From: jimruttshow8596
Humanity is currently undergoing a “world historical transition” that poses existential threats, yet also holds the potential for a “truly amazing future” [00:02:08]. Reaching this better future, known as Game B, requires a significant upgrade in humanity’s individual and collective capacity for thought and action [00:02:20].
The Challenges of Game A
Game A refers to the current civilization methods and systems that have been in place for a long time [00:03:07]. The core issue with Game A is that while it has historically relied on fighting to resolve fundamental disagreements, modern technological capabilities make such conflicts catastrophic [00:03:20]. This means humanity must learn to be “really good at something in the direction of peace” [00:03:39].
Key issues within Game A:
- Accelerating Destructive Capacity The underlying code of Game A is an increase in technological capability within a context of competition [00:04:42]. This has led to an accelerating capacity to destroy things, such as through nuclear weapons post-World War II [00:05:03]. The risk footprint continues to expand with technologies like CRISPR, which enables biological warfare risks from non-state actors [00:05:17].
- Increased Fragility A deeply technological civilization has inherent fragility [00:06:33]. For example, shutting down a power grid 150 years ago would have had little impact, but now it would be catastrophic [00:06:39]. The means to cause such disruptions are increasingly distributed, from EMPs to drone swarms and cyber warfare [00:06:51].
- Game Theoretical Traps Game A is caught in an “arms race problem” [00:07:49]. Organizations feel compelled to “keep running forward as fast as we can” in areas like AI research, even realizing it’s reckless, because not doing so means falling behind [00:08:07]. This logic of competition drives choices that are recognized as dangerous [00:08:32].
- Environmental Limits Humanity is reaching or has exceeded the Earth’s long-term carrying capacity to support 8 billion people at current average lifestyles [00:09:00]. The technological enhancement of lifestyles leads to ever-increasing externalities, essentially “blowing up” the environment through micro-corrosion or toxicity [00:10:02].
- The War on Sense-Making This refers to the manipulation of human cognition, often through AI-enhanced marketing and political propaganda on social media [00:12:00]. Sophisticated understanding of cognitive neuroscience is used to circumvent our neuro-cognitive structures and manipulate choice-making [00:12:10]. This leads to a diminished capacity for individuals to make sense of the world and make effective choices [00:12:55]. It’s akin to an “autoimmune disease on sense-making,” where the very tools meant to aid sense-making turn against it [00:13:48].
Introduction to Game B
Game B represents a possible better world or trajectory towards it [00:14:22]. Thinking and talking about Game B is difficult using Game A’s conceptual structures, as this can “poison the well” [00:15:16].
Defining Game B through Parallax Perspectives
One way to understand Game B is through multiple succinct constructions:
- Navigating Complexity without Complicated Systems Game B is about “building or developing capacity to navigate complexity without resorting to complicated systems” [00:16:08]. This involves developing skillfulness in individuals and groups to respond to natural, anthropo-complexity (human interaction), and techno-complexity (human-created technology’s impact) [00:16:44].
- A Meta-Protocol for Hyper-Collaboration Game B is an emergent, spontaneous phenomenon where people co-discover and co-create new ways of operating [00:17:31]. It’s characterized by “emergent distributed cognition” where uncoordinated individuals collaborate and generate useful things without top-down structure [00:18:42]. This “meta protocol” allows anyone to orient themselves and find ways to participate meaningfully, adding value to the whole [00:19:59]. Hyper-collaboration implies that everyone is “playing Game B” at some level, but the goal is to increase skillfulness and conscious choice in collaboration [00:21:15].
- This is not explicitly formally defining the terms of collaboration [00:23:27]. Instead, individuals focus on parts of the problem that make sense to them, communicate with fidelity, and support each other’s orientation towards alignment [00:23:41]. This leads to collaboration even with people not explicitly known [00:24:10].
- Core Architectural Attributes Early discussions of Game B identified key attributes: non-hierarchical, network-oriented, and long-term metastable [00:24:40]. These principles seem to be driving the “self-booting and self-growing aspect” of Game B 2.0 [00:24:54].
Optimism for Game B’s Emergence
Despite Game A’s massive current power, there is optimism for Game B due to the concept of the “adjacent possible” [00:26:40].
- Faster-than-Exponential Growth: Stuart Kauffman’s concept of the adjacent possible describes how combining existing components can generate novel capacities, expanding the set of components and leading to possibilities that grow faster than exponentially, potentially “to infinity in a finite time” [00:27:01].
- Higher Exponent of Growth: Game A has a high state and rate of power, like a large oil tanker [00:28:18]. However, Game B, though starting small, can have a higher exponent of growth by being better at riding the accelerating curve of the adjacent possible [00:28:44]. This means a smaller starting point with a higher growth rate can eventually surpass a much larger system [00:43:02].
- Focus on Innovation and Collective Intelligence: Game A’s competitive evolution increasingly relies on technological innovation and collective intelligence [00:29:08]. Game B is explicitly “designed from the get-go to be substantially better at innovation than Game A” [00:44:35].
- This involves moving beyond extrinsic motivation and hierarchical organization, which inhibit creative collaboration, towards supporting intrinsic motivation and free exploration of possibilities [00:31:41].
- The goal is to create individuals with maximum “sovereignty” and capacity to respond effectively to diverse contexts, and to rapidly achieve “coherence” in relationships [00:32:30].
