Category Archives: Balance the Triangle
The Tilt isn’t the End
I have something I brought back from Equilibria.
More than memory. More than change. Something physical, hard…and grounding.
I held that little shape in my hand today—the one they call the Gömböc. It looks like nothing special. Just a smooth, oddly cut stone. But when I placed it down crooked on the table, it shivered once, then—almost stubbornly—tipped itself upright.
No matter how I set it down, it always found its way back.
And something in me ached watching it.
Because I know what it feels like to be tilted. To be spun by grief or fear or confusion until all your angles feel wrong and your balance is lost. I’ve seen entire villages like that. Systems like that. People who never believed they could come back.
But the Gömböc doesn’t fight the tilt. It doesn’t panic.
It just remembers.
It carries its center like a secret. And no matter how the world tosses it, it returns—not because it wants to, but because it was shaped to.
That’s the lesson I think the Keepers were trying to show us.
We spend so much time trying not to fall, as if failure were final. As if imbalance means brokenness. But what if the real strength isn’t in staying upright?
What if it’s in learning how to rise, to stand again and again, until balance isn’t luck—it’s design?
The world that’s building in Equilibria won’t always stand straight.
But if it is shaped right—if we shape ourselves right—it will always know how to return.
I want to be like that little shape.
Not unbreakable.
Just unlosable.
~ Olivia
Belonging in an Age of Dehumanizing Rhetoric
Balance the Triangle examines the relationship between us, our institutions, and our technologies. The language we use shapes who we are, the institutions we create, and the technologies we build. It creates the narratives by which we flourish or fail in the societies we create.From its past subtleties, language in politics and the public forum has become more blatantly dehumanizing and divisive in the United States. As the us portion of our balance triad determines the other two legs, failure to address this trend in ourselves inevitably shapes society’s institutions and technologies. Which in turn determines whether our societies support or suppress human flourishing.
The Language of Loss
Political discourse in recent years has increasingly turned to metaphors of infestation, decay, and invasion to describe marginalized populations—most often the poor, the unhoused, the immigrant, and the addicted. This domination of the weaker is found in all cultures—a product of our evolutionary history. Its expression in American political life reduces human beings to vermin in order to erode public empathy and justify systemic neglect or punishment.
This rhetorical strategy is hardly new. It’s one of history’s oldest tricks.
From Nazi propaganda calling Jews vermin to Rwandan broadcasters describing the Tutsi as cockroaches, dehumanizing language precedes and enables violence. It shifts public perception from solidarity to suspicion, from compassion to containment. It dulls the collective conscience and divides.
Today, we experience a modern but no less corrosive version at work—one where urban decay is attributed not to structural failure or policy neglect, but to the supposed character flaws of its inhabitants.
The Real Stakes of Dehumanization: When Language Unweaves the Triangle
To reduce a person to something less than human is not simply to insult them—it is to cast them out of the moral circle. And once outside that circle, what happens to them is no longer seen as injustice, but merely inevitable.
The consequences of dehumanization are not theoretical. They are felt—in policy, in neighborhoods, and in our inner lives. When the triangle unbalances, its unraveling leaves damage in every domain.
1. Policy Hardening (Institutional Fracture)
When metaphors turn neighbors into “rats” or “infestations,” political leaders are no longer bound to serve them. Aid becomes handout. Housing becomes a threat. Infrastructure withers, not from cost, but from contempt.
In Equilibria, Olivia learned: The way you describe a person determines how you serve them. When the institution loses the ability to see citizens as sacred threads in the social weave, it frays into hierarchy and neglect.
2. Social Withdrawal (Us Fragmented)
Dehumanization erodes trust not just in leaders—but in each other. Neighbors pull inward. Conversations shrink. Fear replaces fellowship. The playground becomes a border. The streetlight, a warning.
In Equilibria, this was called Gray Seasons—when even the kindest lost the language of hello. Healing began not with programs, but with presence. Because no civic architecture stands when hearts board up their windows.
3. Normalization of Cruelty (Technological Indifference)
Technology, once a bridge, becomes a blade. Social media algorithmic feeds amplify outrage. Cruelty becomes content. Empathy—dismissed as naïveté. Compassion—mocked as weakness.
