In a multi-part post on Mastodon, mathematician Terence Tao presents a "loosely organized" theory on the current societal Zeitgeist, categorizing human interactions into four scales: individuals, small organized groups, large organized groups, and large complex systems. He argues that modern systems have disproportionately empowered large organizations and, to a lesser extent, individuals, at the significant expense of small organizations. This imbalance, he posits, contributes to widespread feelings of disconnection, alienation, loneliness, and cynicism, as large entities provide "synthetic" social goods while authentic community roles diminish. Tao advocates for greater recognition and support of emerging grassroots organizations for their non-economic benefits and their potential to meaningfully influence larger systems. The subsequent discussion from other users explores historical and anthropological counter-arguments, proposes solutions like worker cooperatives and technology-driven decentralization, and offers further sociological and economic perspectives on the dynamics of group influence and societal change.
Exploring the Current Societal Zeitgeist: Terence Tao's Framework and Community Responses
Terence Tao (Post 1/5) - Societal Scales: Terence Tao outlines a framework for understanding human society through four interacting scales: individual humans, small organized groups (e.g., family, friends, small collaborations), large organized groups (e.g., corporations, governments), and large complex systems (e.g., global economy, environment).
Terence Tao (Post 2/5) - Benefits of Groups: Individuals rely on organized groups for essential material conveniences (food, power, internet, travel) and to interact with larger systems. Small groups, typically below Dunbar's number, also fulfill social and emotional needs, allowing participants to feel connected and influence direction.
Terence Tao (Post 3/5) - Dynamics of Large Groups: Large groups offer greater economies of scale and global impact but provide less authentic social and emotional services. Individuals typically have minimal influence on their direction unless exceptionally powerful or wealthy, and correcting dysfunctional large groups is difficult.
Terence Tao (Post 4/5) - Decline of Small Organizations: Tao's "tentative theory" suggests that modern systems empower individuals (slightly) and large organizations (massively), but at the significant expense of small organizations. This leads to individual feelings of disconnection, alienation, loneliness, and cynicism, with large organizations imperfectly filling the void with "synthetic" social goods.
Terence Tao (Post 5/5) - Valuing Grassroots: Tao suggests highlighting the valuable, non-economic roles of emerging grassroots organizations in providing individuals with purpose and belonging, and as a way to connect meaningfully with larger systems. He stresses awareness of the tradeoffs when such organizations scale up.
@GhostOnTheHalfShell - Counter-arguments & Egalitarianism: Multiple commenters, including @GhostOnTheHalfShell and @ttiurani, dispute the assertion that individuals without large group support are limited to "primitive levels," citing cultural anthropology and arguing that egalitarianism and freedom are inseparable. @GhostOnTheHalfShell also suggests powerful entities deliberately unravel small social organizations.
@nahcirn - Worker Cooperatives: This commenter proposes worker cooperatives as a solution to alienation and disempowerment. They are democratic, egalitarian, and non-profit, allowing influence on both public and private institutions.
@riemannzeta - Historical Parallels: This user points to "Violence and Social Orders" by North, Wallis, and Weingast, suggesting Tao's theory independently reproduces aspects of their work on "door step conditions" (the ability to freely form organizations) that allow societies to transcend oligarchic "natural states."
@mdcory - Smaller Nations & Tech Centralization: Matthew D Cory highlights empirical evidence suggesting smaller nations can achieve higher living standards and warns that technological advance, by centralizing power, could lead to catastrophic consequences.
@jedbrown - Social Accountability: Jed Brown emphasizes that small organizations are critical for valuing social norms and for the effectiveness of "shame" as a mechanism for social accountability, which is often lacking among the wealthy and leaders of large organizations.
@maxpool & @kamstrup - Religious Organizations: The discussion identifies American conservative Christian churches as an example of successful bottom-up small organizations that converge to larger scales, demonstrating significant political influence.
@lmk - Technology and Power: Loren Kohnfelder suggests that the disproportionate power of large organizations often stems from their control over technology systems (e.g., most of the web), advocating for individuals and small organizations to build alternative tech.
@zby - Preference for Impersonal Relations: This commenter theorizes that people often prefer impersonal, rule-bound interactions to avoid the complex social calculations and "fairness math" inherent in personal relationships, aligning with relational-models theory.
@peoplearecute - Unprecedented Shift: This user views the current dominance of impersonal, algorithmically mediated large systems as an unprecedented "mutation" of human society, potentially leading to new ideas in metaphysics and epistemology.