The Principle of Diminishing Narrative Returns
The pace of human discovery within a scientific discipline is inversely and exponentially proportional to the body of discovery already accomplished inside that discipline
The pace of human discovery within a scientific discipline is inversely and exponentially proportional to the body of discovery already accomplished inside that discipline.
Science under such a burden cannot suffer disruption for centuries to come—mandating multi-agency bureaucratic approval and peer-review for every new effort and at every new doorstep of research.
Cognitive Load Theory suggests that a person engaged in the act of lying must process more streams of logic than a person relating a simple fact or observation. Due to our limited capacity for processing information, lying requires more time as the liar must assemble a more complicated calculus of contention. The liar needs to reconcile multiple streams of consistency: the fabricated story itself, the truth they are seeking to deflect, the perceptions and responses of the audience, and the consistency of the liar’s tale with the their previous statements or established prior art on the topic.
Lying involves continuous ‘strategic monitoring,’ where the liar constantly checks their responses against past statements to maintain consistency. This continuous monitoring increases cognitive load and slows down response times. Finally, lying can be viewed as a kind of multi-tasking: managing the lie and managing the interaction. This results in an increasing game of rhetorical deflection along with the necessity of placing the liar on a pedestal of virtue or non-assailability.
This understanding is supported by several studies and reviews, which highlight the cognitive demands and complexities involved in deception. Neuroimaging studies have shown that areas of the brain associated with cognitive control are more active when lying compared to telling the truth, indicating the higher cognitive load involved in deception. For further reading, you can explore the works of Vrij, A., Granhag, P.A., & Porter, S. (2010) in “Pitfalls and Opportunities in Nonverbal and Verbal Lie Detection” published in Psychological Science in the Public Interest, and Vrij, A., Fisher, R.P., Mann, S., & Leal, S. (2006) in “Detecting Deception by Means of Cognitive Load” published in Trends in Cognitive Sciences. These provide comprehensive insights into the cognitive demands of lying and the methods used to detect deception by increasing cognitive load.
Diminishing Systemic Returns Under Large Audience Demand
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fb68b7424-6345-42a0-8d55-f599c7a4960b_768x511.png)
This principle is not simply a principle of human psychology; rather, it applies to large systems and organizations as well. It is a fundamental law within computation and complex systems (this is my professional domain) that system load functions in inverse proportion with its performance.
Of course we all understand the impact which bureaucracy plays in the response times of medical and governmental organizations. This is a given. One expanded application of this theory I have developed however, posits that the computational load on a universe increases as the observer load within that universe also increases. In our universe, the result of this is that the Planck interval of time (tp = 5.39×10−44 seconds at present) dilates as outside observers are introduced into its deterministic fabric (in order words, the deterministic-monist and the observer-dualist are both correct). Consequently, Planck time begins to slow over time, resulting in several physical phenomena we document in our observable universe.
This theoretical framework suggests that as more observers (or observational events) are introduced, the universe’s computational demands increase, leading to a dilation of fundamental time intervals. The observer does not witness the past. Instead he witnesses an extant factor which the universe offers up in response to his query. However the universe must first check to ensure that what it offers up, is in accord with what it has offered up in the past for this same frame of reference and query subject posed by the observer. In other words, as observers and observational events increase, the Universe must ‘tell its story’ to a progressively larger audience.1
Under this construct, the interference that should not exist in the context of a single photon transiting the double slit experiment, yet still does nonetheless, is a case of the universe inadvertently oversharing. By making the lie too perfect, it betrays its own illusion.2 This is akin to a suspect in a murder accidentally revealing knowledge of the weapon used in the crime, when they otherwise should not have had any knowledge of it. The universe spoke too much. Such experimental observation constitutes a rare Truman Show moment.
This principle could potentially explain cosmological phenomena such as the galactic redshift or path-dependent Fast Radio Burst dispersion (see image above right, extracted from our FRB study), wherein the light from distant sources begins to exhibit exotic effects as it traverses spacetime itself. Perhaps it is not space influencing this per se, but rather the audience of observers which places load on computational time-flow inside the universe—an expansion of the cosmological observer effect in quantum theory.
Diminishing Narrative Returns
Such duality applies to syndicates and bureaucracies as well. It is not simply the cognitive load of the lie itself, nor merely its consistency with past lies, but also the necessity to accommodate all this to the audience of observers.
Ethical Skeptic’s Principle of Diminishing Narrative Returns combines elements of both Cognitive Load Theory and Diminishing Systemic Returns Under Large Audience Demand into a single bureaucratic phenomenon. As the complexity and volume of a narrative increase, whether in scientific discovery, bureaucratic systems, or deceptive practices, the rate of meaningful or coherent additions to the narrative diminishes. This is due not only to the poor fit of new discoveries but also to the increasing cognitive load required to maintain consistency, address growing scrutiny, and manage the demands of a larger audience.
Ethical Skeptic’s Principle of Diminishing Narrative Returns
The pace of human discovery within a scientific discipline is inversely and exponentially proportional to the body of discovery already accomplished inside that discipline.
A Narrative must answer questions progressively more slowly over time, resulting from efforts to ensure that discovery both conforms to The Narrative Line and is consistent with past established elements of narrative.
As the tangled web begins to become obvious to outsiders, a shroud of rhetoric and virtue must be established to protect The Narrative Line.
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F745316eb-b7db-42ac-96ee-b7c4a2ecacee_697x568.png)
A Critical Example in Official Pseudoscience
A decade ago, I attended and presented at a conference in Houston, where I had the opportunity to converse after hours with one of the other conference presenters, who happened to be an archaeologist. Since this is one area of personal fascination, I raised the issue of Göbekli Tepe with her. She looked off to the side and offered a slight, disconcerted expression.
