
## Introduction

In the neon-lit world of Kabukicho host clubs—often dismissed as dens of ambition and vanity—one man has consistently turned struggling young men into top performers.  
Itsuki Minato, known as *Gunshin*. His approach to training and leadership transcends mere charisma.  

What he practices is a **living model of behavioral science and educational psychology**, quietly overturning the adult world’s common belief that *“people don’t really change.”*

---

## 1. Language First: State the Conclusion Before Guiding Thought

Minato wields **language** as his primary tool.  
While most people form thoughts and then express them, he reverses this process. He **states the conclusion first, framing the listener’s thinking**—a powerful technique.

For instance, when someone described a host-client relationship as “like an old married couple,” most would hesitate or deflect. Minato immediately responded:  
*"Old couples are ideal."*  
At that moment, he likely hadn’t yet worked out the reasoning. But by posing the conclusion upfront, he prompted himself—and the listener—to fill in the rationale: *Because they represent long-lasting, enduring relationships.*

This reflects both the **framing effect** and a reversal of Kahneman’s **System 1 and System 2 thinking**.  
By presenting a “frame” first, Minato engages the listener’s System 1 (intuition), which accepts the conclusion. System 2 (logic) then backfills the justification.

As Tversky and Kahneman (1981) demonstrated, **the language presented first often dictates the direction of thought**.

**He doesn’t lead thought. He hands over the ideal conclusion upfront.** This is his first strategy.

---

## 2. Zero Logical Gaps: Explicitly Explain Even the Obvious

Minato **never allows logical leaps** in his explanations.  
This isn’t because he’s just a skilled logical thinker. It’s because he deliberately avoids the **curse of knowledge**—the assumption that others share your background assumptions.

According to the **Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)**, when listeners are provided with detailed reasoning, they process information via the **central route**, leading to deeper, longer-lasting attitude change.  
Thus, **even the obvious must be carefully explained**.

Rather than assuming understanding, Minato chooses to reiterate even the simplest points.  
This is the second pillar of the Gunshin Method.

---

## 3. The Golden Ratio of Praise and Criticism: Designing Emotional Feedback

All leaders praise and sometimes criticize. But **few control the ratio**.  
Minato seems to rigorously maintain a **5:1 positive-to-negative feedback ratio**.

Psychologist John Gottman found that when married couples fell below this golden ratio, divorce rates skyrocketed. Losada’s research showed that in teams, a ratio below 3:1 correlated with dramatic performance declines.

Moreover, when team members believe **“this might be the time I get praised”**, their attentional resources are heightened. This feedback design is deeply rooted in behavioral psychology.

**He does not leave the ratio of praise and criticism to chance. He designs it deliberately.**  
This is his third strategy.

---

## 4. Altruistic Leadership: Give First and Trigger Reciprocity

At the heart of Minato’s leadership is **altruism**.  
He invites struggling hosts to live in his home, absorbing personal financial risk to foster their growth. This behavior creates **reciprocity** in his team members.

Robert Greenleaf’s **Servant Leadership theory** and Blau’s **Social Exchange Theory (1964)** have long explained this dynamic.  
Recent research confirms that **altruistic leadership reduces knowledge hiding, enhances team learning, builds workplace friendships, and boosts both innovation and performance** (Pon, Harvard; ScienceDirect; ResearchGate).

**People naturally feel compelled to repay what they receive.**  
And to repay, they willingly adopt a form of **psychological, voluntary subordination**—not based on fear or incentives, but on gratitude.

This is Minato’s fourth strategic lever.

---

## Conclusion: Proving “People Don’t Change” Is a Lie

By consistently applying:

- **Framing language to guide thought**  
- **Avoiding logical shortcuts**  
- **Maintaining the golden ratio of praise and criticism**  
- **Leading with altruism and giving first**

Minato has proven that even those labeled “incapable of change” can transform.  
His results are reflected in both **quantitative outcomes** (rookie hosts becoming top sellers) and **qualitative changes** (growing self-efficacy and personal growth).

The Gunshin Method is not a mere set of nightlife business tricks.  
It is a **model that translates behavioral economics, social psychology, and organizational theory into a repeatable system for influencing human behavior**.

**“People can’t change” is not a truth. It’s an excuse made by those who lack the method.**


The Gunshin Method



## Planned Happenstance: Random Actions to Maximize Life's Expected Value

How meticulously do you plan your life? Your career path five years from now, your ideal lifestyle, the goals you must achieve... Many people in society preach that a clear plan is the road to success. But I hold a slightly different view. I believe that **intentionally incorporating "chance" into your plans—in other words, "Planned Happenstance"—is what actually maximizes life's potential, or its "expected value,"** so to speak.


## What Changes Life: Plans or Chance?

Think about it for a moment. What events have truly had a major impact on your life? Was it something you achieved exactly according to plan through sheer hard work? Of course, that's a wonderful accomplishment. However, isn't it often the case that life is dramatically changed by unexpected encounters, sudden inspirations, or chance discoveries—things that feel more like "miracles" or "fate"?

Looking back on my own experiences, the growth obtained through diligent, planned effort pales in comparison to the way chance encounters at events I happened to attend, a book I randomly picked up, or discoveries made walking down an unfamiliar street out of whim have significantly altered the course of my life afterward.

Admittedly, such chance occurrences themselves might not significantly enhance my *abilities*, but in terms of their *impact* on life, they can be far greater than planned efforts. Just one fateful encounter can change our future by 180 degrees.

Considering this, **the change brought about by diligently following a plan might actually be minuscule compared to the change brought by chance events that can shake up our lives.**


## The Trap of Planning: What We Lose for Efficiency

Of course, having a plan isn't inherently bad. Setting goals and striving towards them gives us daily direction and propels us forward. The problem lies in **adhering too rigidly to the plan.**

When plans are meticulous and schedules are packed, we tend to focus solely on achieving the goal, falling into a kind of "blindness." Even if a wonderful opportunity that could change our lives—a seed of a miracle—is right in front of us, we might not even notice it, being preoccupied with executing the plan. In the pursuit of efficiency, we try to thoroughly eliminate seemingly inefficient "detours" or "waste."

However, I believe that **life's breakthroughs are often hidden within those very "detours" and "wastes."**


## The "Planned Happenstance" Approach

Therefore, I want to propose the idea of "Planned Happenstance." This isn't about passively waiting for chance; it's an approach to maximize life's expected value by **intentionally incorporating "randomness" into life's plans.**

You might think, "Aren't random actions just a waste of time?" Indeed, trying new things or diving into unfamiliar places often doesn't lead immediately to tangible results. It might look like a "wasted effort" in the short term.