- Liminality and Humility To navigate complexity, a “liminal” state of “not-knowing” or “child’s mind” is essential [00:33:20]. This means being deeply curious and perceiving without prefiguring, like a “still hunter” in an unfamiliar niche [00:34:20]. Humility is the “handmaiden of liminality” and a primary capacity to play Game B well [00:41:40].
Preparing for Game B: Pre-B and Proto-B Phases
Pre-B: Individual Transformation
Before the emergence of full Game B communities, individuals must undertake personal changes:
- Finding the Others Connecting with like-minded individuals is a crucial first step [00:50:29].
- Transparent Agentic Mind Taking seriously the notion of liminality and being aware of one’s own axiomatic assumptions in sense-making [00:52:01]. This involves being able to shift paradigms as the situation changes [00:52:17].
- Orienting by Meaningfulness Building the capacity to base choices on a deep sense of meaningfulness [00:52:30]. This means reconnecting with one’s authentic values and desires, rather than being driven by external ideologies or status-oriented consumerism [00:54:15]. Meaningfulness is the “fitness of your way of being in relationship to the world” [00:58:01], allowing one to respond effectively and further one’s capacity to do so in the future [01:00:35].
- This requires developing “integrity” – a state where all pieces of oneself and the world are fitting together well, overcoming fragmentation and inauthenticity [01:05:07].
Proto-B: Experimenting with Piece Parts
The “proto-B” phase involves experimenting with the component parts of Game B [01:07:37]. This includes:
- Parenting and Family Life A Game B approach to parenting emphasizes symmetry between parent and child, viewing the child as a “fully realized soul” [01:11:13]. The parent’s role is to support the child in building their own capacities, rather than imposing learned propositions [01:11:47]. Both parent and child teach each other about meaningfulness [01:12:23].
- Making a Living (Vocation/Ikigai) This involves discerning one’s “vocation” or “calling,” that unique contribution one is capable of doing with exquisite care and capacity, and towards which one feels a strong sense of meaningfulness [01:13:02]. The challenge is then to accrue necessary resources to pursue this vocation [01:14:20].
- Conviviality Meaning “living together” [01:15:07], conviviality is the conscious design of culture (including rituals, tools, gatherings) to fully support personal growth, relational growth, and connection with the larger whole [01:15:50]. It emphasizes face-to-face interaction and viewing relationships as sacred, realized in the ordinary [01:16:23]. Conviviality may be Game B’s “secret weapon,” offering a deeper sense of fulfillment than material pursuits [01:17:40].
- Policing and Justice Game B approaches injustice with “curiosity” rather than mere problem-solving [01:27:19]. It views incidents as opportunities to increase capacity and find more meaningful relationships [01:27:51]. This involves maintaining the integrity of conviviality, setting boundaries from a place of maturity and care (e.g., in parenting a tantruming child), and discerning what “right relationship” looks like in a given context [01:31:11].
- This requires “discernment,” which is reality-based and not “non-judgmental” or “Pollyannish idealistic” [01:34:20]. It’s about perceiving reality without projecting frameworks, bringing only what is deeply relatable and furthers the relationship [01:36:06].
- Coherence Coherence in Game B refers to how distinct parts generate a synergistic, emergent whole that is greater than the sum of its parts, while simultaneously enhancing the autonomy of each part [01:37:39]. This creates a feedback loop where increased autonomy leads to increased synergy. This “coherent pluralism” is a challenging design problem, requiring careful balance between agreement and liberty [01:39:15].
- This capacity for coherence allows for enormous specialization and division of labor (e.g., doctor and farmer), while maintaining the integrity of the whole, giving Game B a massive “superpower” to out-compete systems that cannot do so [01:40:40].
Scaling Beyond the Dunbar Number
The “hard problem of Game B” is how to scale these principles beyond the Dunbar number (approximately 150 individuals, the natural limit for face-to-face community social networks) [01:42:39].
- The solution may be “discoverable” by finding an “attractor in reality itself,” a sweet spot where a distributed cognition group can most fully accelerate with the adjacent possible’s accelerating curve, without falling apart [01:44:00].
- This involves “meta-learning” – learning to experiment extremely effectively and using the output of experiments to improve the experimental protocol itself [01:48:01].
- Proto-B Communities The first attempts at whole, integrated Game B life will be “proto-B” communities [01:49:37]. These will likely be dependent on Game A resources (e.g., computer chips, hospitals), strategically “parasitizing Game A” to build themselves [01:50:07].
- These communities can be “geographically anchored” as face-to-face groups [01:56:08]. However, other models exist, such as “episodic physical relationship” (meeting in person periodically and maintaining virtual relationships) [01:56:43], or collaboration between multiple anchored groups (e.g., a group in Santa Cruz collaborating with one in southern France) [01:57:47].
- These proto-Bs will experiment with different selections and versions of Game B components [01:58:37]. Failures are expected and even necessary for evolution, as long as they are “honorable failures” that lead to deep learning and wisdom for the individuals involved [01:59:29]. This accumulated wisdom contributes to the larger Game B effort [02:00:45].
- A significant advantage is that Game B experiments are likely to produce highly disruptive economic innovations that can outcompete Game A, drawing talent and resources [01:54:11].
This endeavor is complex, akin to the multi-decade effort to develop the laser, but with far less resources and a much broader scope [02:02:04]. However, every step contributes to moving “the game forward” [02:03:07].