“It’s being shut down and reconstructed for tourism now. The latest findings are, let us say, existentially upsetting to various groups, and I will leave it at that.”
In 2017 the International Council on Monuments and Sites raised objection to the cessation of archaeological excavation at Göbekli Tepe in their ‘Interim Report and Technical Evaluation’.1
The ICOMOS panel considers that there is an imbalance between the scientific research requirements and prospects as indicated in the nomination dossier, and the proposed management plan. The ICOMOS Panel would appreciate if the State Party could provide reassurances regarding the continuing medium-and long-term funding of fundamental, independent, scientifically motivated and managed research programmes.
~ ICOMOS Evaluation Unit letter to UNESCO, 22 Dec 2017
These are no mere tales, as evidenced by concerns on the part of discipline scientists and the re-adaptation of the site for ‘prolonged’ inactivity—it’s removal from the archaeological landscape and burial inside the lost annals of bureaucratic history. An erstwhile crate containing the Ark of the Covenant, from cinematic Indian Jones lore.
Thus, archaeological hand-waving becomes a necessity, with no better example than The Narrative Line expressed by John Hoopes, Harvard PhD in Anthropology, who stated, “I think it would be okay to rebury Göbekli Tepe and seal the entire site with concrete. After thirty years of archaeological research at the site, there is plenty to keep archaeologists busy for a long time.”2 This statement reveals itself to be what it really is: oppressive virtue-rhetoric employed to protect The Narrative Line (the green curve asymptotic to the red line, in Exhibit A above).
Except in this instance, the archaeological site is being interred beneath a more robust barrier than simply Hoopes’ metaphorical concrete; rather, more tantalizingly, “elements and forms of past landscapes inside a motif of use, option, and existential values” according to a an example dissertation justifying such actions.3 This is code-speak on the part of the wayward discipline and the presiding Şanlıurfa Council for Conservation of Cultural Properties for ‘planting regionally-endangered trees,’ in an environment which is not natural forest, but semi-arid Mediterranean plateau. In other words, they are not innocently ‘planting trees’, but rather creating a barrier of perpetually fragile and re-establishing woodlands. This is diabolically clever.
This is part of the protection and management of Göbekli Tepe, carried out under a UNESCO World Heritage Centre management plan that was finalized in 2017, under funding by the World Economic Forum.4 All this enacted, fully cognizant that a nascent and fragile ‘re-establishing ancient landscape’ will not be allowed disruption for centuries to come—mandating multi-agency bureaucratic approval for every new initiative and at every new step of research.
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Faeb88f63-fa34-49b7-951a-0f58148a0516_869x723.jpeg)
BCE
, as mere religious babble – relegated to the bin of ‘ignore this.’A mere 5% of Göbekli Tepe has been unearthed over the decades, while in contrast, 66% of Pompeii has been excavated and fully documented to the public at large during that same time. The difference lies in what is being unearthed and the disruptive potential with regard to The Narrative Line.5
I find it ironic that archaeology will gladly process voiceless finds in an agnostic assembly line of typology, but artifacts with actual content and expression on them, messages to future generations – “we’ll get to that later.” …It is so transparently evil.
Once an archaeological site has established that its purpose was to communicate messages to future generations, as is unequivocally the case with Göbekli Tepe, and does not reside in the context of mere mundane human habitation, the ethical responsibility of such a site passes from the hands of one sect of science into the domain of humanity’s intellectual property. As such, its excavation and transparency become the duty of those who administer the site on behalf of humanity. Claiming a need for ‘better technology’ simply to unearth and interpret these artifacts is disingenuous.
The only hesitation I have on this may stem from concerns that these artifacts will conveniently disappear, as has so often occurred throughout the history of this form of liberal arts pseudoscience called archaeology. In other words, we await spiritual maturity, not technological advancement.
As a result, the “existentially upsetting” artifacts which lay buried under the ground at Göbekli Tepe, will be forever and ironically entombed by our very fanatical veneration of them. The astute ethical skeptic should note that this is how our most prominent religions ply their craft as well. What better way to conceal something, than make it an object of obsession.
Fanatical obsession is after all, the most sincere form of disbelief or dishonor.
Fully 80% of the Göbekli Tepe site is now rendered inaccessible to students, independent researchers, or scientific focus teams for centuries to come. Any objections are met with the de rigueur “You don’t understand how archaeologists work.” As an experienced professional science and technology ethicist I fully comprehend what I am witnessing.
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F6e9519d0-2b21-4bfd-8b4c-ffedadd3f6ce_869x282.png)
There exists a curious poetry to the fact that someone deliberately buried the complex in antiquity and are now deliberately burying it once again.
Finally, perhaps, and this is a stretch, we are not allowed to further investigate the complex because it is not "under the domain of humanity’s intellectual property” after all? We are allowed to investigate our heritage, but not others' who were “still on the Earth in those days.” Nah …who would believe such a ridiculous notion.
Regardless, this is how darkness applies its craft, fully conscious of appearances and aware of its audience, shrouded in virtue—fully cognizant as well that the pace of scientific discovery is grinding to a halt.
Ethical skepticism, involves becoming a student of this particular form of tradecraft inside ponerology.
The Ethical Skeptic, “The Principle of Diminishing Narrative Returns”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 13 Jun 2024; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=89300
Nikola Tesla, Thomas Chan - Adam & Eve, Eye of the Sahara, Trees planted over GT?
Some seriously compelling questions about advanced ancient civilizations.
Hmm, that’s the second time this week, out of the blue, I’ve become aware of this Gobeke monument and its bizarre transformation into a tourist trap?!?!?! What are the odds from 2 very different sources of learning about a place I’ve never heard of before?!?! There are so many odd and jarring things happening all around us. I’m starting to think we don’t know what is the half of what this world has seen!!!