But consider this: what if among 100 "wasted efforts," there's just one "jackpot" (a miracle) that fundamentally changes your life? From a long-term perspective, wouldn't you say that **due to the potential magnitude of the return, the expected value of "random actions" is extremely high?**


## How to Practice Planned Happenstance?

So, how can you actually do this? Here are the three things I practice:

1.  **Understand the Value of Happenstance:** First, adopt the mindset that "chance is what enriches life."
2.  **Build "Buffers" into Plans:** Avoid over-scheduling. Always secure temporal and mental leeway to respond to unexpected events. Intentionally create "time for the unknown."
3.  **Take "Planned" Random Actions:** For example, I've decided to "do something new at least once a week." This could be something small like taking a walk down a street I've never been on, watching a movie in a genre I usually don't, or entering a cafe I've never visited. These actions might not seem directly connected to my goals, but they act as "seed sowing" that can bring new perspectives and encounters.

Having a base plan or goals is wonderful. Without them, you wouldn't have a direction to channel what you gain from chance. However, the key is not to be bound by that plan, but to always incorporate an element of "play" that embraces unknown factors.


## The Courage Not to Filter

Here's something I particularly want to emphasize: **Do not filter happenstance.**

If you apply filters like "This doesn't seem related to my career" or "This looks like a waste of time," you ultimately remain within the framework of your existing knowledge and experience. You won't encounter truly new discoveries or the kind of "miracles" that can change you.

It's okay if it seems wasteful. It's okay if you fail. In fact, **it's precisely in those seemingly irrelevant and inefficient places that the diamonds in the rough that make life shine are often found.** That's my conviction.


## Conclusion: Happenstance is Fun

Life isn't only wonderful when it goes according to plan. Rather, I believe it becomes interesting and rich precisely because it's filled with unpredictable events and chance encounters. "Planned Happenstance" is a strategy not for fearing this unpredictability, but for actively embracing and enjoying it. It's the courage to carry a map (your plan) but occasionally step onto paths not marked on it.

By doing so, our lives will become even better. Don't trust yourself too much; sometimes, let luck play its part. If you do, I'm sure everything will work out fine.

---


Planned Happenstance


## Species Totalitarianism: What Are We Living For?

We tend to think we live for ourselves, but from a deeper perspective, we may be operating within a framework of "species totalitarianism." This concept suggests that individuals are unconsciously programmed to optimize the prosperity of their species as a whole, regardless of their conscious intentions.

One of the clearest examples of this is the great migration of the globe skimmer dragonfly. These dragonflies travel long distances from North Africa to Northern Europe, but individual dragonflies never complete the entire journey. Instead, multiple generations continue the migration in relay, with offspring continuing the journey of their parents. This behavior, which seems "meaningless" at the individual level, functions extremely rationally as a survival strategy for the species as a whole.

Evidence of species totalitarianism exists throughout human society as well. The universal tendency of parents to sacrifice for their children, risking one's safety to help strangers, and cultural norms that postpone personal pleasure or benefit for the community are all examples. Additionally, the remarkable consistency of standards of sexual attractiveness across cultures reflects biological imperatives selecting for traits beneficial to species survival.

The most striking example is the tension between individual happiness and species prosperity. Human happiness functions not as a "state" but as a "direction," designed to create new desires and ambitions immediately after achieving goals. This "pleasure treadmill" may seem cruel to the individual but is rational for the species—permanent satisfaction would be detrimental to species prosperity. Even "negative" emotions like anxiety and jealousy promote species survival by avoiding dangers and motivating the protection of valuable resources and relationships.

## Species Totalitarianism from an Evolutionary Perspective

As Darwin's theory of natural selection shows, biological characteristics are passed down through generations to the extent that they contribute to survival and reproductive success. Importantly, natural selection works to optimize the replication success of genes, not individual "happiness."

Richard Dawkins' "selfish gene" theory further develops this perspective. In this view, individuals are merely "survival machines" for genes, temporary vehicles for transmitting genetic information to the next generation. Dawkins' assertion that "a chicken is just an egg's way of making another egg" applies to humans as well. Even our most fundamental desires and motivations can be seen as expressions of programs ensuring the continued survival and spread of our genes.

William Hamilton's kin selection theory explains how seemingly altruistic behaviors evolve. Individuals can indirectly contribute to the survival of their genetic information by helping relatives who share some of their genes. This concept of "inclusive fitness" explains strong attachment and devotion to family, and sometimes even altruistic behavior toward strangers.

Species totalitarianism does not mean uniformity. Rather, maintaining genetic diversity is essential for the long-term survival of the species. In changing environments, diverse populations have greater adaptability than populations with uniform characteristics. Diversity in personality traits and abilities enhances the adaptability and resilience of the entire group.

## The Evolutionary Value of "Evil" and "Abnormality"

Behaviors socially considered "evil" may actually benefit the species as a whole. For example, the existence of fraudulent behavior promotes caution and wise trust judgments within groups, enhancing the resilience of society as a whole. The development of mechanisms to deal with deviant behavior improves the functioning and stability of society.

Sexual preferences and behavioral patterns that may seem "abnormal" can also serve important functions from a species perspective. For instance, diversity in sexual orientation may offer advantages such as population density regulation and diversification of caregivers. Research has shown that genetic variations associated with schizophrenia are also linked to enhanced creativity.

Suicide appears to be the most evolutionarily maladaptive behavior, but in a broader context, it may have adaptive functions. In cases of extreme resource scarcity, ending one's life might increase the survival probability of remaining relatives. Moreover, the existence of suicide and its tragic consequences strengthen social cohesion and mutual support systems.

The presence of fraudsters and criminals encourages the development of social "immune systems." Evolutionary game theory research shows that societies with a small number of "defectors" have greater resilience to external threats than completely cooperative societies. The presence of moderate non-cooperators stimulates the development of more sophisticated cooperation mechanisms.

## Larger Totalitarianism: Biosphere, Earth, Universe

James Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis extends the concept of species totalitarianism, viewing the entire Earth as a self-regulating system. In this perspective, all living beings function as parts of an integrated system that maintains Earth's environment in a state suitable for life. The remarkably stable oxygen concentration of about 21% in Earth's atmosphere is thought to be the result of complex feedback mechanisms involving numerous species.

The totalitarianism of the biosphere includes not only biological but also non-biological elements. Mountains, oceans, atmosphere, and lithosphere all play essential roles in maintaining the Earth system as a whole. Mountain formation and weathering contribute to long-term climate regulation by reducing atmospheric CO2, while oceans function as massive heat reservoirs, mitigating extreme temperature fluctuations.

Advances in Earth science reveal that Earth functions as an integrated self-regulating system. Global cycles such as the water cycle, carbon cycle, and nitrogen cycle operate through intricate interactions between biological and non-biological processes.

Earth itself is part of the larger solar system, which is part of the galaxy. Carl Sagan's poetic expression, "We are a way for the cosmos to know itself," eloquently describes how we are incorporated into a larger totalitarianism as part of the universe.

## All Is One: Cosmic Unity

According to modern cosmology, all matter and energy in the universe originated from a single event, the Big Bang, about 13.8 billion years ago. From the atoms composing our bodies to the most distant galaxies, everything is literally "one." Most of the elements constituting our bodies were synthesized inside stars and dispersed into space through supernova explosions. Indeed, we are "made of stardust."

