Funny, when I hear someone using words in novel ways and just making up their own definitions, I start to think they might be hiding the real truth or something. Or just fucking lying.
As a confirmed slacker nudist doper, I feel for these high-whatchmacallit guys. They're all a type we've seen if we ever had a job downtown: laser-focused on being in charge, with a philosophy that allows them to forgive themselves for being complete assholes.
And speaking of assholes—you brought him up, Nancy—Peter Thiel's name keeps coming up in connection with things like Elon Musk and Project 2025. Readers who would enjoy learning more about the connection between "high agency" and "smirking fascism" might enjoy this three-year-old John Ganz post from "Unpopular Front."
"In some ways, Thiel’s vision of the future is familiar. Though he often gripes that Hollywood futurism is too dystopian, with sci-fi films reflective of a general technophobia, many of his investments suggest a 'Blade Runner'-like world that is militaristic, private, secretive, corporate, and controlled. For him, the processes of liberal democratic life are either an obstacle or a distraction. Technological innovation is paramount. What’s on offer is a fantasy of a future shaped purely by technology. The mixture of cool, utopian futurism and Messianic redemption is itself a sci-fi trope."
I began my career at Microsoft working on what would have been version 2.0 of Microsoft BoB (as it's sometimes spelled). The product was maligned (indeed, it was more or less mocked out of the market), but in a sense it's had a beyond-the-grave last laugh: it was one of the first products to incorporate the idea of an agent doing computer tasks on your behalf. ("Its legacy would be observed in future Microsoft products, notably the use of virtual assistants." — Wikipedia.) It's not incorrect to see a line from today's AI agents back to Clippy, which originated as a part of a suite of agent characters that were developed in BoB before migrating to Microsoft Office. The problem with BoB, however, was that it was about 30 years ahead of its time, both technology-wise and user-acceptance wise: now everyone loves the idea of an agent doing something for them.
Here is my reaction in terms of your quote from the March 2025 article: "The concept of “high agency” is an amalgamation of, or an umbrella term for, a range of traits that psychologists have studied for decades. Related concepts include the prized “growth mindset” (the belief that one’s talents are developable rather than innate), “proactivity” (acting in advance of, rather than reacting to, situations), and the somewhat controversial “grit” (perseverance in the pursuit of long-term goals). . . .
High agency, as the tech world sees it, appears to borrow from all these concepts, wrapped up in one convenient package. Agentic people are those who see possibility where others see barriers, take action rather than wait to be told what to do, and aren’t afraid to go after what they want."
This does not bring to mind a description of the current president. He wants to grow his own brand and finances, and nothing else, and that has always been his attitude - no growth there. He is not proactive unless you consider that a "let's throw it against the wall and see what happens" move, is proactive. I would never describe a person who has other people do all the dirty work and lets them take the blame for mistakes as having grit. Now, seeing possibility where others see barriers (for example, the Constitution and the law) and not afraid to go after what they want, well he certainly does not let those things stop him. He always seems to feel free to twist a situation until he gets what he wants.
In any case, no matter who is having a war of words, it still sounds like whining and crying about what someone did, in this situation. They sound like hurt children, not people with high agency as the original tweeter referred to them.
High-maintenance sounds more appropriate to me
Exactly. Every time I read "high-agency" as a description, my brain substitutes "high-maintenance" and you know what? The sentence still makes sense.
Funny, when I hear someone using words in novel ways and just making up their own definitions, I start to think they might be hiding the real truth or something. Or just fucking lying.
As a confirmed slacker nudist doper, I feel for these high-whatchmacallit guys. They're all a type we've seen if we ever had a job downtown: laser-focused on being in charge, with a philosophy that allows them to forgive themselves for being complete assholes.
And speaking of assholes—you brought him up, Nancy—Peter Thiel's name keeps coming up in connection with things like Elon Musk and Project 2025. Readers who would enjoy learning more about the connection between "high agency" and "smirking fascism" might enjoy this three-year-old John Ganz post from "Unpopular Front."
https://www.unpopularfront.news/p/the-enigma-of-peter-thiel
There's also the 2021 New Yorker profile I linked to, perhaps too subtly: https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-silicon-valley/what-is-it-about-peter-thiel
"In some ways, Thiel’s vision of the future is familiar. Though he often gripes that Hollywood futurism is too dystopian, with sci-fi films reflective of a general technophobia, many of his investments suggest a 'Blade Runner'-like world that is militaristic, private, secretive, corporate, and controlled. For him, the processes of liberal democratic life are either an obstacle or a distraction. Technological innovation is paramount. What’s on offer is a fantasy of a future shaped purely by technology. The mixture of cool, utopian futurism and Messianic redemption is itself a sci-fi trope."
I began my career at Microsoft working on what would have been version 2.0 of Microsoft BoB (as it's sometimes spelled). The product was maligned (indeed, it was more or less mocked out of the market), but in a sense it's had a beyond-the-grave last laugh: it was one of the first products to incorporate the idea of an agent doing computer tasks on your behalf. ("Its legacy would be observed in future Microsoft products, notably the use of virtual assistants." — Wikipedia.) It's not incorrect to see a line from today's AI agents back to Clippy, which originated as a part of a suite of agent characters that were developed in BoB before migrating to Microsoft Office. The problem with BoB, however, was that it was about 30 years ahead of its time, both technology-wise and user-acceptance wise: now everyone loves the idea of an agent doing something for them.
Good point!
Here is my reaction in terms of your quote from the March 2025 article: "The concept of “high agency” is an amalgamation of, or an umbrella term for, a range of traits that psychologists have studied for decades. Related concepts include the prized “growth mindset” (the belief that one’s talents are developable rather than innate), “proactivity” (acting in advance of, rather than reacting to, situations), and the somewhat controversial “grit” (perseverance in the pursuit of long-term goals). . . .
High agency, as the tech world sees it, appears to borrow from all these concepts, wrapped up in one convenient package. Agentic people are those who see possibility where others see barriers, take action rather than wait to be told what to do, and aren’t afraid to go after what they want."
This does not bring to mind a description of the current president. He wants to grow his own brand and finances, and nothing else, and that has always been his attitude - no growth there. He is not proactive unless you consider that a "let's throw it against the wall and see what happens" move, is proactive. I would never describe a person who has other people do all the dirty work and lets them take the blame for mistakes as having grit. Now, seeing possibility where others see barriers (for example, the Constitution and the law) and not afraid to go after what they want, well he certainly does not let those things stop him. He always seems to feel free to twist a situation until he gets what he wants.
In any case, no matter who is having a war of words, it still sounds like whining and crying about what someone did, in this situation. They sound like hurt children, not people with high agency as the original tweeter referred to them.
It’s an interesting meme. Seems healthy for most people to develop more agency, and deeply destructive for a small subset of people to lean into
Thanks for sharing!