4 ms·

THere is a particular term for when a group of people all know that everyone else in the group know somehting. I have forgotten the word but to me this is what

THere is a particular term for when a group of people all know that everyone else in the group know somehting. I have forgotten the word but to me this is what meetings are about in a way. go one to one first, get all the feedback, make all the changes. then get everyone in a room and say "everyone knows this diagram/document/decision point, right and we all agree on it" - then everyone looks round the room and somethign animal happens.. a new word may have entered their vocaulary, or a new imaginary hill top to strive for exists. That common agreement is like a wedding or something.. it sort of means nothing.. but now we can all use this shorthand "married" and certain expectations will commonly align.. not only that you can ask just about anyone who knows the couple and they will have a very clear memory that, yes that definately happened, yes i will testify as a witness (i cannot lie about it as there were lots of people at that wedding). wedding analogy is probably terrible, sorry.

TeMPOraL 5y ago
I think the term you're looking for is... "common knowledge"[0]. And indeed, there are peculiar things that happen once you cross the thresholds between knowing something, knowing that others know it too, and knowing that everyone knows everyone knows it. Related to this, and I'm guessing where you were going with your wedding analogy, is the concept of intersubjectivity[1]. Intersubjectivity happens when you have people sharing subjective states or beliefs, and are aware they're sharing it. Pretty much all critical social infrastructure - all of modern life - depends on it. For example: - Money is an intersubjective phenomenon. It holds value only because - and only for as long as - everyone knows that everyone else in the community will accept it as a means of payment. This shared belief is usually bootstrapped and maintained by a government declaring they'll accept a given form of money for purposes of taxation - but on smaller scales, can also start in many other ways. - Organizations like governments and corporations are an intersubjective phenomenon. To borrow an example from Harari[2], a corporation like Porsche doesn't really exist in physical space - it's an abstract entity that exists only because, and for as long as, people believe it exists. It's independent of people employed in or running it - the board could fire all employees, and then the government could forcefully replace the board, and Porsche would still be there, with all the factories and offices and salons it owns. - Companies are bootstrapped into being by performing certain rituals - offering monetary sacrifices to the government and getting the right priests sign the right legal paperwork. These rituals - and all laws in general - are also intersubjective. They have power only because, and for as long as, people believe they do (and believe everyone else believes it too). It's kind of mind-blowing if you think about it - all the structure of our civilization is just an enormous pile of interconnected shared delusions. But it works, because intersubjective phenomena are extremely resilient - people can stop believing in them individually, but it doesn't matter for as long as enough other people keep the faith. It takes a critical mass of people to lose confidence in a visible way, or a memetic weapon[3], to shut down such an intersubjective phenomenon. -- [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_knowledge_(logic) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_knowledge_(logic) [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity [2] - As much as I remember it. I was introduced to the name "intersubjectivity" through his book, Sapiens. [3] - People don't have to actually lose faith in something - they just need to believe that enough other people believe that enough other people don't believe anymore.
- hoseja 5y ago
  Porsche, as self-preserving meme-complex would probably cease to actually exist, unless they have written down very detailed ~indoctrination~ training materials for every relevant position. The legal entity would still be there but another lifeform would wear it's skin.

TeMPOraL 5y ago

I think the term you're looking for is... "common knowledge"[0]. And indeed, there are peculiar things that happen once you cross the thresholds between knowing something, knowing that others know it too, and knowing that everyone knows everyone knows it. Related to this, and I'm guessing where you were going with your wedding analogy, is the concept of intersubjectivity[1]. Intersubjectivity happens when you have people sharing subjective states or beliefs, and are aware they're sharing it. Pretty much all critical social infrastructure - all of modern life - depends on it. For example: - Money is an intersubjective phenomenon. It holds value only because - and only for as long as - everyone knows that everyone else in the community will accept it as a means of payment. This shared belief is usually bootstrapped and maintained by a government declaring they'll accept a given form of money for purposes of taxation - but on smaller scales, can also start in many other ways. - Organizations like governments and corporations are an intersubjective phenomenon. To borrow an example from Harari[2], a corporation like Porsche doesn't really exist in physical space - it's an abstract entity that exists only because, and for as long as, people believe it exists. It's independent of people employed in or running it - the board could fire all employees, and then the government could forcefully replace the board, and Porsche would still be there, with all the factories and offices and salons it owns. - Companies are bootstrapped into being by performing certain rituals - offering monetary sacrifices to the government and getting the right priests sign the right legal paperwork. These rituals - and all laws in general - are also intersubjective. They have power only because, and for as long as, people believe they do (and believe everyone else believes it too). It's kind of mind-blowing if you think about it - all the structure of our civilization is just an enormous pile of interconnected shared delusions. But it works, because intersubjective phenomena are extremely resilient - people can stop believing in them individually, but it doesn't matter for as long as enough other people keep the faith. It takes a critical mass of people to lose confidence in a visible way, or a memetic weapon[3], to shut down such an intersubjective phenomenon. -- [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_knowledge_(logic) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_knowledge_(logic) [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity [2] - As much as I remember it. I was introduced to the name "intersubjectivity" through his book, Sapiens. [3] - People don't have to actually lose faith in something - they just need to believe that enough other people believe that enough other people don't believe anymore.

hoseja 5y ago
Porsche, as self-preserving meme-complex would probably cease to actually exist, unless they have written down very detailed ~indoctrination~ training materials for every relevant position. The legal entity would still be there but another lifeform would wear it's skin.