This was a compelling and well-structured piece, Sterlin. I particularly appreciate the framing of governance as the upstream failure behind so many downstream crises. The connection between incentive structures, systemic risk, and coordination breakdowns is spot on.
The reference to phronesis, Aristotle’s grounding notion of context-sensitive practical wisdom, adds important depth to the “wisdom-based governance” concept and avoids the trap of abstract idealism by pointing us toward something both human and operational.
That said, I’m still left wondering how we make such wisdom scalable and resilient under pressure, especially when cultural forces, tribal instincts, and entrenched power structures tend to override good sense. And while I see potential in experiments like network states and digital governance, I’m cautious because many of them still run on logics of capital extraction or epistemic monoculture. The container may change, but if the code stays the same we should expect similar outcomes to manifest.
Ultimately, I believe the shift we need begins with the integrity of thought. When we lose coherence within, all outer systems reflect that fragmentation. Governance reform will have to address not just the architecture, but the deeper patterns of sense-making that shape it.
So much insight and wisdom, I don't know where to start. I love your question: "Most importantly, can we build governance structures that foster human flourishing rather than collective despair?"
My answer is YES! If you look at governing in a family situation, parents help their children thrive or not. If you look at the research regarding coercion, you see it does not lead to thriving individuals or society! If you look at starling murmurations and driving on the interstate, nature has a way of self-organizing in a beneficial way.
As humans move into our future, we are discovering what works and what does not. Thank goodness! and thanks for your post! I am inspired to continue my quest.
This is exactly my vision of the future. The governance layer needs to be reinvented. I would love you feedback on my personal proposal and my teams vision. They are aligned but the first one is more a political movement design to break the monopoly of representation in my country Peru (I want to abolish the Peruvian Congress) meanwhile the other is aiming at the software require to do something like that. It's an innovation at the coordination level (To harness CBDC's architecture in our favor) with an identity system that's decentralized and time based.
My personal project you can find it at inkahacker <dot> eth
An my team proposal you can find it at societyprotocol <dot> io
This was a compelling and well-structured piece, Sterlin. I particularly appreciate the framing of governance as the upstream failure behind so many downstream crises. The connection between incentive structures, systemic risk, and coordination breakdowns is spot on.
The reference to phronesis, Aristotle’s grounding notion of context-sensitive practical wisdom, adds important depth to the “wisdom-based governance” concept and avoids the trap of abstract idealism by pointing us toward something both human and operational.
That said, I’m still left wondering how we make such wisdom scalable and resilient under pressure, especially when cultural forces, tribal instincts, and entrenched power structures tend to override good sense. And while I see potential in experiments like network states and digital governance, I’m cautious because many of them still run on logics of capital extraction or epistemic monoculture. The container may change, but if the code stays the same we should expect similar outcomes to manifest.
Ultimately, I believe the shift we need begins with the integrity of thought. When we lose coherence within, all outer systems reflect that fragmentation. Governance reform will have to address not just the architecture, but the deeper patterns of sense-making that shape it.
So much insight and wisdom, I don't know where to start. I love your question: "Most importantly, can we build governance structures that foster human flourishing rather than collective despair?"
My answer is YES! If you look at governing in a family situation, parents help their children thrive or not. If you look at the research regarding coercion, you see it does not lead to thriving individuals or society! If you look at starling murmurations and driving on the interstate, nature has a way of self-organizing in a beneficial way.
As humans move into our future, we are discovering what works and what does not. Thank goodness! and thanks for your post! I am inspired to continue my quest.
Hi Kris, seriously appreciate your support.
I am glad you see the purpose and direction we have here at Polis. Would love to find ways to collab!
let's explore what that might look like.
This is exactly my vision of the future. The governance layer needs to be reinvented. I would love you feedback on my personal proposal and my teams vision. They are aligned but the first one is more a political movement design to break the monopoly of representation in my country Peru (I want to abolish the Peruvian Congress) meanwhile the other is aiming at the software require to do something like that. It's an innovation at the coordination level (To harness CBDC's architecture in our favor) with an identity system that's decentralized and time based.
My personal project you can find it at inkahacker <dot> eth
An my team proposal you can find it at societyprotocol <dot> io
Greetings Sterlin