
The Wisdom of Crowds generally succeeds against small teams of handpicked experts specifically because the experts are prone to failing to adhere to the four principles and fall prey to group think, herd mentality and information cascades of compounded errors or assumptions.
Basically, the Wisdom of Crowds refers to the iterative power of decentralised distributed networks. The organic nature of human societies means they can try thousands of different solutions to the same problem when governments usually try less than five and generally opt for the least worst option.
The exceptions are a few rare circumstances in the engineering and hard science fields, particularly in closed systems or when looking at less complex issues.
The key to understanding evolution is recognising the relevance of duplicon transposition, which only occurs in a few species of hominids. It gives a window into evolution which is (relatively speaking) sped up.
Where most people go wrong is in assuming that genetic mutations necessarily lead to great leap forward. In reality, they probably accumulate and spread within populations before they are ever really of relevance to the species. The key is likely niche adaption, leading to selection factors which can rapidly optimise the genome within the space of at least a double digits worth of generations. It's not speciation or gradation, but a process which probably tends more towards the former than the latter.
The reason why human evolution is so salient in highlighting this likely mechanic, is because duplicon transposition selects from within the existing human genome to copy, effectively drastically increasing the likelihood that a major positive mutation will be selected spread and sit dormant until niche adaption activates its benefit to the organism. Unfortunately the same process is also a contributor to some pretty awful hereditary conditions.
Let me give you an example from human history. When some Conquistadors settled in the Andes, they found their Spanish wives couldn't bear children at those altitudes, likely because of the effects of high-altitude hypoxia on fertility. They had to take native wives to breed. My point would be this- the native Quechua and Aymara couldn't have evolved the capacity for greater lung capacity or haemoglobin levels over a few thousand years, or even several tens of thousands of years, using commonly conceived notions of evolution.
Instead, the capacity had to have remained dormant (but not necessarily inactive) in their genome for an unknown much broader span of history, waiting for the right niche adaption and selection pressures to activate the needs for other parts of their genome to optimise to make the most of an existing positive mutation. Evolution is not a gradual process, but rather one of long fits and massive starts.
Almost all of evolution is based on speculation. And using made up words like duplicon won't persuade me otherwise.
Duplicons as a word is in common usage within the field of genetics- although sometimes the term duplication-driven transposition is substituted, terminologically speaking.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-missing-genetic-link-in-human-evolution/
I (like most on the Right it would seem) am somewhat in awe of the Orange Avenger's unexpectedly no-holds-barred start. And I want to be heartened by ARC too. I really do. But..... As I wrote in this piece: https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/the-madness-of-intelligentsias
"I am pessimistic about there being effective political solutions to our Western malaise. I have never read Spengler’s Decline of the West but the idea that every civilisation will eventually – sooner or later - fall apart seems axiomatic... and borne out by history. The laws of entropy will apply...why would an exception be made of Western Liberalism? ....There are two fundamental ways of thinking about politics....a limited conception and a grandiose one. Due to the dominance of the grandiose conception in the modern era, we in the West have been schooled into an expectation that there is a political solution to every social problem. There isn’t... but the expectation can lead people - especially the most politically engaged kind - down some big rabbit holes.
The biggest problem - as I see it - is bureaucracy. Nobody really has any idea how to run an advanced urban society without it. What could realistically be done about the general Kafkaesqueness of the interface between us as individuals and any kind of system?
Graham, of course the Laws of Entropy will apply, but maybe--just maybe--we can extend the time frame of that disintegration out a few decades/centuries.
Our Optimistic Thought of the Day!
I agree with your optimism, but one of things we need to consider is the ever increasing insistence upon adding complexity. Would Brunel have built a one hundred million pound bat tunnel? Probably not.
I think most people misapply or misread Tainter on The Collapse of Complex Societies. Yes, there are products which are overengineered, but more broadly the best analogy I can think of is for our current quandary is being told to attend a meeting to solve staff parking issues whilst the factory is on fire.
Feel better already!
This reference gives a glimpse of the worse-than-awful world-view promoted by the conservative "intelligentsia"
http://www.cpac.org/us/events-dc2025
Mary has participated in these CPAC gab-fests in the past!
I don’t think I’ve ever attended a CPAC?
As far as I know (or remember) a few years ago you gave a presentation at one of their gab-fests via an online hook-up.
These are vital topics moving ahead. I understand why capping it to a limited number is essential for engagement. However, it is important that we create a way to discuss them online. Could we have access to the readings by paying a small fee? As well, while ARC is inspirational, it is the everyday people around the world who are aligned with, "We don’t want to abandon the achievements of modernity, but we are uncomfortably aware that many have been won at the cost of destroying our shared sociocultural common" that require more concrete direction on - what now. Not everyone is able to be a leader. Despite the stress and limited time, I believe people are starting to care deeply, but they need local groups. Most vitally, we can capitalize on the ARC sessions on YT that inspire people, but who are unsure what to do next. We must leverage this critical junction in our society, and our culture . Is it doable to consider an online event for those interested in leading, but who do not have the tools? I realize this is beyond what you've stated here, and yet, I hope it is something worth while considering.
Having run similar seminars, I can tell you that there is no secrecy around the syllabus. I would imagine if you write to the organizers, they would be happy to share the reading list. You could probably also come up with it yourself because it sounds like they are reading pretty basic foundational works. And what better platform than Substack to discuss these kinds of things on? Or if you are talking about leading a local discussion group, that’s the kind of thing any homeschool parent could do. We have groups like this through Beatrice Institute in Pittsburgh, but anybody can read Mary’s essays or something more foundational and gather a group to discuss every couple weeks.
co-sign this comment
Mary's criticism of the venue is accurate. The amphitheater of Herod Atticus in Greece can accommodate 5000 people and doesn't express the nomos of the airport.
Norman Foster's blueprint for the modern airport was actually an impressive feat, when compared to previous layouts and designs- but one does wonder why on Earth the concept has proliferated into so many other public areas? Perhaps the retail outlet rents are simply too irresistible.
Thank you for sharing the video of this brilliant talk. I found myself wanting to clap for you along with the audience around minute 9:00.
Also: Computation is not comprehension. Exactly! Why is this so hard for some people to .... errr .... comprehend?
Mary, I like what you are doing, and what you are saying. Keep on.
Thank you Mary. Your contribution at ARC was sparkling. And ARC itself the best set of speeches I've ever heard, and I've heard a few including for the Gospel as Public Truth process, an age ago. Lesslie Newbigin used to ask: "What is Britain for?" I never heard a good enough answer, other than the Westminster Shorter Catechism.
I wish i were young! I will be welcoming my seventh grandchild as this seminar occurs, but i will join my prayers
I loved your thoughts and especially our optimism about AI and the potential for us to use this moment to emphasize what is uniquely human and cannot be part of a machine.
Until an AI can be sued, I'm not going to worry about it having an identity.