Egregores are composed of, *run on*, multiple human brains, potentially millions of them, but they are (usually) far less complex, *lower-dimensional*, than humans. It's a bandwidth issue: an egregore doesn't only rely on language for transmission, but for all of its cognition.
-
Show this thread
-
Written language allowed egregores to advance in complexity by using text as long-term storage -- holy writ, contracts, regulations etc. This allows an advanced egregore a degree of independence from individual minds. But most egregores are much smaller and more primitive.
1 reply 2 retweets 17 likesShow this thread -
This is why a fully owned human sounds eerily like a simple computer program when carrying out the egregore's will: the egregore is much simpler than the mind hosting it.
1 reply 3 retweets 29 likesShow this thread -
As a footnote, this suggests a strategy for resisting egregore infection: When you notice everyone agreeing on some subject, train yourself to avoid that subject and reserve judgment. Kneejerk contrarianism isn't enough, not "you're wrong!" but "I dunno about that."
1 reply 10 retweets 32 likesShow this thread -
To clarify: Train yourself to avoid _discussing_ that subject, or repeating what you hear. If you choose to _investigate_ the subject, that's great, but it isn't always practical. Remaining ignorant of the media explosion du jour is always a wise choice.
2 replies 6 retweets 25 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @St_Rev
Interesting. So but is there a mode of collective action that doesn’t fit this definition of egregore? I guess when people are knowingly aligned instead of just by subconscious assumption? But even that might have non-self-aware participants. Can something be part-egregore?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dicey__
"Egregore" is an extended metaphor for trying to understand the behavior of groups of humans that behave as-if they had agency separate from the constituent humans. How relevant that metaphor is varies.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think "collective action" is virtually always evil and I personally avoid it at all costs, but I'm not going to claim that's intrinsic to the model, or that the model is universally applicable.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
But to get back to your question, certainly there are individual humans who are skilled at assembling mobs and sending them after their enemies, for instance.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @St_Rev
Yes, but that’s not really collective action. That is people being exploited and guided by a force that is for all intents and purposes external to whatever group is being flimflammed. I am taking about a group that chooses to work together, that shares values and understandings.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
You asked a question, I gave an answer. Not here for an argument, have a great evening.
-
-
Replying to @St_Rev
Me neither- I thought your idea was interesting and wanted to understand it better, so I asked a question. You didn’t seem to answer that question, so I tried to clarify. If you don’t want to explain your thinking that’s fine, but I’m not trying to be quarrelsome.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.