The Psychopathic Selection Hypothesis: The Rules of the Game Keep Us Trapped

Description

Modern companies, markets, and institutions routinely behave in ways that would be diagnosed as pathological in a person: emotional detachment, strategic deception, grandiosity, and the treatment of people, animals, and ecosystems as means to an end. Yet, most of the individuals who make up these organizations don’t naturally hold these traits and behaviors themselves. So, why does exploitation keep winning at scale, even when most people are decent, cooperative, and want the same basic things? 

In this episode, Nate is joined by Greg Elliott, a systems theorist and author of the Psychopathic Selection Hypothesis (PSH), to unpack why our institutions themselves have become so psychopathic, and how that affects the behavior of the average human. Drawing on evolutionary game theory, anthropology, and the neuroscience of psychopathy, Greg argues that cooperation is evolutionarily stable in small tribal systems, but that modern systems where anonymity and abstraction make exploitative, instrumental strategies more profitable. He walks through how this dynamic produces what he calls “entrapment games,” in which pro-social people become behaviorally locked into relationships, jobs, and systems where leaving costs more than staying.  All of this builds toward the core of Greg’s theory: winning, instrumental strategies get crystallized into the operating logic of institutions themselves and reproduced by anyone who plays the game, whether or not they are personally psychopathic. While Greg doesn’t see any easy answers, he does offer a set of possible leverage points: shortening feedback loops, increasing transparency and accountability, and rebuilding smaller, reciprocal communities.

If domination isn’t an aberration but a predictable output of the game board we’ve built, what does that mean for how we try to fix it? Is it possible for an entire civilization to behave psychopathically even when the vast majority of the individual people inside it are empathetic and pro-social? And if the ultimate goal is to steer toward a more pro-social system, is there a way to ‘win the game’ and re-write the rules without also resorting to psychopathic strategies and behaviors?

About Greg Elliott

Greg is a Siemens solutions Consultant specializing in data science and AI, as well as the Co-Founder of Orbyfy.

His research and writing of his book, Psychopathic Selection Hypothesis: From Natural Selection to Symbolic Selection, Scale, Abstraction, and Institutional Collapse, led him to found The Institute for Symbolic Selection, an interdisciplinary research program investigating how human-created symbolic systems shape behavior, institutions, and the long-term evolution of civilization. 

New to game theory? Here’s a short primer:

Game theory is the study of how people make decisions when the outcome depends on what everyone else decides too, often with the potential for mutual gain or mutual harm. Its most famous illustration is the Prisoner’s Dilemma: two people, each individually better off betraying the other, who both end up worse off when they do.

For a deeper understanding, check out these links:

– Game Theory video explainer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ecJ_fDpWTg 

– Game Theory article explainer: https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/GameTheory.html 

– Prisoner’s Dilemma deep dive video explainer: https://ed.ted.com/lessons/how-to-outsmart-the-prisoner-s-dilemma-lucas-husted