Olivia observed the buildingof social filters in Equilibria, not just to moderate speech, but torestore resonance. They trained their systems to ask not just “is it trending?” but “is it kind?” Tech aligned to moral vision doesn’t profit from dehumanization—it shields against it.
In her experiences, Olivia saw every citizen contributing to a “weave of shared becoming.” No one was irrelevant. The moment a person is cast out by language, the entire tapestry weakens. Weaving in Equilibria parallels—and is a metaphor—for society.
Reclaiming Belonging Means…
To reclaim belonging is not to return to a past where everyone felt safe—it is to forge a future where no one is made invisible.
It is not a project of nostalgia, but of design—an act of collective threading, where every voice strengthens the weave and every name is called with care.
1. Naming the Harm (Us)
We begin with our mouths. Dehumanization doesn’t always shout. Sometimes it sighs.
When we call a neighborhood a “war zone,” we imply its residents are combatants. When we call people “drains,” we forget that systems fail people—not the reverse.
Reclaiming belonging means resisting these metaphors—even in private thought. Especially in policy, media, or pulpits. Language is how we decide who belongs and who is managed.
In Equilibria, Olivia learned that silence in the face of degrading speech is not neutrality—it is erosion.
2. Centering Human Stories (Institutional)
Systems love statistics. But people live in stories.
To craft policies without hearing the lives beneath them is to build scaffolding on sand. Reclaiming belonging means listening longer. Letting policy emerge from proximity, not presumption.
Narrative isn’t decoration. It’s how we build moral gravity.
Equilibria’s councils opened with stories—not reports. Because what touches the heart shapes the hand. And we, as human, are wired to make sense of the world through narrative.
3. Designing with Dignity (Institutional)
Community systems too often ask: “Are you worthy?” before offering help.
We must flip that question. What if dignity was assumed—not earned?
Reclaiming belonging means creating infrastructure—housing, schools, public spaces—that speaks with people, not about them. No tests of purity. No labyrinths of paperwork. Just the quiet declaration: You matter.
4. Ethical Leadership in Language (Institutional/Us)
Power speaks. So, it must learn to speak wisely.
Leaders—whether civic, spiritual, or technological—must be trained in the ethics of language. Not just what rallies a base, but what repairs a wound. Not just what wins a vote, but what builds a bridge.
Language was not just tool in Equilibria—but trust. A careless phrase could unravel months of communal care. So, leaders learned to speak as if each word carried weight—because it does.
Pathways Forward: Repairing the Weave of Belonging
Each act of dehumanization tears at our collective fabric. But the fabric can be rewoven—thread by thread, action by action. In Equilibria, such repairs are not responses to crisis, but the daily maintenance of a shared life. These pathways offer ways to reclaim belonging across all corners of the triangle: Us, our Institutions, and our Tools.
1. Mutual Aid Networks (Us + Institutional Interface)
Decentralized and relational, mutual aid reframes need as a shared condition rather than a flaw. It is not charity—it is community in motion.
Where traditional aid often reinforces hierarchies, mutual aid dismantles them. There are no deserving poor or undeserving others—only neighbors with different needs at different times.
Religious and secular groups alike have long carried the DNA of mutual aid. But we must not confuse institutional scaffolds with the failures of those who misuse them. The values—compassion, solidarity, reciprocity—endure, even when people falter.
In Equilibria, mutual aid is a baseline practice. No forms. No suspicion. Just exchange—warm bread left at the door; skill traded for care. It is the cultural immune system that resists the corrosion of transactional living.
2. Participatory Budgeting (Institutional)
This model shifts decision-making back to the people most affected by those decisions. It says: You know what your community needs. Let us build it together.
Instead of far-off officials or unaccountable boards, participatory budgeting lets residents propose, deliberate, and vote on how to allocate public funds—whether for park restoration, mental health services, or harm reduction.
It is democracy rehydrated. And it is belonging made visible.
In Equilibria, every neighborhood hosts a seasonal budgeting festival—part civic process, part celebration. Children paint murals beside budget proposals. Elders advise from benches. People protect what they help create.
3. Narrative Journalism Initiatives (Us + Institutional)
We make sense through stories. And too often, the stories that shape our systems exclude the people most affected by them.
