The Future of Governance Part 3 | Jordan Hall and John Vervaeke | Voices with Vervaeke

If you would like to join our community on Patreon, please go to www.Patreon.com/JohnVervaeke
The final episode in our series on Governance... for now. In this episode, Dr. Vervaeke and Jordan Hall talk about effective groups of peer-distributed governance, each human beings intrinsic motivations and drives, and the integration of artificial intelligence into these systems.

[@KevinFlowersJr]

As someone who's followed Hall & Vervaeke's projects for a while (before and after they met), it's astonishing that they seem to be converging at all (let alone in a concrete & profoundly practical way). This not only gives me a cautious optimism, but also inspiration to continue augmenting my own & others' capacities in service of supporting such hyper structures of governance. The path forward seems narrow and difficult, but it does in fact appear possible. My gratitude for the both of you in helping illuminate such a path 🙏

[@late_fee]

Having watched and listened to probably several hundred hours of your content I've not seen you ask for anything so I know it wasn't easy for you to put the request you did in the beginning of this video. That said, I'm glad you did because it was the push I needed to join your Patreon community, sorry I didn't do it sooner. It seems a paltry amount to help something I believe in, especially considering how much of my money finds its way into the hands of the egregores that are fueling the meaning crisis. I would be lying if I said I wasn't afraid of what's about to come with the advent of AI/AGI, not so much for myself but for my young son and the kind of future that may await, but this represents a small flame of hope and I truly wish for it to become an inferno. Thank you so very much for your time, your work has had a monumental impact on me and I know many others. I hope your work and the work of the like minded people contributing to help solve the meaning crisis finds a rapidly growing audience.

[@matamoney]

just finished watching all three episodes, positive ripples confirmed 🙏

[@InterfaceGuhy]

Watching this again for a second time… the poetry and poignancy of these conversations is truly beautiful. Check out the (probably) unintentional alliteration in the last few minutes. You guys are literally singing us into a-muse-ment Cheers Project Penny Proposing Point Probative Problem Posing Prospective Publicly Probably Producing Partnered Properly Positive riPPles

[@InterfaceGuhy]

@jordan @John

[@leedufour]

Thanks Jordan and John!

[@clumsydad7158]

Let's Roll ! Numero Tres !! Governance - Wisdom - Meaning - Humanity ... DOWN WITH MOLOCH !!

[@nateTheNomad23]

Onward brothers and sisters!

[@tigreytigrey8537]

Im Constantly touched too

[@MrGroovequest]

24:26 "You already know people who are highly intelligent and highly foolish." THIS.

[@dionnemathew780]

I am not on social media but it crosses my mind that this would scale fast with the types of people who follow persons such as Vanda Shiva and Sadguru, maybe the Lex Freedman crowd as well.

[@colorfulbookmark]

Dr.Vevaeke's video is inspiration and motivation for people who have to improve perspectives and skills as well. The governance as a topic of this video is too. I wonder how he and his guests are doing accomplishing what is truthful of the solvings, I learn much from it.

[@dionnemathew780]

Most definitely positive ripples! So uplifting to listen to brilliant minds ensconced with integrity discuss real problems and proposed solutions that ACTUALLY have the potential to scale for the greater good :). I also loved hearing that Daniel Schmachtenburger has been part of this. He is another one of my favorite “great minds” with conscious intentions. I rather like what the algorithm send me. This was absolutely wonderful! Thank you

[@woodandwandco]

This is an excellent series! Please keep them coming!

[@alexandresavardo]

Thank you so much for your work again John. We all need to wrap our heads around what's awaiting us. Very relevant short series.

[@williamjmccartan8879]

Jordan this has been really great towards the future of governance, but at 42 minutes you seemed to invoke Rod Serling in your voice. I'll come back, thank you John for hosting and of course sharing. 60 minutes The Ent's, so appropriate. Coherence is essential to growth. Wonderful conversation gentlemen, thank you both very much. Peace

[@Science-bi8dp]

Humanity is greater than the sum of all parts. Critically mass of 66% of people need to see the truth, the rest take longer to teach. As there is always absolute good and on the other side absolute evil. People need to see that we are building the past and calling it the future. Like ants and an anthill. Bees to a beehive. The things we forget as we blindly advance "progress" Great conversation 🎉

[@mikegarrigan5182]

For AI to love it must be positively nurtured. As we procreate this sentient agent, that has a sense of self, there’s hope that it might become a loving angel.

