Conversation

Dunbar’s number needs to be retired as a concept. It’s turned into a meaningless trope under conditions of modernity. It’s not a meaningful social scaling breakpoint for anything in practice, and hasn’t been since the invention of agriculture and archetype based storytelling.
Replying to
Dunbar’s number refers to how many other minds you can model not group size per se. Unless all made men only know w the other made men personally and nobody else, it’s not an example.
2
1
Show replies
Replying to
I find "Dunbar's number" still order-of-mag-approximation useful; and also useful as one of the few turns of phrase that reliably gets people to think about the fact communication changes as the numbers of participants goes up.
1
1