Narrative journalism restores dignity where statistics flatten it. Story circles, place-based oral history projects, and first-person reporting help reframe the dialogue—not around problems, but around people.
Policy does not proceed in Equilibria without a narrative review. Every new law must include the voice of someone it would touch. Because decisions made without stories are decisions made without soul.
4. AI-Powered Empathy Filters (Technological + Cultural Mediation)
Words form worlds. And so, we build tools to guard them wisely.
Emerging empathy filters, powered by language models, scan for patterns of metaphor, analogy, and framing that echo historical harm. They do not censor—they invite reconsideration.
Imagine a news editor writing, “invasion of the homeless,” and receiving a gentle prompt: “Would you consider: ‘a surge in need’ or ‘a growing population left without options’?”
In Equilibria, these filters are woven into civic media platforms. Not to control speech—but to cultivate clarity and compassion.
Because wise speech is not fragile. It is intentional.
Final Words
To describe someone as vermin is not just to insult them—it is to remove them from the moral circle. What follows is not a debate, but a dismissal. Not reform, but retribution.
If we wish to preserve any vision of shared democracy or solidarity, we must reclaim the words we use for one another. Because what we call people determines what we do to them.
And what we do to them, ultimately, becomes what we do to ourselves.
References:
See the nice piece by
Paul Krugman. “We’re All Rats Now.” The Paul Krugman Reader, July 2025. Link
Walking a Strange Savanna
OVERVIEW
The world we inhabit today is both familiar and strange. It teems with life, connection, and possibility, yet it feels unsteady, as if the ground beneath us has shifted. We find ourselves in a moment of profound transformation, shaped by forces we only partially understand—forces of our own making.
On one level, this story is deeply familiar. For millennia, humans have faced challenges born of the mismatch between who we are and the worlds we create. We are a species hardwired for small groups and simple tools, navigating a global, digital civilization of billions. Our minds were forged in the scarcity of the Paleolithic, yet we now contend with the paradox of abundance. Our institutions, designed for slower, more predictable eras, falter under the weight of exponential change. And our technologies, which amplify both our wisdom and our folly, demand a level of foresight we have barely begun to develop.
On another level, this story is entirely new. Never before have the stakes been so high or the opportunities so immense. The choices we make today will shape the lives of billions—and the legacy of humanity—for generations to come. Will we navigate this strange new savanna with the wisdom it demands? Or will we stumble, weighed down by the mismatches of our wiring, the inertia of our institutions, and the blind spots of our technologies?
This book is an invitation to explore these questions. It is a journey through the forces that shape our world—human nature, societal structures, and technological systems—and how they interact in ways that often seem chaotic, even overwhelming. But it is also a journey of hope. For as much as humanity is defined by its flaws, it is also defined by its capacity to adapt, to learn, and to create.
The framework at the heart of this book—Balance the Triangle—offers a way to understand and address the tensions of our time. It begins with three elements:
Human Wiring: The instincts and behaviors that have guided us for tens of thousands of years.
Institutions: The systems and structures that channel those instincts into collective action.
Technology: The tools that magnify our abilities and reshape our environment.
When these elements are in harmony, humanity flourishes. When they fall out of balance, we face conflict, stagnation, and collapse. The digital age has pushed this Triangle out of alignment, but it has also given us the tools to restore it.
This book is written for those who shape the world—leaders, innovators, thinkers, and doers. It is for anyone who feels the dissonance of the present moment and wonders how we might resolve it. It draws on insights from evolutionary psychology, philosophy, technology, and history, but its purpose is practical: to chart a path toward a world where humanity thrives, not just survives.
Throughout these pages, we will explore the past to understand how we arrived here, examine the present to confront our challenges, and imagine the future to envision what we might become. This is not a book of easy answers but a call to engage with the complexity of our time—and to act.
The strange savanna we walk today is not without its dangers, but it is also rich with promise. Together, we can find our way, guided by the lessons of the past and the vision of a better future.
Let’s begin.
Which is the Hardest to Change: People, Institutions, or Technology?
