Epistemic Commons and Knowledge Sharing

From: jimruttshow8596

The concept of the “epistemic commons” refers to the shared process of belief, understanding, and knowledge generation within a society [00:29:16]. It encompasses how people come to agree on what is true, fostering shared understanding and the capacity for effective communication [00:29:31].

Importance in an Open Society

For a society to function as an open society, a democracy, or a republic, where governance is “of, for, and by the people,” the people must possess the capacity to understand the issues that the government addresses [00:04:14], [00:24:26], [00:30:06]. This requires not only knowledge but also the ability to make sense of the world and communicate effectively [00:02:45].

The Founding Fathers of the United States, such as Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, understood that widespread education and a robust “fourth estate” (the press) were prerequisite institutions for a republic to function [00:08:00], [00:30:31]. Thomas Jefferson famously suggested he would prefer a perfect news system over a perfect government, believing that if people fully understood the world, they could build a new system of government [00:30:50]. George Washington stated that the number one aim of the federal government should be the comprehensive education of every citizen in the science of government [00:31:10].

Erosion of the Epistemic Commons

Despite these foundational understandings, the quality of education and the fourth estate has eroded significantly [00:05:40], [00:31:47]. This erosion, coupled with increasing global complexity, the speed of change, and vastly larger power asymmetries, has created a new world where traditional systems are inadequate [00:06:11], [00:09:16].

Key factors contributing to this erosion include:

• Complexity and Scale: Modern challenges, such as global supply chains and planetary boundaries, are far more complex than those faced by previous civilizations [00:13:06].
• Technological Automation and Information Singularity: Rapid technological advancements mean humans cannot process all information to be subject matter experts in the same way, leading to questions about the unique role of humans and education in an AI-driven world [00:06:21].
• Pathological Media Landscape: The fragmented and ad-driven media landscape incentivizes salacious headlines, tribalism, and short-form content, rather than nuanced, thoughtful, or long-form analysis [00:33:00]. Social media algorithms, optimized for time on site, often promote content that confirms existing biases, instills fear of out-groups, and triggers limbic responses, leading to increased polarization and extremism [00:45:16].
• Loss of Shared Identity: In the US, the absence of a large external enemy after the end of the Cold War, combined with internal political infighting, has led to a breakdown of national unity and a demonization of opposing political parties [00:55:50]. Studies show that people are now more likely to disapprove of their child marrying someone from an opposing political party than to discriminate based on race or religion [00:59:31]. This internal conflict wastes significant energy and hinders long-term planning or progress [00:56:30].
• Runaway Confirmation Bias: People tend to accept and propagate information that reinforces their existing “memeplex” (their worldview), often without critical thinking, leading to predictable responses and a lack of original thought [00:38:03], [00:39:30]. This tendency fosters “wrong certainty,” which is more dangerous than comfort with uncertainty [00:37:41].
• Arbitrary Platform Censorship: Large platforms, acting as the de facto public square, make arbitrary decisions about what is “in-bounds,” leading to concerns about freedom of speech and political intimidation [00:48:57].

Consequences of Erosion

The erosion of the epistemic commons results in society’s problem-solving processes failing to address catastrophic risks, or even causing worse, cumulative problems [00:18:00]. This leads to infighting and a breakdown of coordination, making it impossible to address global challenges that require unified action [00:30:30], [00:58:01]. If this trend continues, it could lead to the end of open societies and the rise of technologically-empowered autocracies [00:54:46].

Catalyzing a Cultural Renaissance: The Role of The Consilience Project

The Consilience Project aims to support a new cultural renaissance or enlightenment, where people understand the unique issues the world faces and develop the capacities for better sense-making, communication, and participation in new systems of problem-solving and governance [00:02:22].

It operates as a non-profit, donation-funded organization with no paywalls, ads, or data selling, and does not accept donations with strings attached, ensuring independence and integrity [01:17:47]. The project also avoids individual author bylines on its papers to encourage focus on content rather than ad hominem attacks and to promote collective intelligence [01:18:26].

