Wisdom in fragments

Consciousness lies beyond the framework of quantum mechanics. It must be regarded as a primitive of the universe itself, not merely of brains. If consciousness is a universal primitive, then the entire totality of what exists is conscious and desires self‑knowledge. That offers the best way to understand evolution and why we can know: we are parts of a greater whole, we are fields—not bodies. The body is simply the creation of the field, enabling the field to have experiences in a reality collectively constructed by a multitude of fields.

Co-Inventor of the Microprocessor & Founder of Zilog

There's a considerable correlation between symbols and meaning—especially given how we train modern computer networks these days with unbelievable amounts of data and trillions of parameters. Each parameter is a number representing a probability, but with so many parameters, the answer you get—if you can't follow the vast number of steps—seems unpredictable, much like flipping a coin and not knowing heads or tails. But if you could view all the information, you could determine with certainty which side lands up—that's classical physics. Only in quantum physics does probability acquire a different meaning.

Co-Inventor of the Microprocessor & Founder of Zilog

Fusion – or 'identity fusion' to be more precise – is basically a form of group alignment in which essential features of your personal identity are felt to be shared with the group. What this means is that there are basically two ways of becoming fused. One is to undergo an experience that becomes a core feature of who you are – such as a painful or frightening ordeal.

Cognitive scientist studying ritual, religion, and social bonding mechanisms

The power of routinization is that it allows you to spread a shared set of identity markers to a large population—and to do so very quickly. All you need is a handful of proselytizing leaders willing to travel from village to village, spreading the same ideas and behaviours, and you can soon create a vast tradition encompassing hundreds of communities.

Cognitive scientist studying ritual, religion, and social bonding mechanisms

Social synchrony is a big feature of human behaviour—it's a weird thing if you think about it, but we do things like marching in time and parading and singing in choirs in ways that are highly coordinated and synchronised. One of the psychological effects of that is it can blur the boundaries between self and group and create this feeling that you are the group, and the group is you.

Cognitive scientist studying ritual, religion, and social bonding mechanisms

I'm particularly interested in the human propensity to copy behaviours that lack any kind of knowable causal structure. This is how we learn arbitrary conventions—and I think it originates in a distinctively human way of building group identities. I describe ritual actions as causally opaque. We engage in this kind of behaviour even more enthusiastically when we're anxious about being excluded or left out.

Cognitive scientist studying ritual, religion, and social bonding mechanisms

Rituals are basically conventional forms of behaviour – the stuff that fashions and traditions are made of. They're not just important in our own society—they're important in every human society, as far as we can tell, going back into deep history and prehistory. And so they are part of our collective inheritance. They vary a lot, but the thing is rituals are universal, and at the same time, they're the building blocks of cultural diversity, of traditions that make us distinct from one another.

Cognitive scientist studying ritual, religion, and social bonding mechanisms

I think there was a moment around 2009 to 2011 when states got caught off guard a little. They didn't realise social media had the potential it did. And then I think it didn't take very long for authoritarian regimes to get smart and realise they could actually use these tools to stay in power.

In my book, the reason I call figures like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc., red leviathans is that they're actually serving a role that's necessary in a modern progressive revolution: they're the ones who say what is revolutionary and what isn't. Because it turns out that's not an easy question to answer.

The moment that really stuck with me was during the Egyptian revolution of 2011. Before Mubarak steps down, he turned the internet off for five days. And that was kind of a moment where it was like, wow—actually, in this hyper-technological world we live in, states can control it in ways they couldn't control printing presses or other forms of written technology as easily.

I think it was recognising that revolution was, in a way, the original problem of political thought. But in fact, constitutionalism is a Greek answer to the problem of revolution. You want to avoid revolution? Then you need to design a constitution in a certain way—so that it's balanced and less likely to be overturned by revolution.

There was really a sense that humanity had already reached its peak, and so the question wasn't what comes next that's better, but rather how to prevent decline and loss. If you had a good state—or even just an okay one—your main concern was to keep it, to stop it from falling apart. Because there wasn't anything better you could reasonably expect.

I think what's hard for us to appreciate today is that, for thousands of years of human history—let alone pre-history—there was never this sense, so common to us now, of a future likely to be radically different from the present. But that's a very recent development in human thought that really only dates back, as I argue in the book, to the 18th century.

Just being curious about yourself. You and I could read the same book on leadership or how to run a good team meeting, and we might take away the same five lessons, but we'd still apply them differently — even if we were trying to do exactly the same thing. That's because of our different personalities.

A lot of entrepreneurs don't make that switch. They cling to that brand identity of 'I'm an innovator,' still tinkering with the product while everyone else is saying, 'Hey, it's good enough — let's hire our first salesperson.' So when you're not really thinking about the alignment between your role and your identity, that's when problems can start.

As a psychotherapist, you have diagnostic categories for problems. There are specific techniques and therapies to apply. So the book really comes out of that frustration. If you think about science, it progresses from description, to categorisation, then to explanation, prediction, and control — and I wanted to feel like there was some science behind what I was doing.