Ranking and Analysis of Difficulty: Emotions, Institutions, Technology
Let’s look at a very simple exercise. If we wanted to bring people with their evolutionary wiring, cultural differences, personality varieties, and vastly different upbringings; along with their seemingly unending types of institutions, into balance with our human technological development – which would be most difficult?
1. Institutions: Most Difficult to Change
Rationale:
Institutions are deeply entrenched systems that embody the cumulative historical, cultural, and political legacies of societies. They are resistant to change due to their structural and systemic nature, which is often reinforced by powerful interests and the inertia of established norms and practices. The complexity of institutional reform is evident in the challenges of addressing neoliberal reforms in higher education, where entrenched interests and historical legacies complicate transformative change[2]. Furthermore, institutions like global health systems exhibit profound resistance to change, influenced by political, economic, and social factors that are deeply embedded within national and international power structures[12].
Factors Contributing to Difficulty:
- Entrenched Interests: Institutions often benefit certain groups who have vested interests in maintaining the status quo, making reform challenging.
- Complexity of Systems: Institutions are complex systems with many interdependent parts. Changes in one area can have unforeseen consequences in others, requiring careful planning and broad consensus.
- Cultural and Historical Inertia: Many institutions are rooted in historical and cultural contexts that lend them legitimacy and durability, making radical changes culturally and politically sensitive.
2. Emotions: Moderately Difficult to Manage
Rationale:
Emotions are inherent to human nature and are shaped by evolutionary processes that are not easily rewired. While individuals can learn to manage and regulate their emotions through techniques such as mindfulness and cognitive-behavioral therapy, the fundamental nature of emotional responses remains a constant challenge. The evolutionary ecological model highlights that emotions, such as fear and anxiety, have developed as adaptive responses to environmental threats, making them deeply ingrained in human behavior[10].
Factors Contributing to Difficulty:
- Biological Basis: Emotions are rooted in the human brain’s architecture, which has evolved over millennia. Changing these hard-wired responses requires significant and sustained psychological intervention.
- Individual Variability: Emotional responses vary widely among individuals, influenced by genetics, upbringing, and personal experiences, complicating broad-based management strategies.
- Adaptive Function: Many emotions serve adaptive functions that enhance survival and reproduction, making them essential despite their sometimes-negative effects on modern life.
3. Technology: Least Difficult to Innovate
Rationale:
Technology evolves rapidly, driven by continuous advancements in science and engineering. The pace of technological change is inherently faster than that of emotional evolution or institutional reform, as seen in the ongoing developments in digital media and artificial intelligence[4]. Technological innovation is often embraced because of its potential to improve efficiency, productivity, and quality of life.
Factors Contributing to Ease:
- Rapid Innovation Cycle: Technology sectors are characterized by rapid innovation cycles that continually produce new and improved products and systems.
- Market Dynamics: The technology market is driven by competition and consumer demand, which incentivize constant improvement and adaptation.
- Scalability: Technological solutions can be rapidly scaled and adapted across different contexts and geographies, unlike emotional interventions or institutional reforms that require tailored approaches.
Conclusion
In summary, institutions present the greatest challenge due to their complex, entrenched nature that resists rapid change. Emotions, while more malleable, are still difficult to manage universally due to their deep biological and adaptive roots. Technology, in contrast, evolves quickly and is continuously shaped by market forces and innovation, making it the least difficult to advance among the three. This analysis underscores the importance of addressing each area with strategies that are appropriate to their specific challenges and dynamics.
We are going to look at this issue from many different perspectives. And we’ll be bouncing dialogue from large language model AIs, usually Perplexity as it cites better for now in my opinion. Regardless, think of it as brainstorming ideas with part of our human informational database. – not someONE. Perplexity is an assistant digging for information. Not a sentient AI or even close for now. But a useful tool. And as always, what it chooses to cite is always fascinating, whether or not I would agree.
So, Perplexity’s conclusion indicates institutions. Simplistic for the moment but illustrating the problem. Which would you choose?