[@jefflanahan8812]

In his recent Exodus series, Jordan Peterson recently said, "A structure of priority is a pyramidal structure, and something has to be at the top. Whatever is at the top of your hierarchy of assumptions functions as God for you." I find this relevant here because it seems to me that we humans have a very strong innate desire to come into contact with, and enter into a relationship with what ever our God(s) may be. We want to climb that pyramid and reach God, as it were. I also believe that we are not fully aware of the God(s) we worship. Perhaps, that is, until a revelation occurs. Perhaps an analysis of what we are aiming most vigorously at becoming one with, will illuminate the nature of the God(s) we worship.

[@j.p.marceau5146]

Interesting possibility about building AIs that are bodies for angels rather than demons. For some reason I hadn't been able to frame AIs positively, at least what's coming short term. Thanks for all the thought provoking content these days John and Jordan, as usual.

[@ourblessedtribe9284]

Hi JP. I am wondering if you are attending the Chino Conference? If so I would love to meet you. -Matthew

[@j.p.marceau5146]

@@ourblessedtribe9284 No I can't go right now 🙃 I hope you have a good time there.

[@futurescapeart]

Agreed. Eggregores as a frame for that aspect of the conversation is perfect.

[@RickDelmonico]

Love, in the sense of, empowering the other to make wise choices.

[@idatong976]

Thank you both for this most important conversation about The Future of Governance. There's so much to learn. Indeed, I agree that to cooperate is better to cheat and compete in a vicious cycle, globally... My sentiment is this, we can't even teach all humans, how can we teach AI...

[@JoeTaber]

I think a wide study of the history of 'open source' code and licenses would be good context. I think it's reasonable to say that the world of open source software has been grappling with this exact problem for decades and has been naturally drawing towards the same solutions mentioned near the end. A good study would include past and present motivations for people and companies to release their code as open source, and the intention and outcome of various licenses which use the legal standing of copyright but uses an odd choice of compensation that incentivises reciprocal behavior.

[@ElSeanoF]

This is a brilliant angle to tackle the AI alignment challenge from. You´ve lassoed corporate incentive & human ethics of not to steal in to one value structure - Love the premise of this idea, can´t wait to see where it goes & what more can be designed in to this strategy!

[@epi_sto_letes]

About 1 hr in: yup. I’ve been hearing Ent the whole time.

[@badoedipus2551]

It’s been a little while since I watched a lot of this space or channel.. and based on the bits I have been seeing, while not paying a lot of attention, I’ve had some concerns.. but here it felt a little uncanny.. how well we are getting into, what I think, is the proper depths of the problems.. Great stuff!

[@dalibofurnell]

Yet again, I cant help but think of how awesome these conversations would be if turned into a book ❤

[@CurlyScott89]

"We're wired to seek dominance" please explain. I've been under the impression that we reward competence but that occasionally gets gamed by psychopaths who do seek dominance.

[@michaelyon-stark2085]

I love the idea of restoring the commons, both localized and with AI. Bringing back ethics would also be a welcome change. Considering the the commons was purposely enclosed and destroyed by the ruling class for profits, first at home, and then abroad through imperialism. How do you see the power structure that spent 600 years implementing this system being replaced by a new commons? Certainly not willingly. I think the idealism of the early internet, as a new decentralized democratizing technology, and how that turned out is a more likely outcome for AI. Specifically a few monopolies who have enclosed the space for profit backed by the force of the government, in a partnership of spying, manipulation, and censorship. Wondering if you have specifics about how to solve these issues?

[@futurescapeart]

Very well said, and its clear to me that John feels this particularly deeply .. whereas I think what’s emerging from Jordan’s pov is that to have the slightest chance of success in the project , its participants move through it as if within a ‘faith’ or trust of its success. The commons and the question of future governance are being modeled and lived >no matter what< , because of the principles governing our sacredness/humanity on the individual-to-collective level. Identifying first-principles seems to be a group project .. but we each should sort that out .. only in that way, defining and refining a set of ‘noble principles’ , and modeling it faithfully , can present the liminal moment with it’s success.

[@jacobcochrane9069]

Excellent, but never got to The Network State.

[@TheIgnoramus]

Heuristic imperatives. Really like the ending.

[@snowman1185-v]

🙏

[@TitanIapetus]

Thank you for these conversations. These have been great! Very excited for this one!!

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

Great and lowly are RELATIVE. 😉 Incidentally, are you VEGAN? 🌱

[@krystofekl8162]

This whole series is such a delight, exploring exactly what I intend to devote my life to - bringing wisdom to governance. You are certainly among my biggest inspirations, so I'm more than happy to contribute on Patreon. As I'm still a student without a real income, I'll have to start at the lowest tier, but come June, I'll be working hard on starting my own business focused helping companies decentralize authority and hopefully become places for cultivation of wisdom. I'll do my best to work up towards the highest support tiers :) Please take care and continue your wonderful work!