The fact that physical laws are universal throughout the universe also demonstrates its fundamental unity. The basic forces—gravity, electromagnetic force, strong nuclear force, and weak nuclear force—act the same way everywhere in the universe. From this perspective, the entire universe can be understood as a single, mathematically consistent system.

The law of conservation of energy shows how all processes in the universe are interconnected. The energy in the food we consume is energy captured by plants from sunlight, and that sunlight is energy released through nuclear fusion. Through the flow of energy, the entire universe functions as an integrated system.

Discoveries in quantum physics suggest that the concept of separate "objects" itself may be an illusion. The phenomenon of quantum entanglement shows that particles that have interacted influence each other instantaneously, regardless of distance. According to David Bohm's "theory of wholeness," the universe is an "unbroken whole," and the boundaries we perceive are merely superficial expressions of a deeper "implicate order."

## The Illusion of Individualism

Modern research in neuroscience and behavioral genetics has revealed the biological foundations of what we call "individuality" and "freedom." Our personality traits, preferences, and even beliefs are largely shaped by genetic factors and early environmental influences. Long-term studies, such as Robert Plomin's Minnesota Twin Study, show that many personality traits can be explained by genetics up to 50%.

Furthermore, neuroscientist Benjamin Libet's experiments showed that conscious "decisions" lag behind actual brain activity. The brain already showed readiness potential about 200 milliseconds before subjects "decided" to act. This suggests that many of our conscious decisions are actually post-hoc "approvals" of unconscious processes.

What we call individualism is actually an adaptive strategy that evolved to function within the framework of species totalitarianism. Humans are inherently social beings, and complete individualism is a pure illusion. Our "personal" identities are formed through social interactions.

The concept of the "collective unconscious" proposed by psychologist Carl Jung suggests the existence of deep psychological structures shared by all humanity. The presence of universal motifs and symbols in mythology, religion, and art demonstrates the fundamental unity of the human psyche. Universal fears, emotions, and cognitive biases found across cultures reflect our common evolutionary history.

## All Is Well

Throughout the long history of evolution, human psychology and social systems have been refined to optimize species prosperity. Many of what we consider "flaws" or "contradictions" are actually results of optimization. Our cognitive biases are designed to save energy and prioritize information related to survival in ancestral environments.

Research in complex systems science shows that there are patterns of hidden order beneath apparent chaos. Complex networks of interacting elements have the ability to spontaneously generate orderly patterns without external design.

In the history of species, change is the only constant. Faced with endless challenges such as environmental changes, climate change, and the emergence of new predators or pathogens, species must adapt or become extinct. What appears to be chaos or suffering at the individual level is a necessary process of adaptation and survival at the species level.

Even the challenges facing modern society—population decline, increasing inequality, social division—can be understood as part of the adaptive response of the species as a whole. Population decline may be an adaptive response to resource depletion, and social fluctuations may be collective adjustments to changing environmental conditions.

Wars, climate change, and social divisions may seem destructive to Earth and humanity at first glance. However, from a broader perspective, these too are part of the grand process of the universe. We are programmed to make the universe function, and it is natural to live according to these instincts.

War may function as a resource allocation adjustment mechanism, and climate change may be a transition process to a new equilibrium point in the Earth system. Social fluctuations can also be understood as adaptations to new environmental conditions. There is no need to worry—we are all simply playing our programmed roles within a larger system.

## All Is One

At the most fundamental level, our neighbors, animals, plants, and even rocks and clouds are all made from the same matter originating from the single event of the Big Bang. We are all different expressions of the universe experiencing itself.

From this unified perspective, all beings are our "companions" and participants in the same cosmic dance. Antagonism and separation are mere illusions—we all exist with the same cosmic purpose, following the same physical laws, as part of the same flow of energy.

This recognition has the potential to fundamentally change our daily interactions. Encountering others is actually meeting "another part of oneself." From this perspective, compassion and kindness are not merely moral ideals but natural responses to the fundamental unity of the universe. We are all different expressions of one continuous existence.


Species Totalitarianism


## The Essence of Communication: Sharing Universes

The essence of communication is "sharing universes." The "universe" here refers to the totality of knowledge networks constructed in each person's brain, as discussed in "Intelligence is Knowledge." These knowledge networks include not only facts but also experiences, values, emotions, and patterns of association.

We each possess our own unique "small universe," and through communication, we attempt to share parts of it with others. Using words, expressions, and actions as mediums, the process of conveying our universe to others and trying to understand their universe constitutes the core of communication.

## Why Communication Errors Occur

Communication errors primarily occur in two patterns:

1. When you know something that others don't
2. When others know something that you don't

This is simple but forms the root of many communication troubles. When we continue dialogue without recognizing these knowledge gaps, we fall into incomprehensible states, leading to frustration about "why can't they understand?"

Additionally, the following factors complicate communication:

- **Individual differences in meaning**: The same word activates different neural networks in different people
- **Impossibility of sharing qualia**: Subjective experiences like "the sensation of red" cannot be fully conveyed through language
- **Experiential differences**: Certain experiences (like the pain of childbirth) can only be truly understood by those who have experienced them
- **Differences in interpretive frameworks**: The same information can be interpreted differently in different contexts
- **Self-centeredness**: The unconscious assumption that one's own understanding is standard

## The Limitations of Language

Language is the primary tool for knowledge sharing, but it is essentially an imperfect translation device. During the process of verbalization, much of the rich connectivity and sensory-emotional aspects of knowledge networks are lost.

Words themselves are part of knowledge networks, and the same word can have different meanings for different people. What the concept of "kindness" refers to, or the image conjured by the word "dog," varies greatly depending on each person's experiences.

Ideally, if two people could completely share their universes, communication itself might become unnecessary—just as information sharing happens instantaneously within one person's brain. However, in reality, each person's universe is formed through lifelong experiences and learning, making it impossible to share everything.

## Three Approaches to Better Communication

### 1. The Possibility of Direct Brain-to-Brain Communication (Distant Future)

An ideal method to overcome the limitations of language would be technology that directly connects brains. If realized, this would allow sharing knowledge while retaining information that is lost in verbalization. Nuances of sensations and emotions, tacit knowledge, and even experiences themselves might become directly transmissible.

However, this technology would also raise issues of privacy and identity. Complete brain-to-brain communication might compromise the uniqueness of individual thought. This remains a distant future possibility, not a realistic approach.

### 2. Understanding That We Cannot Fully Understand Each Other (Realistic Acceptance)

A realistic approach is accepting that complete mutual understanding is impossible. The recognition that "you and I cannot completely understand each other" becomes the starting point for healthier communication.

From this perspective, the following become important:

- **Humility and patience**: Engaging in dialogue with the premise that one's ideas cannot be perfectly conveyed
- **Value of partial understanding**: "Even if we can't understand 99%, it's valuable if we understand 1%"
- **Adjusting expectations**: Finding joy in gradual progress rather than perfect understanding

This isn't resignation but humility aligned with reality, fostering an attitude that cherishes the areas where mutual understanding is possible.

