indyjohar.substack.com/p/living-…

Another timely and material post from Indy Johar, observing how society - and our contemporary technologies, implicitly here - has distributed the means of producing claims but concentrated the means of making them count. In this context, whoever controls access to original observation, routes to attention and credibility, or resources to act on beliefs shapes what gets believed and tested.

Indy closes: “Treating relational intelligence as a foundational public good means distributing the means of producing it. The people living with the consequences need the capacity to make what they know count, to examine the beliefs that direct decisions and to use what they learn to change what happens next.”

I’m particularly interested, in this moment of the centering of explicit, legible knowledge (as the [English] language at root of frontier genAI models), in the matter of what is omitted in this context - ie the tacit (and other) knowledge(s) that Indy includes in his inquiry here, presumably part of his definition of relational intelligence.