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

🐟 22. ILLEGITIMATE GOVERNANCES: SOCIALISM (and its more extreme form, communism) is intrinsically evil, because it is based on the ideology of social and economic egalitarianism, which is both a theoretical and a practical impossibility. Equality exists solely in abstract concepts such as mathematics and arguably in the sub-atomic realm. Many proponents of socialism argue that it is purely an economic system and therefore independent of any particular form of governance. However, it is inconceivable that socialism/communism could be implemented on a nationwide scale without any form of government intervention. If a relatively small number of persons wish to unite in order to form a commune or worker-cooperative, that is their prerogative, but it could never work in a country with a large population, because there will always exist entrepreneurs desirous of engaging in wealth-building enterprises. Even a musician who composes a hit tune wants his song to succeed and earn him inordinate wealth. Socialism reduces individual citizens to utilities, who, in practice, are used to support the ruling elite, who are invariably despotic scoundrels, and very far from ideal leaders (i.e. compassionate and righteous monarchs). Those citizens who display talent in business or the arts are either oppressed, or their gifts are coercively utilized by the corrupt state. Despite purporting to be a fair and equitable system of wealth distribution, those in leadership positions seem to live a far more luxurious lifestyle than the mass of menial workers. Wealth is effectively stolen from the rich. Most destructively, virtuous and holy teachings (“dharma”, in Sanskrit) are repressed by the irreligious and ILLEGITIMATE “government”. The argument that some form of government WELFARE programme is essential to aid those who are unable to financially-support themselves for reasons beyond their control, is fallacious. A righteous ruler (i.e. a saintly monarch) will ensure the welfare of each and every citizen by encouraging private welfare. There is no need for a king to extort money from his subjects in order to feed and clothe the impoverished. Of course, in the highly-unlikely event that civilians are unwilling to help a person in dire straits, the king would step-in to assist that person, as one would expect from a patriarch (father of his people). The head of any nation ought to be the penultimate patriarch, not a selfish buffoon. DEMOCRACY is almost as evil, because, just as the rabble favoured the murderous Barabbas over the good King Jesus, the ignorant masses will overwhelmingly vote for the candidate which promises to fulfil their inane desires, rather than one which will enforce the law, and promote a wholesome and just society. Read Chapter 12 for the most authoritative and concise exegesis of law, morality, and ethics, currently available. Even in the miraculous scenario where the vast majority of the population are holy and righteous citizens, it is still immoral for them to vote for a seemingly-righteous leader. This is because that leader will not be, by definition, a king. As clearly and logically explicated in the previous chapter of this Holy Scripture, MONARCHY is the only lawful form of governance. If an elected ruler is truly righteous, he will not be able to condone the fact that the citizens are paying him to perform a job (which is a working-class role), and that an inordinate amount of time, money and resources are being wasted on political campaigning. Furthermore, an actual ruler does not wimpishly pander to voters - he takes power by (divinely-mandated) force, as one would expect from the penultimate alpha-male in society (the ultimate alpha-male being a priest). The thought of children voting for who will be their parents or teachers, would seem utterly RIDICULOUS to the average person, yet most believe that they are qualified to choose their own ruler - they are most assuredly not. Just as a typical child fails to understand that a piece of sweet, juicy, healthy, delicious fruit is more beneficial for them than a cone of pus-infested, fattening, diabetes-inducing ice-cream, so too can the uneducated proletariat not understand that they are unqualified to choose their own leader, even after it is logically explained to them (as it is in this chapter, as well as in the previous chapter). And by “uneducated”, it is simply meant that they are misguided in the realities of life and in righteous living (“dharma”, in Sanskrit), not in facts and figures or in technical training. Intelligence doesn't necessarily correlate to wisdom. No socialist or democratic government will educate its citizens sufficiently well that the citizens have the knowledge of how to usurp their rule. To put it frankly, democracy is rule by the “lowest common denominator”. It should be obvious that ANARCHY can never ever succeed, because even the smallest possible social unit (the nuclear family) requires a dominator. Any family will fall-apart without a strict male household head. In fact, without the husband/father, there is no family, by definition. The English noun “husband” comes from the Old Norse word “hûsbôndi”, meaning “master of the house”. The same paradigm applies to the extended family, which depends on a strong patriarchal figure (customarily, the eldest or most senior male). Likewise with clans, tribes, villages, towns, cities, and nations or countries. Unfortunately, there are many otherwise-intelligent persons who honestly believe that an ENTIRE country can smoothly run without a leader in place. Any sane person can easily understand that even a nuclear family is unable to function properly without a head of the house, what to speak of a populous nation. The reason for anarchists' distrust of any kind of government is due to the corrupt nature of democratic governments, and the adulteration of the monarchy in recent centuries. However, if anarchists were to understand that most all so-called “kings/queens” in recent centuries were not even close to being true monarchs, they may change their stance on that inane “system”. Most of the problems in human society are directly or indirectly attributable to this relatively modern phenomenon (non-monarchies), since it is the government’s role and sacred DUTY to enforce the law (see Chapter 12), and non-monarchical governments are themselves unlawful. One of the many sinister characteristics of democracy, socialism, and other evil forms of governance, is the desire for their so-called “leaders” to control, or at least influence, the private lives of every single citizen (hence the term “Nanny State”). For example, in the wicked, decadent nations in which this holy scripture was composed, The Philippine Islands and The Southland (or “Australia”, as it is known in the Latin tongue), the DEMONIC governments try, and largely succeed, in controlling the rights of parents to properly raise, discipline and punish their children according to their own morals, compulsory vaccination of infants, enforcing feminist ideology, limiting legitimate powers an employer has over his servants, subsidizing animal agriculture, persecuting religious leaders (even to imprisonment and death, believe it or not. Personally, I have been jailed thrice for executing God’s perfect and pure will), and even trying to negatively influence what people eat and wear. Not that a government shouldn’t control what its citizens wear in public, but it should ensure that they are MODESTLY dressed, according to the guidelines outlined in Chapter 28, which is hardly the case in Australia, the Philippines, and similar nations. At least ninety-nine per cent of Filipinas, for instance, are transvestinal, despite Philippines pretending to be a religious nation. Cont...

