Category: Growth


  • Theme:

    chicken or egg wisdom

    1–2 minutes

    Almost every problem has a “chicken or egg” framing we trot out as needed.
    “My depression caused my bad life” can easily be inverted to “My bad life caused my depression,” proving we situationally assign causation.

    While we naturally tend to the binary format (“Politically, is the populace crazy (them), or am I out of touch with reality (me)?”), it obfuscates complexity for a didactic, hyperbolic simplicity akin to some of the most insightful religious teachings (“The first shall be last, and the last shall be first.”)

    It sounds like considerable wisdom to invert causation or status, to reveal a new perspective, when it is often simply untrue, and yet it fulfills a desire for the world to be different.

    Instead of this quasi-linear thinking in which we swap positions (chicken/egg is really egg/chicken), we can release the binary and consider a vast complex of several self-reinforcing cycles. These are generative network effects, with conditions co-arising and evolving beyond our seemingly insightful reductive inversions.


  • Theme:

    Value in the Future: implicit vs tacit

    1–2 minutes

    Implicit is about the unsaid, while tacit is about the unsayable.

    To have implicit permission means it is understood but not spelled out, yet it could be theoretically made explicit or disclosed.
    Example: “Make yourself at home” means you do not need to ask permission for every action.

    To have tacit knowledge is understanding something that can not be described easily.
    Example: Riding a bike or an artist’s masterful stroke cannot be fully described. They are acts of embodied knowledge despite any replicability or theoretical grounding.

    When considering skills that cannot be easily outsourced or replicated (especially in the age of AI), it is implicit that we recognize tacit skills as more human and of higher value, yet making the implicit explicit is what companies can easily measure. This means many companies are not optimized to recognize the values that will allow future success.


  • Theme:

    The reversal of responsibility in capitalism

    1–2 minutes

    The Paradox of Dispersed Responsibility and Concentrated Gain

    When responsibility is distributed across many actors but profits flow to few, we face a fundamental challenge of modern capitalism.

    Commons Exploitation Without Governance

    The tragedy of shared resources – like oceans or public attention – emerges when individual actors can extract private wealth without effective oversight. Ocean pollution exemplifies this: while the damage is collective, the profits from activities causing pollution accrue to specific entities. Without global governance mechanisms, there’s no effective way to align private incentives with public good.

    Technology’s Regulatory Gap

    The digital economy demonstrates how innovation can outpace regulation, creating new “commons” to exploit. Social media companies harvest attention and personal data, transforming public mental space into private profit centers before legal frameworks can adapt. This regulatory lag allows for the privatization of previously unmonetized aspects of human experience.

    Risk Socialization, Profit Privatization

    As enterprises grow, they often develop symbiotic relationships with national governments, leading to a system where risks are socialized (through bailouts and subsidies) while profits remain private. This creates a perverse incentive structure where growth itself becomes a shield against responsibility.

    The Responsibility Inversion

    A critical shift occurs as organizations scale: initial risk-taking that demanded responsibility transforms into an argument against responsibility. Large enterprises cite their size – their employees, infrastructure, and economic importance – as reasons they cannot be held fully accountable for their negative externalities. The organization’s success becomes a defense against bearing the full costs of its actions.


  • Theme:

    persecution over prosecution

    1–2 minutes


    It is thrilling to extrapolate, dispossess, and liquefy arguments, ideology, and religion. It is exhilarating to be a hedonistic iconoclast.

    Yet, for most, our rebellion stays in the realm of persecution (harassment) rather than prosecution (legal process).

    Organized responsibility robs us of enjoyment, converting libidinal angst into bureaucratic justification, dismantling the romance of rebellion.



  • Theme:

    Superficial Control

    1–2 minutes

    When faced with failures or setbacks, many people resort to superficial solutions rather than addressing core problems.

    They believe that polishing appearances, rebranding, or forcing perceptual changes will mask the fundamental lack of substance in their candidate, product, or ideology… or themself.

    It only follows that those who choose a symbolic/semantic argument would accuse critics of bias or persecution when they reject these surface-level changes. It is not only disingenuous—it’s a continual form of gaslighting that attempts to shift blame rather than confront real issues.

    Naturally, it is easier to shift appearance than reality, to control spin rather than actions, but this pursuit of superficial control reveals a core truth: that those who grasp and mold appearances are invested in the ephemeral, attempting to control what is inherently fleeting and easily displaced.


  • Theme:

    Parallax: Subject into object

    1–2 minutes

    What if to be as subjective, individual human requires contradictory views?

    This means you have a parallax problem: to see the other perspective, you must switch your point of view. More troublesome is there is no way to see them both at the same time, meaning they cannot be true simultaneously for a single, logical position.

    And yet, to be human, we do this constantly: hold opposing contradictory positions as subjective truth.

    Even more complex, we want to be a fluctuating, active subject, not a fixed object. Yet, reason, truth, and rationality all tend to convert us towards objectness: static, one view, non-evolving, perhaps non-human.


  • Theme:

    Restraint in fiction is comedic

    1–2 minutes

    "Reality is stranger than fiction." So, fiction must be restrained to be believable.

    Yet merely observing a character and the hypocrisy between stated belief and action is already good fiction. But for comedic gold, like Don Quixote, allow the character to adhere to their beliefs strictly: a character devoid of flexible hypocrisy, that is, an utterly restrained character, is unbelievable.


  • Theme:

    emotional triage

    1–2 minutes

    External problems often require categorizing their quantity, quality, severity, or magnitude. We can perform triage to organize and prioritize by converting these logical abstractions into relative ranking.

    However, internally (psychologically and emotionally), we are incapable of logically ranking each predicament or distress: an argument with your boss or spouse is equally as influential on our decision being hungry. (see Daniel Kahneman)

    More importantly, we seldom recognize our emotional or psychological state, allowing it to creep into influencing our external evaluations (affecting our effects).


  • Theme:

    The fickle nature of beliefs

    1–2 minutes

    We pay to consume our beliefs.

    Yet, why do we need more confirmation and novel arguments or insights if we already believe? So we are prepared when the slidey sideways belief shifts its stance. When our belief bucks, we can rebut or run.

    Your beliefs: it’s like watching the weather and preparing yourself for the flash flood from the blue sky; not only is keeping a keen eye on the sky good for your social alignment, but you also catch your own party adrift.

    So, we pay not only for affirmation, but also for a really wonky weather gauge to protect us from our beliefs rogue waves.


  • Theme:

    Paradox of Desire: universal uniqueness

    1–2 minutes

    Naturally, people desire and struggle to pursue those desires. Manufacturing desire (programming and targeting specific desires, objects, and ideas) is a means to unite people: we all want the same thing. And yet, it is divisive as solidarity shifts to bitter competition and mimetic jealousy.

    Curiously, today, we all want uniqueness. It is our universal desire, which is paradoxical, to say the least.

    Not only are selective channels (archetype scripts) prepared in advance for your journey, but to actually be unique removes (excludes) you from the universal desire, the communal pursuit.

    That is, the goal (unique individuality) must not be achieved if one is to remain a relatable participant in society.