Psychofauna Studies

Description

Kahlil Corazo:

"What if animism works because it is actually an accurate representation of reality? What would anthropology and ethnography look like if we applied an animist lens to it?

To answer these questions, I'll first modulate animism to the level that I think represents reality: these creatures have agency and intelligence but not consciousness. They are "psychofauna," not gods or egregores. I'll define these terms below. Next, I'll present a couple of examples—Technocapital and a nation-state—as a demonstration of "Psychofauna Studies." Lastly, I'll map out how I can test out this approach in my scholarly work (e.g., “animist ethnography”) and in writing for normal people (e.g., in the “personal growth” genre).

A manifesto is an announcement of a journey into the unknown, but it is also an invitation. Will you join me in this adventure?

There are three levels at which this animist approach might represent reality:

1) as a metaphor

2) as a recognition of the agency and intelligence of these beings

3) as a recognition of the consciousness of these beings."

(https://www.theseedsofscience.pub/p/psychofauna-studies-a-manifesto)

Discussion

Kahlil Corazo:

"What would the discipline of "Psychofauna Studies" look like? To get an idea, let's get to know two examples of psychofauna: Technocapital and a nation-state, the Philippines.

In my animist reinterpretation and extrapolation of Durkheim's ideas, I presented these four characteristics of psychofauna:

• Psychofauna emerge from the substrate of human minds.

• Psychofauna emerge from positive feedback loops.

• Psychofauna have coercive power over humans.

• Psychofauna are also creatures of evolution.

Psychofauna studies is, firstly, a weapon of defense. Seeing and understanding these creatures can help us better protect ourselves from enslavement by them (i.e., ideological capture). This animist approach also allows us to better collaborate with these psychofauna if we so choose. Once we put on our animist lens, we will see that the only way to make an impact on the world, create wealth or gain power at scale is to work with at least one of these creatures. So let's unpack the mechanism behind their power to influence human minds and the world around them.

Our entry point is Dawkins' observation that psychofuana are also creatures of evolution. They are “memes,” the cultural analog to genes. As such, they compete for the limited resource of their substrate—minds. Like biological species, the psychofauna that are best at survival and replication will eventually dominate the playing field. This field has been called the “noösphere.”

The concept of “positive feedback loops” from the field of cybernetics adds another layer to this competition. Positive feedback loops have components that reinforce each other, resulting in the growth of each component and of the overall system. The psychofauna that eventually dominate are those with the strongest positive feedback loops and those that can find stability as they grow (positive feedback loops can in some cases also result in the destruction of the system).

In my Durkheim post, I gave the example of Technocapital and entrepreneurs as components of a positive feedback loop. Technocapital produces more entrepreneurs by rewarding the successful ones with wealth and status. “Success” here is defined by how much the entrepreneur expands and strengthens Technocapital, thus creating a positive loop of more entrepreneurs and the growth of Technocapital.

If we enhance the resolution of this example, we will see other components within this positive feedback loop:

• Consumer-laborers whose desire and work fuel the cycle

• Marketers who increase desire and create new desires

• Technologists who create new objects of desire and whose innovations increase the efficiency of fulfilling desires

• Capital allocators whose work functions like natural selection, directing resources to the most successful species within the ecosystem that is Technocapital

Consumer-laborers are rewarded by Technocapital with what they desire in exchange for their time and part of their minds. Marketers, technologists, and capital allocators, by working directly in the growth of Technocapital in ways that scale, tend to be rewarded with more wealth than consumer-laborers. Entrepreneurs and managers—who, by definition, orchestrate work, technology, and capital—tend to contribute the most to the growth of Technocapital (when successful!), so they also get rewarded with a lot of wealth. Technocapital's positive feedback loop explains the accelerating growth of technology and wealth that humanity has been experiencing in the recent past.

This growth has a dark side. So, in the 20th century, people attempted to replace Technocapital with another psychofauna. Karl Marx saw the creature: “A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of communism,” we read in the opening of the Communist Manifesto. The goal was to reward laborers for their work at a level similar to Technocapital’s favored classes. This meant replacing the distributed intelligence of Technocapital with a select cadre of human minds (central planning) and enforcing their theory of value through the state's monopoly of violence. The results were disastrous. The more or less stable compromise today is for nation-states to collaborate with Technocapital but with some guardrails, like labor laws and minimum wage.

Next, let's look at the positive feedback loops of nation-states. This species of psychofauna has become one of the most dominant since its emergence two hundred plus years ago. Since this species has many variations, let me explore the one I'm most familiar with: the Philippines.

Like all nations, the Philippines collaborates with different kinds of humans for its survival and growth.

Similar to entrepreneurs, politicians orchestrate other players within the system. They do this through law, the state bureaucracy, and the distribution of power and its benefits. Sometimes, they use violence. The nation rewards these players with power. Many of them translate this power into money.

Similar to marketers, propagandists and nationalist intellectuals mold the hearts and minds of citizens for the sake of the nation. They are rewarded with meaning and status.

State bureaucrats and soldiers lend their minds and bodies for the nation to engage with its citizens and to negotiate with other psychofauna. They get a stable job in exchange.

Citizens constitute the mass of the nation's mental substrate. Their belief sustains the imagined community of the nation and their work supports the politicians, propagandists, bureaucrats, and soldiers through various modern forms of tribute, like tax and kickbacks. In return, they are given safety and identity.

The state is the much older component of this symbiosis of nation and state. In Imagined Communities (1983), Benedict Anderson argues that it was Technocapital, or, in his words, “print-capitalism,” that enabled the emergence of the modern nation starting in the 18th century. This collaboration between Technocapital and nation-states has continued. The state supports Technocapital by enforcing contracts and the value of the state's fiat currency. Conversely, Technocapital has become a vital part of the foundation of modern nation-states, enabling them to function with unprecedented scale and complexity. Technocapital’s role is highlighted by its absence in pre-modern polities, which tend to rely on ritual sacrifice and caste to maintain their power structures.5

Émile Durkheim, who lived from 1858 to 1917, was one of the first scholars to apply a modern scientific approach to the study of society and culture. He used a lot of biological analogies, like viewing social institutions as interconnected parts functioning together, similar to organs in a body. Cybernetics, which only emerged decades after Durkheim's death, shows us that living bodies are not mere metaphors of societies. Both are both complex systems operating on the same principles of information processing, feedback, and self-regulation. To a cybernetician, a liver and a bureaucrat are the same kind of thing."

(https://www.theseedsofscience.pub/p/psychofauna-studies-a-manifesto)