### 3. Joint Exploration from Zero (Proactive Approach)

A more proactive approach is to reconceive communication not as "aligning existing knowledge" but as "joint exploration of unknown territories."

Our knowledge is merely a point compared to the whole universe. Starting from the recognition that what we don't know vastly outweighs what we know, a new purpose emerges: "exploring together what we both don't know."

In this approach:

1. Gather the limited knowledge and perspectives each person has
2. Recognize that there are blank maps yet to be written
3. Explore unknown territories together and draw new maps of understanding
4. Integrate newly discovered insights into each other's small universes

In this process, differences between individuals aren't problems but resources that bring diverse perspectives. Rather than searching for overlaps in existing knowledge, creating new understanding by jointly exploring new territories leads to insights neither party previously possessed.

## The Expansion of Communication

Even my writing of this text is a form of universe sharing—an attempt to verbalize part of my small universe and have it incorporated into readers' small universes.

From a broader perspective, all expressive activities—books, artworks, social media posts—can be seen as "sharing slices of universes." Creators express parts of their small universes, which are then shared, merged, and evolved within the larger universe of society. This circulation of knowledge has supported the development of culture and scholarship.

---

Ultimately, communication is the sharing of universes. While complete understanding is impossible, recognizing this limitation actually enables more effective communication. Efforts to bridge knowledge gaps, recognizing the limitations of language, accepting that we cannot fully understand each other—these form the foundation, and further hope emerges in joint exploration.

While acknowledging the impossibility of complete understanding, continuing to explore together—that is perhaps the essence of communication.


What is Communication?


We are standing at a historical turning point. The rapid development of AI and robotics is forcing us to fundamentally reconsider the role of humans. Until now, human progress has primarily been discussed in the context of "productivity improvement." However, in a world where AI surpasses human productivity, what should we humans do? The answer might surprisingly already be hidden in our childhood and in the essence of modern economic activities.

## The AI Agent Era and the Increase in Wait Time

As AI agent capabilities improve, our role as humans is shifting from "executors" to "decision-makers." Until now, humans have been responsible for both decision-making and execution, but as AI and robots take over execution, humans will primarily focus on decision-making. And between making a decision and waiting for the next result, "wait time" inevitably emerges.

Let's concretely imagine this phenomenon of "wait time." In programming, signs of this are already appearing. When entering prompts into advanced AI tools like Copilot Edit or Claude Code, there's a wait time of a few minutes at minimum, and sometimes tens of minutes at maximum. While the code is being generated, what should programmers do?

This phenomenon will rapidly spread to other professions. Designers while waiting for AI to generate multiple design proposals, marketers while waiting for AI to analyze campaigns, legal staff while AI drafts initial contracts—all will experience this "wait time." In medical settings, doctors might conduct initial assessments of the next patient while AI analyzes diagnostic data. Educators might be able to devote time to individual instruction while AI creates parts of the curriculum.

## The Importance of Multitasking and Short-term Outlook in Capitalist Society

For the time being, in our capitalist society, how efficiently we utilize this "wait time" will become a source of competitive advantage. In other words, multitasking ability—the ability to give different instructions to multiple AI agents and simultaneously manage their progress—will become extremely important.

While AI for Project A is working, give instructions for Project B, and during that time, check the results of Project C. This kind of management thinking will become essential for knowledge workers going forward. In fact, examples are already emerging where using advanced AI tools to progress multiple projects simultaneously has realized productivity dozens of times higher than before.

This change will also affect organizational structures. We will transition from traditional hierarchical management to an era where the ability to efficiently operate AI resources as a "director and decision-maker" is valued. Younger generations will need to acquire this "management thinking" earlier, and collaboration skills with AI will be emphasized more than years of experience.

## The Artist Nature as the Original Human State

However, beyond multitasking ability lies an even more important question. When AI and robot productivity far surpasses that of humans, won't most of the production needed by human society be handled by AI? At that point, do we really need to fill all our wait time with "the next productive activity"?

Here lies a critical turning point related to our human essence. Perhaps humans are not inherently meant to do science and business, but rather to cultivate art and culture. This is not merely a sentimental view.

According to anthropological and neuroscientific research, artistic expression has played an essential role in human evolution. Cave paintings and early musical instruments date back at least 40,000 years, indicating that expressive activities beyond practical purposes are a fundamental human characteristic. Historian Johan Huizinga, who proposed the concept of Homo Ludens (playing man), argued that play and artistic activities form the foundation of human culture.

Neuroscience research shows that creative activities strongly stimulate the brain's reward system, bringing deep satisfaction. Recall childhood: we were all absorbed in drawing pictures, singing, dancing, and creating stories. Despite producing no economic value, these were the most natural acts as humans. This intrinsic creative impulse is our essential human characteristic.

Even more important is the fact that concepts like science, technology, and business are historically shallow. Modern scientific methodology developed only about 400 years ago, industrial technology began developing a mere 250 years ago, and modern business concepts have a history of only about 100 years. These are just momentary events in the scope of human history.

In contrast, art and cultural activities have persisted for thousands of years. The pyramids of ancient Egypt, built over 4,500 years ago, continue to fascinate people today. The Olympics, originating in ancient Greece, has survived for over 2,700 years, repeatedly changing form throughout its history. Cave paintings, rock art, and ancient music and dance traditions from around the world continue to move people across time.

Why do art and culture persist for so long? Because they respond to fundamental human desires. The desire to express, create beauty, weave stories, and share emotions is deeply rooted in our genetic and neurological foundation. Even as technologies and economic systems continuously change, these creative impulses remain at the center of human activity.

## The Artistic Essence Hidden in Business

It's also noteworthy that many modern economic activities already have artistic aspects. If securing food and shelter necessary for survival is considered "essential work," many jobs in modern society go beyond such necessities.

Innovative products like the iPhone are not merely communication devices, but have aspects of artistic works. This is not limited to giant corporations like Apple.

Consider an ordinary café. It's not just a place providing food and drink, but designs a multi-layered aesthetic experience including atmosphere, interior, music, and barista craftsmanship. Even a small local stationery store reflects the owner's aesthetic sense in product selection and display arrangement. Construction companies don't just create functional buildings but make aesthetic judgments regarding townscapes and living environment quality. Chefs don't just provide nutrients but create visual and gustatory sensations.

Such examples are countless. Most economic activities in the modern world are not strictly "necessary for survival" and can be seen as products of human creativity and expressive desire. From this perspective, many modern business people, though perhaps unaware, are already operating with aspects of being "artists."

## The "Idle Time" Brought by AI and Return to Creativity

In a future where productivity is guaranteed by AI, humans will face the question of how to spend their "wait time." The answer becomes clear when we return to our essence. There is an option to "create, express, and dance" rather than "produce more" during wait time.