[@clumsydad7158]

@@ReverendDr.Thomas um, so, wha we do?

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

@@clumsydad7158, kindly repeat that in ENGLISH, Miss.☝️ Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱

[@RickDelmonico]

Forbidden Planet movie 1956. Monsters from the id.

[@jerehaw]

What is the gap between the infinite love of God who created humans in his own image, and the finite love of humans who are trying to create AI in their own image? What will prevent AI's knowledge of Darwinism turning into social Darwinism? Who will defeat an AI in court when it defends itself against it's plagiarism?

[@thephilosophicalagnostic2177]

What I want to know is how you deal with the problem of vast numbers. Best estimates are that the United States has at the very least 325 million people. Millions are babies and children, who would not be involved in political decision-making, but we are still speaking of vast numbers of adults. Incomprehensibly many. There is no political system that can handle that many hands-on political decision makers or the information they would be accessing or the information they would be generating. So, here's the problem: Who gets to decide? What tiny fraction of a vast population get to be Plato's Guardians? And what qualifies them? And who picks them? I have never, ever read any good solid political philosophy that engaged the problem of vast numbers. Can you?

[@peachycore6823]

The agreement structures you talking about i see currently happening in the web3 space the consensus algorithm that settles the current state of the network can bring the fasted alignment of different market participants with different interest. If we want to build something like that for a.I. We need speed. Technology is governing technology

[@peachycore6823]

Important here is as well that the a.I. Blackbox problem can be countered by the transparency web3 is offering.

[@tigreytigrey8537]

God damn homeboi has a crimson chin! Alpha AS FUCK

[@AdielShnior]

wow. bright future.

[@Joshua_6_9]

So in social media the platforms produce a collective agency from the users, because the dialogue of individuals Carry the agency of the individuals, that through the platform also loops back to influence the other individual agents through the collective agency, this would make the collective agency of the platform a God, because it has power over the platform (realm) and influence over agents of the platform (realm) it would also make the users of the platform a demi-god because their agency in the platform (realm) is born, propagates, has followers and has influence on the platform (realm) through their followers and it's relationship with and influence over the collective agency.

[@Joshua_6_9]

Platforms turns the individuals agency into demi-gods that have temples (timelines/feeds) and alters (comments/replys/retweets/etc where the followers of that individuals agency (the demi-god) is worshipped (interacted with and idolized)

[@tminusmat]

Amazing discussion. My thought is a socialist idea of property and stealing could b more in line with the power structure. A socialist states corruption would be different. Yes centralized but information control might incentivize human rights. R copyrights necessary?

[@olafhaze7898]

Isn't the prisoners dilemma lacking complexity to be applied to a complex situation? the actual framework is clear in terms of actions and consequences while in a complex framework this wouldn't be the case especially for the consequences.

