Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Somo's avatar

I view epistemic tribes and echo chambers not just as products of information ecosystems or cognitive biases, but as deeply rooted in material conditions.

Our basic needs shape our cognitive engagement, including our ability to recognize and reconcile cognitive dissonance (Maslow: needs must be met to engage in higher orders of thinking).

Scarcity, and even the threat of scarcity, creates a specific mindset, tunneling our focus onto immediate needs and making it harder to consider long-term consequences or engage in abstract thinking. Scarcity of basic resources consumes mental bandwidth, leaving less cognitive capacity to consider opposing viewpoints. This "lack" can erode trust in others, making individuals less likely to engage with or welcome outsiders.

To use a common political example: the resource-rich "liberal left" often engages in abstract social debates, overlooking immediate concerns of the resource-scarce. This illustrates the gap between theoretical discourse and practical needs stemming from their own abundance—an important chasm to consider.

Expand full comment
Bob Downs's avatar

I would be interested in hearing more about how you see this theory being applied in practice. For instance, how might community leaders or educators use this framework to foster more robust and healthier epistemic tribes? How could it be used to address some of the challenges we face in our increasingly polarized society?

Additionally, while you touch on the potential impact of AI on epistemic tribes, this seems like an area ripe for further exploration. As AI continues to shape how we access and interpret information, how might it influence the formation and evolution of epistemic tribes?

Expand full comment
7 more comments...

No posts