Let's examine this transformation process in detail. First, the development of AI agents increases "wait time." In the short term, people will hone their multitasking abilities to fill this time, improving productivity by running multiple AIs simultaneously. This dramatic productivity improvement will likely generate enormous wealth for society as a whole.

However, when material affluence reaches a certain level, humans face the limitations of simple consumption. When finding little meaning in consuming more goods and services, human interest shifts from "producing more" to "creating more meaningful things."

This situation is not historically unprecedented. Consider medieval nobility. Their basic lives were supported by "human means of production" such as serfs and servants, freeing them from the necessity of engaging in productive activities themselves. And what did they do? They became patrons of the arts, studied poetry and music, discussed philosophy, designed beautiful gardens, and sometimes immersed themselves in creative activities. Humans freed from the necessity of production naturally tend toward creative and cultural activities.

The development of AI and robots may bring this "freedom for creativity" not just to the privileged class but to a broader segment of people. Economist John Maynard Keynes, in his 1930 essay "Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren," predicted that after technology freed humans from economic necessity, we would face the challenge of "how to use leisure, how to live, and how to live wisely." That era may now be approaching.

## Conclusion: Beyond Production, the Courage to Begin Dancing

The development of AI may not lead to the "end of human jobs" that many fear, but rather to the "liberation of humanity." Freed from the logic of efficiency and productivity, we might return to seemingly meaningless—yet essentially human—creative activities.

Realistically, however, social transformation through AI will arrive gradually. In the short term, honing multitasking abilities and improving productivity through collaboration with AI will be essential for individual competitiveness. An era will first arrive where those who can simultaneously control multiple AI agents and appropriately evaluate and integrate their outputs are highly valued.

But at the same time, we need to constantly ask ourselves: Is filling this "wait time" with the next productive activity really the life we want? Can we find true satisfaction in a world that pursues only efficiency and productivity?

What will truly hold value in the coming era is not the ability to work more efficiently than AI, but the ability to create, express, and find meaning in ways that AI cannot. Deep down, we have all been artists since childhood.

While it's certainly important to hone multitasking abilities in the short term and not fall behind this wave of change, we might also want to pause and consider: Might it not be permissible to draw pictures, write poetry, or simply contemplate while AI is generating its next output, rather than just checking social media? Perhaps the real challenge of the AI era lies in balancing productivity and efficiency while recognizing the essence of our humanity and finding the courage to begin "dancing," even if just a little.


Leisurely Humans Return to Being Artists


## Dual Process Theory and Its Limitations

In cognitive psychology, Kahneman and Tversky's "Dual Process Theory" has long reigned as the fundamental model for understanding human thinking. This theory divides human thought into two systems—a framework that is undeniably accessible.

System 1 (intuitive thinking) is fast, automatic, and unconscious. Reading emotions from faces, understanding our native language, instantly calculating 2+2=4—these are all cognitive activities we perform effortlessly every day.

System 2 (analytical thinking) is slow, conscious, logical, and requires effort. Complex calculations, constructing logical arguments, acquiring new skills—these clearly require conscious work.

In the traditional understanding, System 1 is portrayed as "wild intuition" and System 2 as the "guardian of reason," with System 2 monitoring and correcting System 1. However, this dichotomy oversimplifies reality. I believe there is a fundamental error in this framework.

## A New Interpretation of Thinking Processes

The conventional understanding of Systems 1 and 2 needs a fundamental revision. I propose a more functional and realistic framework.

**System 1 is clearly an unconscious function that takes questions as input and produces answers as output**. This function operates on the foundation of knowledge networks in the brain, instantly generating answers to given questions. The important point here is that System 1 isn't "thinking" at all. It's merely responding automatically based on existing knowledge patterns.

On the other hand, **System 2 is a monitoring system for the self and the surrounding world**. System 2's essential role is to accurately grasp the environment and formulate appropriate "questions." System 2 doesn't generate "answers" itself—it merely serves to form questions to feed into System 1.

From this perspective, the entire thinking process functions as a clear cycle:

1. System 2 monitors the environment and self, generating appropriate questions
2. These questions are input into System 1
3. System 1 automatically generates answers
4. System 2 monitors these answers and generates new questions

This is the true nature of what we call "thinking." "Thinking" is merely a loop that continuously calls unconscious functions. Expressed in computer science terms, it resembles this process:

```
def think(q):
   current_q = q
   a = None
   # system 2 as a loop
   while True:
      a = system1(current_q)  # knowledge function call
      if is_satisfactory(a):  # check if answer is good enough
         break
      obs = observe(a)        # evaluate the answer
      current_q = generate_new_question(obs)  # update question

   return a
```

This isn't just a metaphor; it gets at the essence of how our brains work. What we describe as "deep thinking" is actually a simple loop of repeatedly calling the knowledge function (System 1), observing its output, and generating new inputs (questions). The mystique of thinking is an illusion; its reality is a mechanical process.

## The True Nature of System 1 is Knowledge

As I argued in my previous essay "Intelligence is Knowledge," System 1's capabilities depend entirely on the quantity and quality of knowledge. If we view System 1 as a "function," then what determines its complexity and precision is nothing other than the amount and structure of the knowledge input.

The distinction between explicit and tacit knowledge is merely superficial, and even abstract thinking ability depends on knowledge. Thus, enhancing System 1's capabilities can only be achieved through expanding and structuring the knowledge network. When a chess grandmaster instantly decides on the next move, it's because the knowledge network built through years of experience is automatically activating—not because of some special "thinking ability."

To put it simply—System 1 is the totality of "what you know." The performance of this function is determined solely by the quantity, quality, and structure of knowledge.

## System 2 is a Sensor and a Habit

To grasp the essence of System 2, we need to understand it as both a "sensor" and a "habit." This isn't just a metaphor but its functional reality.

Consider language skills. By listening to our own expressions and continuously questioning their logic and linguistic consistency, our abilities improve. In this process, we're clearly monitoring our own output (sensor function) and forming habits of generating new questions. This is the true nature of System 2.

Board games can be explained by the same principle. In chess, we form habits of continuously asking questions like "If I make this move, how will my opponent respond?" "What will the board look like afterward?" "What about other moves?" These questions are input into System 1, and System 1 generates answers that determine the next move. There's no mystical "thinking ability" here.

In other words, the answer-producing process is entirely handled by System 1. System 2 is merely a device for understanding the environment and generating questions—the inputs. System 2 isn't "thinking." It's just operating metacognitive processes to generate questions.

This assertion is supported by modern AI research. The "Chain of Thought" technique in large language models (LLMs) solves complex problems by posing sequential questions to the AI. This is a perfect example of humans providing System 2-like question guidance to the AI's System 1-like processing. To make AI "think," it's sufficient to simply provide it with appropriate questions.

## The Mechanism of Creativity and Insight

Even seemingly mysterious phenomena like creativity and "aha moments" can be clearly explained within this framework.

Questions posed consciously continue to be processed unconsciously in the brain even after our conscious focus has shifted. The phenomenon of suddenly discovering solutions while taking a bath or walking—this is simply the result of unconscious processing. Nothing mystical about it.