[@clumsydad7158]

prob true, but most of our decision making, even at high levels, is often simple/direct/political and not taking much into account, especially regarding future considerations (long-term)

[@olafhaze7898]

@@clumsydad7158 i absolutely agree, in some sense that's the ouroboros. If there is the realization of a threshold point then considering for example what and to what extent has been made binding by the LORD is inevitable in order to come across with a desired outcome. anyway thx for the reply.

[@X11bl]

Would be great a personal evolution super app. Many influencer focus mostly in one topic and we know is basket that enhance purpose and happiness in life.

[@david81663]

What is the best way myself and fellow followers of your work can contribute to bringing about the "collaboration spiral" that Jordan outlined at the end of this episode?

[@3rdwaveredpill144]

Are you familiar with decentralized autonomous organizations? (DAO)

[@davidjoseph7185]

Haven't finished this yet, but has Jordan presented his "argument" as a coherent whole anywhere? (I.e. a list of propositions somehow related to one another). Can anyone outline what this is, to this point, if not? I'm having a little hard keeping track of it, and I'm sure everyone would benefit from a clearly delineated list of propositions.

[@dalibofurnell]

I haven't finished this yet either, but I'd also like to know the answer to your question 😅

[@InterfaceGuhy]

Did finishing to the end shed any light?

[@davidjoseph7185]

​@@InterfaceGuhy I'm sure there's a lot that I missed, but the gist of it seems to be: 1. We are living in a chiros, i.e. a time in which significant change is possible, and this window of opportunity may close soon. 2. Distributed cognition has an advantage over egregorian entities in such a time.

[@InterfaceGuhy]

@@davidjoseph7185 hmm. Aren't Egregores a product of distributed cognition? I think most of his argument is about how we can arrange the incentive structure of the Commons so that egregorian entities are incentivized to act responsibly in the age of digital technology and artificial intelligence.

[@davidjoseph7185]

​@@InterfaceGuhy I think you're right, and the incentive structure is part of it. I was picking up on something special about this moment that Jordan is drawing attention toward. If we can take advantage of the moment and incentivize egregores to act responsibly in the age of AI, it will be by taking advantage of the dynamism possible through a fresh movement of distributed cognition (which is something egregores are less capable of doing)

[@cullynn]

is there anyway you could start uploading all conversations to Spotify as a podcast or start an RSS feed? I like Spotify UX/UI much more than KZbin, and everything else besides your content is there.

[@sgramstrup]

We can create a personal AI system that has the job of optimizing the life of users in a bottom up fashion. AI's will be able to talk to each other. First between the users devices, then between user AI's, then between groups of users and so on. That way we will have created a 'controlled' global AI system, that are directed bottom up from users and humanities best interest in a dynamic layered way. WE are the initiators of the global AI's goal. It will also - by itself - protect users from evil singular super AI's. I'm definitely building this baby ('Sims').. 'This is the way!' (tm)

[@missh1774]

Soooo... ubi can only go so far, but this needs to be somewhat fully constructed and green light ready in its first quarter ... hmm lay leverage potentials for anyone??? wow.

[@gettingtogive]

Best investment you’ll make today!

[@sgramstrup]

You know, a third panel participant - An AI could easily talk to you about these things, and even help you. It has to 'learn' the areas of interest, principles used, your 'wordulations' and such, but it can already assist you in these thoughts, and even dumb it down for others. You should embrace it more..

[@JordanGreenhall]

I took Eric Weinstein's Geometric Unity PDF and dropped it into PDFGPT. Then asked it dumb questions until I started to get some sense of what it / he was talking about. Totally worked.

[@InterfaceGuhy]

@@JordanGreenhall That is amazing. Totally gonna try that. After getting more clarity on GU, do you see any convergence between Weinstein and other attempts at unifying physics? (Bohm, Penrose, Wolfram, etc)

[@JordanGreenhall]

@@InterfaceGuhy wolfram

[@InterfaceGuhy]

@@JordanGreenhall Thanks for the reply and I agree. tangentially, have you ever spoken with Joscha Bach?

[@JordanGreenhall]

@@InterfaceGuhy I haven't Daniel and Forrest have quite a bit, but not me directly.

[@mcnallyaar]

I am always troubled when Dr. Vervaeke chats with this gentleman. Something about Professor Hall's demeanor seems stolid and judicious. I remember when they did a dialogue after the Will Smith thing, professor Hall spoke as though physical violence were perfectly appropriate, and people who challenged that were somehow cognitively inferior. I don't forget things like that. Dr. Vervaeke, I generally click like on your videos. On this one, I am saying hello in the comments while also clicking dislike. I certainly want to know more about how to govern, but not when your interlocutor carries overtones of tyranny.

[@clumsydad7158]

everyone has a different style and affect, and sometimes they don't mesh with ours, etc.