Bravo Johnson pfp
Bravo Johnson
@bravojohnson
So maybe the real question is: how much of what we call capital is grounded in the material world, and how much is a collective hallucination? And when the hallucination ends, what’s left? The bicameral mind theorizes that early humans experienced consciousness differently, as though one part of the brain “spoke” to the other in the form of auditory commands, like hearing the voice of a god. It was a system of authority and action without introspection. Now, pair that with the idea of modern capital, and things start to click. Consider “made-up” capital—cryptocurrencies, inflated stock valuations, speculative VC bets. These are not grounded in tangible goods or production but in belief. They require masses of people to act on faith, responding to the “voice” of market forces or charismatic leaders. It’s almost a reawakening of the bicameral mind, with billionaires, algorithms, and media acting as those commanding voices, directing the collective hallucination.
1 reply
0 recast
6 reactions
Bravo Johnson pfp
Bravo Johnson
@bravojohnson
Meanwhile, real capital—factories, food, energy—operates in the material world, requires introspection and problem-solving, not faith. The clash between the two feels like a modern echo of Jaynes’ theory: hallucinated authority versus grounded reality. So maybe the question isn’t just “what is real capital?” but “how much of our economy is guided by bicameral whispers versus rational, conscious thought?” And if the balance tilts too far toward the whispers, what’s the tail risk of that?
1 reply
0 recast
5 reactions