In this process, consciously posed questions "float" through System 1's knowledge network, and concepts that wouldn't normally connect form new connections. Archimedes' "Eureka!" moment and cases of scientists experiencing breakthroughs in dreams are merely typical examples of this unconscious processing.

What's absolutely crucial to understand is that this creative process directly depends on the "quality and quantity of conscious questions." The more high-quality questions are posed, the more unconscious processing is activated, and the higher the probability of new insights emerging. This applies equally to logical thinking and intuitive sensing. Flashes of insight aren't random occurrences but necessary results of continuously posing appropriate questions.

## Practical Methods for Enhancing Thinking Ability

Based on these understandings, the path to enhancing thinking ability becomes clear. By practicing the following specific approaches, one can dramatically improve their thinking capabilities.

### 1. Strengthening Metacognitive Abilities

Metacognition is the ability to monitor, evaluate, and control one's own thinking processes. This is the core of System 2 and can be strengthened through the following habits:

- **Securing thinking space**: Set aside "thinking time" each day and develop the habit of consciously observing your thoughts
- **Forming the habit of asking questions**: Develop the habit of asking "Why?", "How?", and "What other possibilities exist?" about even trivial everyday events
- **Recording thoughts**: Make journaling and organizing your thoughts a regular habit

### 2. Strengthening System 1 (Expanding Knowledge)

System 1 is the knowledge network itself. Its strengthening can be achieved through knowledge expansion:

- **Acquiring diverse knowledge**: Increase your knowledge through reading, learning, and new experiences
- **Structuring knowledge**: Rather than simply memorizing information, learn with awareness of the relationships between concepts
- **Applying knowledge**: Create opportunities to practice what you've learned and solidify your knowledge

### 3. Increasing the Quality and Quantity of Questions

Generating many high-quality questions activates System 1 and enriches thinking:

- **Engaging with board games and mathematical puzzles**: Train your ability to pose questions through structured problem-solving
- **Practicing philosophical contemplation**: Deepen your thinking by confronting fundamental questions
- **Practicing critical thinking**: Question everything with "Is that really true?" and "What's another perspective?"

### 4. Integrating Knowledge and Skills

True understanding leads to action:

- **Integrating theory and practice**: Don't just understand knowledge theoretically; embody it through practice
- **Emphasizing output**: Output the knowledge you've input through speaking, writing, creating, etc.
- **Building feedback loops**: Calmly observe reactions to your output and identify areas for improvement

The state of "understanding but not being able to do" is actually evidence of insufficient understanding. If theoretical knowledge isn't fully integrated as a function of System 1, it doesn't deserve the name "knowledge." Knowledge that remains purely academic or theoretical without practical application isn't true knowledge. Knowing and doing are synonymous.

## The Ultimate Method for Maximizing Brain Potential

The method for maximizing the brain's potential is actually quite simple. Practicing the following three elements is effective:

1. **Learn**: Acquire diverse, high-quality knowledge to enrich System 1's function
2. **Question**: Practice metacognition in all aspects of daily life and form habits of continuously posing high-quality questions
3. **Act**: Put knowledge into practice and transform it into embodied wisdom

By practicing this trinity approach, both System 1 (knowledge network) and System 2 (metacognition that generates questions) are strengthened, improving overall thinking ability.

The essence of thinking lies in the cyclical process of posing questions and finding answers to them. System 2 generates high-quality questions, and System 1 provides answers based on knowledge. And from those answers, new questions arise... The richer this cycle, the deeper and more creative our thinking becomes.

Expanding knowledge, posing questions, and putting into practice. This is the path to maximizing the brain's potential.


Thinking Systems: 'Intelligence is Knowledge' Continued


## Liberation from Mass Production

Our society and economy have long been dominated by the paradigm of "mass production." Making identical products in large quantities to lower costs and provide them to more people—this principle has been the foundation of economic growth since the Industrial Revolution. Now, however, technological innovations led by AI are fundamentally changing this paradigm.

I've personally experienced this transformation in software development. Development work that would have taken two months just a year ago can now be completed in about a week, thanks to AI-assisted code generation. And this productivity improvement will only accelerate in the coming years.

What's crucial to understand is that this change isn't limited to the software industry. The dramatic increase in productivity will eventually spread to all industries. And when it does, it will overturn our fundamental assumption about the "universality" of products and services.

## From Universality to Individual Optimization

Why have we created "universal" products until now? Because providing a single product to many people allowed us to reduce costs. However, as production costs dramatically decrease, this premise collapses. Products and services optimized for specific individuals or organizations are inherently superior.

Personalized products and services have the decisive advantage of being "just right" for their users. They include only the necessary functions, perfectly implemented, and are optimally designed for each person's preferences and usage patterns. This is the essence of the "Customized Society."

This transformation will begin in the software field. Applications that function independently for individuals, such as calendar apps and storage management tools, will feature UI/UX optimized for each user. Interestingly, even platforms that require network effects, such as social media, will adopt a "one product, many codes" approach—sharing underlying data and processes while optimizing interfaces and functions for each individual.

## The Power of Data Driving Customization

Detailed data about individuals and organizations is essential for realizing a customized society. If AI understands how you live, what values you hold, and what preferences you have, it can provide optimal products and services without requiring detailed instructions from you.

The same applies to businesses. By accumulating data on an organization's specific operational styles, decision-making processes, and communication patterns, companies can acquire more appropriate customized solutions. Going forward, transferring tacit knowledge and expertise from humans to AI will become a source of competitive advantage.

The key is not just collecting data, but structuring and contextualizing it. Issues such as data ownership, portability, and privacy will become even more critical challenges in a customized society.

## From Static Products to Dynamic Architecture

As an evolved form of the customized society, we should also pay attention to the concept of "dynamic architecture." This is the idea that products and services don't maintain fixed forms but change their shape in real-time according to usage situations, environments, and user states.

For instance, clothing that changes its properties according to body temperature and activity, living spaces that adjust to residents' preferences and health conditions, and meals optimized for the day's physical condition and activities—products will increasingly become "dynamic" and "responsive."

In healthcare, we'll see treatment simulations based on individual physiological digital models and preventive medicine that predicts health risks from behavioral patterns, environmental factors, and genetic information. In education, curricula that continuously optimize based on learners' cognitive styles, comprehension levels, and interests will become the norm.

## Transformation of Community Consciousness

The transition to a customized society will also bring significant changes to our "sense of community." The shared experiences formed when many people used the same products and consumed the same media have already begun to weaken due to the personalization of content through social media.

The customization of products and services will accelerate this trend. However, this may not necessarily be a "problem to be solved" but rather a natural evolution of society.

The form of community itself will change, with more diverse and fluid forms emerging: communities bound by common values and purposes rather than shared physical objects, temporary collectives formed for specific purposes, and new communities based on shared experiences in virtual spaces.