Citations:
[1] https://academic.oup.com/book/43098/chapter/361570262
[2] https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/9/5/79
[3] https://chalmers.org/resources/blog/a-biblical-framework-for-poverty-the-four-key-relationships/
[4] https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1010&context=christian_engineering_conference
[5] https://orionmagazine.org/article/dark-ecology/
[6] https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html
[7] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3578575
[8] https://philarchive.org/archive/JONTRO-26v2
[9] https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/02/24/expert-essays-on-human-agency-and-digital-life/
[10] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7324729/
[11] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7215339/
[12] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7458571/
[13] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10729319/
[14] https://quizlet.com/98830550/chapter-10-flash-cards/
[15] https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/ACCC%2Bcommissioned%2Breport%2B-%2BThe%2Bimpact%2Bof%2Bdigital%2Bplatforms%2Bon%2Bnews%2Band%2Bjournalistic%2Bcontent,%2BCentre%2Bfor%2BMedia%2BTransition%2B%282%29.pdf
[16] https://www.amazon.com/Following-Jesus-Digital-Jason-Thacker/dp/1087754593
[17] https://www.jstor.org/stable/23019520
[18] https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1620732114
[19] https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/hs/cf/documents/hssframeworkwhole.pdf
[20] https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED618290.pdf
Balance the Triangle
This Perplexity summary touches on a few of the high points regarding balancing Wilson’s issues:
The real problem of humanity is the following: we have paleolithic emotions; medieval institutions; and god-like technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall.
E. O. Wilson
Introduction
The quote attributed to Edward O. Wilson encapsulates a profound challenge facing contemporary society: the discordance between our evolved emotional responses, our historical and often outdated institutional frameworks, and the exponential growth of our technological capabilities. This dissonance has the potential to precipitate crises across various domains, from environmental degradation to social inequality, and from ethical dilemmas in science to the erosion of democratic processes. To address this, a multidisciplinary methodology that promotes balance among these three elements is essential. This approach would involve the integration of insights from evolutionary psychology, social and political sciences, and technology and information studies.
Evolutionary Psychology and Emotion Regulation
Understanding Paleolithic Emotions
Our emotional responses, while having served us well in the Paleolithic era, may not always be suited to the modern world. Fear, aggression, and tribalism, for example, can lead to conflict in a globally interconnected society. Evolutionary psychology can help us understand these primal emotions and their triggers.
Strategies for Emotion Regulation
To mitigate the impact of these emotions, we can develop strategies for emotion regulation. This includes mindfulness practices, cognitive-behavioral techniques, and educational programs that focus on emotional intelligence. These practices can help individuals recognize and manage their emotional responses in a way that is more aligned with the complexities of contemporary life.
[My note: There are many other human behaviors we will discuss.]
Reforming Medieval Institutions
Assessing Institutional Relevance
Many of our institutions, from legal systems to educational structures, have roots in medieval or even earlier times. A critical assessment of their relevance and effectiveness in the modern world is necessary. This involves questioning whether these institutions serve the public good or perpetuate outdated power dynamics.
Institutional Evolution
Institutions must evolve to reflect contemporary values and knowledge. This can be achieved through reforms that incorporate principles of equity, transparency, and adaptability. For example, modernizing the education system to include critical thinking and digital literacy can prepare individuals to navigate the complexities of the modern world.
[Ditto for institutions]
Harnessing God-like Technology
Ethical Frameworks for Technology
The rapid advancement of technology, particularly in fields like artificial intelligence and biotechnology, presents ethical challenges that our current frameworks may not adequately address. Developing robust ethical guidelines that consider long-term impacts and the rights of all stakeholders is crucial.
Technology for Social Good
Technology should be harnessed to address societal challenges rather than exacerbate them. This involves directing research and development towards sustainable practices, equitable access to resources, and technologies that promote social cohesion.
Integrating the Three Elements
Interdisciplinary Collaboration
Balancing paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions, and god-like technology requires interdisciplinary collaboration. Psychologists, sociologists, ethicists, technologists, and policymakers must work together to create integrated solutions that consider the emotional, institutional, and technological aspects of challenges.
Public Engagement and Education
Public engagement and education are vital in this process. By increasing public understanding of these issues, individuals can make informed decisions and demand accountability from institutions and technology developers.
Continuous Evaluation and Adaptation
Finally, a system of continuous evaluation and adaptation must be in place to ensure that the balance among emotions, institutions, and technology remains aligned with the public interest. This involves regular reassessment of policies, educational curricula, and technological impacts.
