Don't mean to give the impression that public life is a useless theater we can do without. Public life has critical value. It creates the spillover space for value from all other activities, and the compounding raw material of grand narratives. It's like a drip pan of meaning.
Conversation
Without it, anomie and nihilism basically take over and eat the human condition, and nothing compounds that's worthy of names like "progress" or "decline" which make life worth it (the valence actually doesn't matter so much as there being a secular trend of any sort).
2
4
The optimal amount of anomie and nihilism in the human condition is not 0%, but it's also not 100%. The correct amount is 42%.
2
3
18
This sense of public figure I think largely tracks the definition used in the legal system when it comes to slander/defamation lawsuits against journalists by famous people. It's probably tighter in some ways.
1
4
Also, the "public" is an unqualified, unrestricted space within a connected social geography. You cannot for eg. be a "public figure in tech" or "a public figure in music." You're either a public figure or you're not. Sectorally restricted public figures are... not really
1
5
The new information that gets past the Arendt filter is best thought of as "eigendiscoveries"... discoveries that alter the eigenstructure of the public (add/remove/shift eigenvalues)
Quote Tweet
Replying to @vgr
Why is this the only info we care about?
1
1
Yes asymmetric cryptography was the discovery, but blockchain was its debut event in the public sphere. Before that it was consequential, but not in a public way. Like og human discovery of America vs. Colombian moment that connected it to old world.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @mreliwjones and @vgr
Asymmetric cryptography is the truly original thing here.. people are just taking their sweet time fully grasping how to take advantage of it.
2
2
5
I'm inclined to suspect that the former is a null set. They can be influencers and powerful marketers, but not really public figures. Arts and entertainment celebs are particularly clear examples.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @vgr
I think there's a distinction to make here between those who are powerful because they are public figures, and those who (may be) public figures because they are powerful.
1
5
A rough test of public-figureness is whether somebody makes it into *general* history books. A few scientists do, but almost no artists do, which says a lot. For eg. Shakespeare in a general history is usually just a data point on the cultural flowering of the Elizabethan era.
1
2
This is why, all due respect to musical prowess, Kanye is not quite a public figure in the largest sense. He's struggled to have a consequential impact beyond music. It is entirely possible to ignore him entirely so long as he ignores you.
2
1
4
Being valued, admired, even nationally treasured, is irrelevant. You’re only a true public figure if you’re acknowledged as someone involved in steering the general human condition. You can be pretty obscure and qualify. George Kennan probably does for eg.
Replying to
Who’s doing the acknowledging?
Ultimately you’re a public figure if the public (or *a* public) responds to you - if you over-theorise it you underplay the public in favour of a personal conception of influence or significance
1