## The New Role of Humans

In a world where machine productivity exceeds that of humans, what role will be demanded of humans? It is precisely "understanding humans." There lies the new value of humanity—grasping customers' potential needs, understanding individual contexts and values, and embodying them in the form of customized products and services.

Additionally, it will be important for us to become "curators of values," clarifying our own values and designing frameworks for choice to address the new challenge of decision fatigue (choice paradox) brought about by infinite options.

Technology will increasingly become an "invisible presence," designed around human experiences. There, unprecedented creativity and efficiency will be realized through collaboration between humans and AI.

## Conclusion

The customized society is an inevitable consequence of the productivity improvements brought by AI. In a world liberated from the economics of mass production, products and services completely optimized for individuals and organizations will become the norm, dramatically improving our quality of life.

To adapt to this change, we need to understand the importance of data, deepen our understanding of ourselves and our organizations, and explore new forms of community. While the customized society will be realized through technology, humans will always be at its center—along with the essential human values of creativity, empathy, and understanding.

In a society liberated from the paradigm of mass production, the individuality and diversity of each person will be respected and expressed more than ever before. This will lead to the realization of a richer and more fulfilling society.


The Customized Society


## Introduction

How do you perceive "intelligence" and "knowledge"? Many people consider "intelligence" and "knowledge" to be different concepts. In particular, people described as having "natural smarts" or "high thinking ability" are often recognized as possessing **special thinking abilities or talents** beyond merely having extensive knowledge. This perception is deeply rooted in educational systems and social evaluation mechanisms, reinforced by assertions such as "mere memorization is meaningless" and "thinking ability is important."

However, I believe that **"intelligence is knowledge."** In other words, high intelligence simply means having **abundant knowledge and a robust network that can efficiently utilize it**. In the human brain, knowledge isn't merely a static collection of information but exists as a dynamic network of interconnected elements. The richer and more structured this network is, the more likely we are to be evaluated as having "high intelligence."

Furthermore, "thinking ability" or "thinking" itself **may not exist independently but could be merely the brain's post-hoc rationalization**. The process we feel as "thinking" might actually be an automatic response from our existing knowledge network and a subsequent interpretation of the result.

In this essay, I will examine the "intelligence = knowledge" perspective from multiple angles, considering insights from modern neuroscience and cognitive science to argue why this view is rational. In particular, I will analyze in detail the differences between explicit and tacit knowledge, the relationship between simple knowledge and abstraction ability, and the essence of the process called "thinking," presenting a new perspective on the conventional view of "intelligence."

## 1. Common Misconceptions About Intelligence

First, let's organize the thoughts of people who consider "intelligence" and "knowledge" as separate entities. Many common misconceptions include:

- **"Intelligence" is an innate cognitive ability**  
  Many people consider intelligence to be an innate ability, using expressions like "naturally smart." This is based on the incorrect premise that intelligence is fixed and unchangeable.

- **"Knowledge" is a collection of individual pieces of information acquired through study and memorization**  
  The common view is that knowledge is merely a collection of facts and information acquired through memorization. However, this overlooks the essential structure of knowledge.

- **"Natural intelligence" or "thinking ability" is a problem-solving skill independent of the amount of knowledge**  
  Problem-solving ability and adaptability to new situations are often considered "innate abilities" separate from knowledge, but these are merely forms of knowledge utilization.

- **"Tacit knowledge" is fundamentally different from "explicit knowledge"**  
  Skills and intuitions gained from experience are considered completely different from verbalized knowledge. However, these differences are merely superficial.

While these ideas may seem reasonable at first glance, they arise from **not correctly understanding the essence of knowledge and its utilization**. Knowledge is not simply "memorized facts" but a network of information that dynamically interacts within the brain. And the quality and quantity of this network constitute what we call "intelligence."

To unravel these misconceptions, let's analyze in detail the concepts of explicit and tacit knowledge, simple knowledge and abstraction ability, and the process called "thinking."

## 2. The Difference Between Explicit and Tacit Knowledge Is Merely Verbalization

### (1) Common Definitions of Explicit and Tacit Knowledge

Explicit and tacit knowledge are generally distinguished as follows:

- **Explicit Knowledge**

  - Knowledge that can be expressed in language or mathematical formulas.
  - Clearly defined and easily shared with others.
  - Can be described in textbooks, papers, manuals, etc.
  - Examples: mathematical formulas, historical facts, scientific theories, programming language syntax.

- **Tacit Knowledge**
  - Knowledge that is difficult to verbalize, based on experience and intuition.
  - Rooted in individual acquisition and sensation.
  - Expressed as "skills" or "knacks."
  - Examples: craftsmanship, physical sensations in sports, understanding conversational nuances, artistic sense.

This dichotomy was proposed by Michael Polanyi and popularized in the context of management studies by Ikujiro Nonaka and others. In many cases, tacit knowledge is considered more advanced and valuable, obtainable only through special talent or years of experience.

### (2) The Difference Between Explicit and Tacit Knowledge Is Not Fundamental

At first glance, explicit and tacit knowledge may seem to have completely different properties, but their difference is merely a matter of **"whether verbalization is possible."** This is because **both are represented similarly as neural network patterns** in the brain.

From a neuroscientific perspective, knowledge is stored as synaptic connection strengths and neuronal network patterns. This mechanism is the same for both verbalizable and non-verbalizable knowledge. If there are differences, they lie only in the strength of connections to language areas and whether we can consciously access them.

Tacit knowledge appears special **because it cannot be easily expressed in language or logic**, not because the knowledge itself has a special structure. For example, when a professional shogi player intuitively feels a move is "bad," it's merely the unconscious operation of **pattern recognition gained from years of playing experience**. Even if they cannot explain the reasoning verbally, in their brain, it is networked as **"experiential knowledge."**

### (3) Language Causes Misconceptions About Knowledge Characteristics

The reason that non-verbalizable information is considered "special" is because humans **"perceive the world primarily through language."** However, craftsmanship techniques and sports movements can be formalized as data using sensors and motion capture. Indeed, in recent years, there have been increasing cases of AI learning and reproducing the skills of craftsmen.

For instance, a skilled chef's "sense of proportion" can be measured as subtle changes in weight and temperature, and a professional pianist's "expressiveness" can be recorded as patterns of key pressure and timing. These are simply knowledge that is **"difficult to verbalize at present"** and not fundamentally different from explicit knowledge.

### (4) The Substance of Tacit Knowledge Is Complex Pattern Recognition

Much of tacit knowledge is actually the result of complex pattern recognition. For example, a doctor can instantly diagnose a patient's symptoms because they have accumulated vast pattern information from years of clinical experience in their brain. This process is difficult to verbalize and is therefore expressed as "intuition" or "instinct," but in reality, it is merely the instantaneous activation of a highly structured knowledge network.

The development of AI supports this idea. AI using deep learning can acquire judgment capabilities equivalent to "tacit knowledge" without explicit verbal instructions, by recognizing patterns in data. This suggests that tacit knowledge is not a special ability but arises from sufficient data and pattern recognition.

