Hypothesis: Heteronomous power concentrations are collectively energy inefficient.
Cooperation through hierarchies are widespread in the animal kingdom and in the human world, and we can assume that some level of power concentration is energy efficient - but to what extent is this true? This hypothesis predicts that when a certain level of power concentration is surpassed in assymetrical organisations (hierarchical), collective energy efficiency will start to decrease. The treshold upon which the organisation becomes heteronomous, occurs when the minority interests of the power concentration are more influential than the common interest among vassals and lords. A heteronomous organisation is primarily influenced by, thus primarily serve, the interests of the power concentration itself. Simplified, the model looks as follows:Level of power concentration 0%|---(hierarchy)---|point of optimal energy efficiency|---(heteronomy)--->100% Utility from level of power concentration 0%|--increasing collective utility--||--decreasing collective utility-->100%
A couple preliminary comments: --This hypothesis examine a general trend in organisations, and does not suggest that individual organisations can be viewed in the same precise and linear manner. It is unclear to this author if you can even measure power concentration on a scale. Instead, I would suggest examining how decision-making is influenced, and who benefits from the organisation's behaviour. --Power concentration does not care for our political biases. This hypothesis does not neglect the presence and dynamic of power concentrations in the instances you can label them "socialistic" or "capitalistic". The hypothesis perceives society as organised in hierarchies of power, and judges who the power concentration of any organisation reflect the interest of, and whether this is an energy efficient structure. DEFINITIONS Power is influence over decision-making (behaviour). Heteronomy means external rule. When the organisation is not primarily influenced by common interest, the vassal majority is externally ruled by the the minority interest of lords.heteronomy<---oligarchic interest---(power)---democratic interest--->autonomy
Collective energy efficiency means using resources in a utilitarian way, which meaning that resources benefit the prosperity of the collective in an optimal way. Prosperity means the alleviation of suffering towards a state of well-being (which is our bodies signal that we are on the right track in our struggle for survival). [Ignoring ordinary and momentary boredom, confusion and stress as suffering; ignoring the level of comfort and joy beyond general well-being.] Utility means prosperity in regards to meeting our needs. As subjective information systems, the best objective measure of this is probably along the lines of Maslow's hierarchy of needs:1. physiological 2. safety 3. love/belonging 4. esteem 5. self-actualisation
Democratic versus heteronomous decision-making. Although decisions are made "at the top", that does not imply that it only reflects "interest at the top" in a top-down structure. Lords may have common interest with vassals, or may be pressured to accommodate the interests of vassals to remain in power. A couple examples:HIERARCHY REFLECTING INTEREST OF VASSALS (democratic). In a family of parents and children, the parents are lords, and the children are vassals. A hierarchy exists where the parents are authorities. If the children wants candy for dinner, the parents will overrule it. However, the children are the parents' offspring, and parents are normally in-tune with the interest and well-being of their offspring. The parents' decisisons also reflect the interest of the children. It is energy efficient for this family (and the survival of their genes) to stick together, and that the parents, with the most wisdom and experience of life, are authorities. HIERARCHY REFLECTING INTEREST OF LORDS (heteronomous). As an energy inefficient scenario, we can imagine a troubled stepfather that has turned to alcoholism. The children is not his offspring, and because of his personal troubles, he is emotionally deattached to them. The economy of the household goes to feed his alcoholism. Here the power concentration is heteronomous, not reflecting the interest of the children, who in the undernurtured and emotionally dysfunctional home are less prosperous.
The above is not formal organisations, but examples used to illuminate the difference between a hierarchy "made of the stuff of vassals", and a hierarchy where lords may ignore the interest of vassals. THE DYNAMICS OF HETERONOMY Cooperation is energy efficient, but if power is sufficiently concentrated, then lords may tweek the organisation into giving themselves increased utility on the expense of decreased utility for vassals. An example:10 individuals roam around Nature, loosely cooperating... Individuals A-J generate +1 utility to themselves (+10 utility total) Nature is tough, so they decide to cooperate formally, and elect individual A as lord, and individual B as assistant lord. Their cooperation is energy efficient... Cooperation generates +1,3 utility to Lord A Cooperation generates +1,2 utility to Lord Assistant B Cooperation generates +1,1 utility to Vassals C-J (+11,3 utility total) The cooperation is mostly governed by Lord A, and he notices that it seems more beneficial to cooperate a little differently. He is able to convince Lord Assistant B of his plans, and together they convince the vassals of the necessity of the changes, threatening to expel the vassals who do not conform. Tweeked cooperation generates +1,4 utility to Lord A Tweeked cooperation generates +1,3 utility to Lord Assistant B Tweeked cooperation generates +1,0 utility to Vassal C-J (+10,7 utility total)
Cooperation gave an extra 13% utility to the sum of individuals, but when the organisation turned heteronomous, the tweeking by lords gave a decreased amount of collective utilty, only benefitting the lords themselves. Again, people tend to do what benefits them, as this is how we are programmed (genetically). If people perceive that they can take actions that will benefit themselves on the expense of others, with no perceived negative repercussions to themselves, then they will tend to do so. According to this hypothesis, reduced collective energy efficiency is a natural concequence of heteronomy. (In reality, the shift of influence within an organisation is often incremental and subtle, while the promise and peril of cooperation and heteronomy is probably greater.) WHY HETERONOMOUS POWER CONCENTRATIONS ARE INEFFICIENT In a world of limited resources, you cannot fully serve everyones interests at the same time. And it requires more resources to increase the personal utility of someone well off, than someone poor. This can be displayed graphically as such:Y = surplus utility (ignoring to whom specifically) X = increased power to lords Xmin = 0 Xmax = 100 Lords (Y1) = 2X - (0,01X) X (decreasing pos. effect from increasing power) Vassals (Y2) = 100 - (0,01X) X (constant neg. effect from decreasing power) Collective output/utility (Y3) = Y1 + Y2 Y (0) = symmetrical / everyone vassal / zero benefit from competence hierarchy
PARASITIC POTENTIAL Power have a natural tendency to concentrate toward heteronomy. But, as shown in the examples of democratic versus heteronomous decision-making, there is an exception to heteronomy being energy inefficient when the interest of lords and vassals perfectly allign. From an evolutionary perspective, parents do not seek to live on the expense of the prosperity of their children, as their interest fundamentally aligns. On the other hand, if lords and vassals have miniscule common identity or interest, then the the tendency for heteronomy is high.Low parasitic potential / low tendency for heteronomy: Vassals---interest--->( A|B|C ) Lords---interest--->( A|B|Z ) High parasitic potential / high tendency for heteronomy: Vassals---interest--->( A|B|C ) Lords---interest--->( A|Y|Z )
SERVING HETERONOMY Maintaining ignorance. A power concentration may not have enough power to ignore the support of vassals, but with enough power to control the perception of the organisation, it can create disinformation Outsourcing effort. Adding utility to the concentration in a manner that burdens vassals. Outsourcing risk (and loss). Being removed from the concequences of actions. No skin in the game. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF HETERONOMY IN SOCIETY Humans are a general platform for the creation of organisations, and various organising emerge in human society. Energy efficient solutions tend to survive, and we should expect energy inefficient structures to eventually break down. This hypothesis might be the cleanest way of understanding how organisations fail, including the demise of civilisations. CASES OF STUDY The polices of governments are important cases to study. [Invasion of Iraq 2003.] As increasing heteronomy means decreasing utility for vassals, turmoil in the population is expected from heteronomous leadership.