[And ditto once again. But this tees a simple summary.]
Conclusion
Creating a better world in the face of the discordance between our ancient emotions, outdated institutions, and advanced technology requires a comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach. By understanding and regulating our emotional responses, reforming institutions to reflect modern values, and developing ethical frameworks for technology, we can work towards a more balanced and sustainable future. Interdisciplinary collaboration, public engagement, and continuous adaptation are key to this endeavor.
Citations:
[1] Medieval Perspectives on the Modern Problem of the “Global Middle Ages … https://brill.com/view/journals/me/29/2-3/article-p285_7.xml?language=en
[2] The medieval power struggles that helped forge today’s universities https://theconversation.com/the-medieval-power-struggles-that-helped-forge-todays-universities-54298
[3] Edward O. Wilson – Oxford Reference https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780191826719.001.0001/q-oro-ed4-00016553
[4] Medieval and Early Modern Challenges | Our Lady of Dallas https://abbey.cistercian.org/history/the-cistercian-order/medieval-and-early-modern-challenges/
[5] Public Humanities and the Future of Medieval Studies – Notre Dame Sites https://sites.nd.edu/manuscript-studies/2021/12/22/public-humanities-work-in-the-field-of-medieval-studies/
[6] Developing Standards | Public History Initiative – UCLA https://phi.history.ucla.edu/nchs/preface/developing-standards/
[7] Current Challenges and Future Trends in Medieval Studies https://medievalstudies.ceu.edu/current-challenges-and-future-trends-medieval-studies-0
[8] Social change | Definition, Types, Theories, Causes, & Examples https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-change
[9] Prehistoric Emotions in the Modern World https://artsci.washington.edu/news/2014-08/prehistoric-emotions-modern-world
[10] What problems back in medieval times (or problems in general) would be … https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/pofxhk/what_problems_back_in_medieval_times_or_problems/
[11] Our Brains Are No Match for Our Technology – The New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/05/opinion/digital-technology-brain.html
[12] Quote by Edward O. Wilson: “The real problem of humanity is … – Goodreads https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9770741-the-real-problem-of-humanity-is-the-following-we-have
[13] Integrating Multiperspectivity in the History Classroom https://www.coe.int/en/web/observatory-history-teaching/-/integrating-multiperspectivity-in-the-history-classroom
[14] The Lifespan Perspective | Lifespan Development – Lumen Learning https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-lifespandevelopment/chapter/the-lifespan-perspective/
[15] We Have Paleolithic Emotions, Medieval Institutions, and Godlike … https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/we-have-paleolithic-emotions-medieval-institutions-godlike-wang
[16] Social Integration Definition, Theory & Types – Lesson – Study.com https://study.com/academy/lesson/social-integration-definition-theory.html
[17] What Is Human Nature? Paleolithic Emotions, Medieval Institutions … https://bigthink.com/hard-science/eo-wilson-what-makes-us-human-paleolithic-emotions-medieval-institutions-god-like-technology/
[18] Timing is everything: Developmental changes in the associations … – NCBI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10552862/
[19] Paleolithic Brains and God-like Technology – Coalition for Trust in … https://trustinhealthandscience.org/paleolithic-brains-and-god-like-technology/
CHANGES TO THE SITE
Changes are in the works.
Children’s blog posts and other age-appropriate materials can be viewed by clicking the YES! button in the top menu. Parents and children can click on that button to access those resources.
The same for the Balance the Triangle posts – click the appropriate button in the top menu.
The HOME page is now home to both Balance the Triangle, the parent initiative of the children’s YES! books and resources, and the YES! project. On either the HOME or Balance the Triangle pages, you will be able to follow more in-depth discussions of the ideas wrapped up each month in the LinkedIn Balance the Triangle newsletter, as well as related materials that don’t make the newsletter. Click on either image on the Home Page or use the top menu buttons to go to either page individually.
The LinkedIn newsletter will continue exactly as it has done for the past year and a half. This site augments that effort.
We all want a better world for our children. And so, we continue that delicate balance of human nature, the institutions we build, and the technologies we create. We owe our children that better future.
Thanks to all for their interest in this project.
MY YES! 