
Solving Civilizational Collective Action Requires a Shared Sacred Foundation
The conversation that is not optional
Collective action problems like the prisoner's dilemma have been solved at small scales through shared belief and mutual obligation, but the species-level version — where lineage-based competition meets exponential technology — has never been solved. That conversation across traditions and worldviews is now existentially urgent.
Actions
The Source

Is God More Than a Story? Jonathan Pageau with Jordan Hall on DarkHorse
The Observer
Distributed governance, collective intelligence, game B — epistemology, sense-making, and the design of resilient social systems
The Translation
AI-assisted summaryFamiliar terms
Classical collective action problems — the Prisoner's dilemma, the tragedy of the commons — are formally unsolvable by rational self-interested agents operating without enforcement mechanisms. Historically, shared normative frameworks, particularly religious ones, have functioned as such mechanisms: the belief in transcendent consequences for defection sustains cooperation even when immediate incentives favor betrayal. This works precisely because belief itself is the enforcement — whether the metaphysical claims are literally true or function as coordination devices, the behavioral output is the same. The critical vulnerability is asymmetry: when some actors are bound by these norms and others are not, the unbound actors capture disproportionate gains while the cooperative framework erodes.
This dynamic now operates at civilizational scale. Lineage-based competition — the deep evolutionary logic of group selection — is being amplified by technological arms races whose destructive potential grows exponentially. The species faces a collective action problem of unprecedented scope. Smaller-scale analogs exist: military units, religious communities, and nations under existential threat have all solved cooperation problems through shared identity and mutual obligation. But the top-level problem — cooperation across all competing lineages simultaneously — remains unsolved.
The argument is that the world's religious traditions each encode partial solutions to this problem. Christianity's insistence on the co-equal dignity of all persons regardless of lineage directly addresses the game-theoretic logic of inter-group defection. Other traditions contribute other essential elements. But these partial solutions have never been systematically compared, reconciled, or integrated — either with each other or with secular moral frameworks. The claim is stark: without a cross-traditional dialogue capable of producing a shared normative foundation robust enough to constrain defection at the species level, the current trajectory terminates in extinction.