The project publishes three types of articles:

1. Foundations Series: Theoretical pieces that discuss the uniqueness of the current problem landscape, re-evaluate previous social theories, and identify what new social capacities are needed for the future [00:23:22]. Examples include “Democracy in the Epistemic Commons,” which explains the necessary conditions for participatory governance, and “Challenges to 21st Century Sense Making,” which details the erosion of the epistemic commons due to complex issues and media fragmentation [00:29:08], [00:32:47].
2. Situational Assessments: Apply social theory to current global issues, such as China’s activity in East Africa or the differences between French and US secularism [00:34:28]. These assessments use “consilience epistemics,” factoring in various narrative views and perspectives (e.g., finance, culture, tech) to achieve higher-order insights [00:24:56].
3. Meta News: Addresses highly polarized topics by analyzing why polarization exists, identifying vested interests pushing narratives, and exposing epistemic biases and “narrative warfare” tactics like cherry-picking statistics or decontextualizing facts [00:26:05]. The goal is to help people develop a “memetic immune system” to resist narrative hijacking and transcend tribalism [00:27:44], [00:28:09]. An example given is an analysis of whether bricks were planted at the George Floyd protests, demonstrating how various factions adopted beliefs that aligned with their existing emotional perspectives despite inconclusive evidence [00:36:02].

Three Epistemologies for Sense-Making

A necessary cultural enlightenment must integrate three types of epistemologies:

1. Third-person epistemology: The philosophy of science, focusing on objective, measurable, repeatable phenomena [01:09:55]. While powerful for understanding “what is,” it does not address “what ought to be” (ethics) [01:08:01].
2. Second-person epistemology: The ability to understand what others think and feel, crucial for the human domain. This involves truly inhabiting another’s perspective, like in the Socratic method or Hegelian dialectic, to seek synthesis rather than mere rhetorical victory [01:10:07].
3. First-person epistemology: Self-awareness of one’s own cognitive biases, desires for certainty, and unwillingness to admit past errors that might compromise sense-making. This aligns with traditions like Stoicism and Eastern contemplative practices [01:10:37].

These three epistemologies must be developed together to create a shared way of making sense of reality and valuing different perspectives, allowing for constructive reconstruction rather than just deconstruction [01:02:40].

Catalyzing a Movement

While The Consilience Project’s initial work is in deep, high-resolution articles, it aims to translate these into more accessible forms like animations and podcasts to reach wider audiences, including high school students [01:14:00], [01:14:40].

The project also engages in movement building by:

• Identifying and Curating Resources: Identifying groups doing critical work related to the epistemic commons, sense-making, meaning-making, and choice-making, and curating their resources [01:24:16].
• Re-contextualization: Helping these groups recognize their interconnectedness as part of a larger effort to upgrade culture, moving beyond siloed “social media project,” “journalism project,” or “education project” labels [01:24:47].
• Prototyping Media Methods: Documenting its own methods, such as those used for Meta News, and making them publicly available, inspiring other media organizations and individuals to adopt and innovate on them [01:21:39].
• Fostering New Demand: By providing quality, nuanced information, The Consilience Project hopes to shift the “perverse” demand in media away from salacious, short-form content toward more thoughtful engagement, encouraging a “race to the top” among information providers [01:22:58].
• Self-Termination: The project is designed to self-terminate after five years, ensuring it does not become another self-perpetuating organization. Its success is measured by its ability to catalyze a decentralized cultural renaissance and empower other groups to continue its aims [01:16:05], [01:19:34]. This commitment encourages transparency and collaboration, demonstrating that it is not in competition with other initiatives but seeks to support them [01:20:09].

Ultimately, the goal is to develop new social capacities and institutions adequate to hold the power of current physical technology and to overcome rivalrous dynamics that risk existential threats [01:08:47].