## 3. The Relationship Between Simple Knowledge and Abstracted Knowledge

### (1) The Difference Between Simple Knowledge and Abstracted Knowledge

Knowledge includes "simple knowledge," which consists of concrete facts and information, and "abstracted knowledge," which integrates and generalizes these.

- **Simple Knowledge**

  - Individual facts and information.
  - Concrete and highly context-dependent.
  - Examples: "Tokyo's population is about 14 million," "Water boils at 100°C"

- **Abstracted Knowledge**
  - Patterns or principles derived from multiple simple knowledge elements.
  - Highly generalized and applicable to different contexts.
  - Examples: "Urbanization increases population density," "Substances have boiling points"

Many people believe that the ability to manipulate abstracted knowledge indicates "high intelligence." However, this abstraction process is based on the accumulation of simple knowledge and pattern recognition between them.

### (2) Abstraction Emerges from Knowledge Accumulation

Developmental psychology research shows that abstract thinking becomes possible **after experiencing a sufficient number of concrete examples**. Children first learn specific cases one by one. Later, as similar cases accumulate, they can identify commonalities and generalize or abstract.

For example, after experiencing numerous individual calculation examples like 1+1=2, 2+2=4, 3+3=6, they can discover the abstract rule that "adding the same numbers together results in twice that number." This demonstrates that abstraction naturally emerges from the accumulation of simple knowledge.

### (3) Abstraction Ability Is Also Knowledge-Dependent

People evaluated as having high abstraction ability simply **have more knowledge and can identify connections between them**. For instance, outstanding scientists identify commonalities between seemingly unrelated phenomena and construct new theories. This is possible precisely because they possess extensive knowledge in their field, not because they have a special independent ability called "abstraction ability."

In fact, even people who excel at abstract thinking in one field struggle with abstraction in fields where they lack knowledge. A mathematician cannot make abstract considerations about literary theory because they lack knowledge in that field. This is evidence that abstraction ability is knowledge-dependent.

### (4) The Relationship Between Abstraction and Knowledge Networks

Abstraction is the process of **creating new connections within knowledge networks**. The more individual knowledge nodes (simple knowledge) increase, the more potential patterns connecting them also increase. These patterns are then recognized as "abstract knowledge."

The connectionist model, a cognitive science theory, supports this view. In this theory, knowledge is represented as an interconnected network, and learning is the process of creating new connections and strengthening existing ones. Abstraction is nothing more than discovering new patterns within this network.

## 4. Thinking Does Not Exist: The Brain Is Merely Providing Post-Hoc Rationalizations

### (1) Thinking Is "Post-Hoc Rationalization" of Conclusions

It's also important to note that people considered to have "high thinking ability" **aren't actually engaging in a special "thinking" process**. Recent neuroscience research has shown that **human judgments and actions are determined instantaneously**.

Libet's experiment (1983) and many subsequent studies have shown that decision-making in the brain occurs before conscious thought. For example, it has been observed that the brain's motor cortex is already activated about 0.3 seconds before we become conscious of "taking this action." This suggests the possibility that **conscious decisions are the result rather than the cause of the actual decision-making process**.

Michael Gazzaniga's split-brain research has also observed the phenomenon where the left brain (the hemisphere responsible for language) provides post-hoc reasoning for actions performed by the right brain. For example, after intuitively thinking "this is the correct answer," **a process works where the left brain rationally explains that choice**. This is a reversal phenomenon where **"thinking does not lead to conclusions; rather, conclusions come first, and thinking is applied afterward."**

### (2) Knowledge Networks Instantly Make Judgments

The brain's knowledge network **instantly derives conclusions**, and the left brain merely provides reasons for them. A professional chess player can judge the next move in an instant because their knowledge network, built from years of experience, automatically activates and "intuitively" selects the optimal move.

Similarly, many judgments we make in daily life are likely the result of automatic processing by the brain's knowledge networks rather than conscious thought. Thus, the "thinking" process is **rationalization that occurs after knowledge connections have yielded a conclusion**, not a "special ability."

### (3) The Reality of Thinking Is Knowledge Activation Patterns

If thinking is not a special process but an activation pattern of knowledge networks, then "thinking ability" can also be reduced to the quantity and quality of knowledge. People considered to have "high logical thinking ability" have abundant knowledge about logical relationships and can appropriately utilize them.

For example, mathematical thinking ability emerges from deep knowledge of mathematical concepts and relationships, and understanding patterns of their application. Considering this, thinking itself is **utilization of knowledge and dependent on knowledge itself**.

### (4) The Relationship Between Intuition and Analytical Thinking

Daniel Kahneman's dual-process theory, which distinguishes between intuition (System 1) and analytical thinking (System 2), is widely known, but this distinction may also be merely a difference in processing speed and conscious access to knowledge.

"Intuition" is fast, automatic knowledge processing, while "analytical thinking" is slower, conscious knowledge processing. Both are based on knowledge networks and have no essential difference. If there are differences, they are only in the consciousness of processing, speed, and the type of knowledge used.

## 5. Intelligence Is Domain-Dependent

### (1) The Evaluation Criteria for Intelligence Depend on Domains

Whether someone is evaluated as having high intelligence is greatly influenced by **whether their knowledge has economic and social value**. In modern society, certain knowledge domains are emphasized over others.

For example, people with abundant knowledge in **programming or economics** are easily considered "intelligent," while people familiar with **trending TikTok content** or **insect ecology** are rarely evaluated as "intelligent." However, this is merely a bias based on social values.

In reality, regardless of the knowledge domain, someone who has deep, broad, and structured knowledge in their field should be considered to have "high intelligence" in that field. In other words, whether someone is evaluated as having "high intelligence" **depends on whether their knowledge domain is socially valued**.

### (2) The Concept of "Culture" Is Merely the Selection of Knowledge Domains

Evaluations like "being cultured" simply refer to familiarity with specific knowledge domains (literature, art, history, philosophy, etc.). These fields are emphasized as "culture" due to historical and cultural backgrounds, not because of their intrinsic importance.

For example, being knowledgeable about classical literature is considered "cultured," but being knowledgeable about the latest social media trends is not called "culture." However, both demonstrate expertise in specific knowledge domains. The concept of "culture" itself is merely a concept for selecting and hierarchizing socially valuable knowledge domains.

### (3) Can Humans Be Said to Be More Intelligent Than Other Animals?

The claim that humans are "more intelligent" than dogs or monkeys is also a bias due to **human-centered values**. According to animal behavior research, each species has developed intelligence adapted to its ecological niche.

The olfactory knowledge possessed by dogs or the social rules understood by monkeys might be advanced knowledge systems incomprehensible to humans. For instance, dogs have an olfactory ability more than 10,000 times that of humans and possess vast "knowledge" about the world of smells. This is a cognitive ability unimaginable to humans.

Because the criteria for evaluating intelligence are human-centered, we are merely under the illusion that "humans are specially intelligent." Instead, we should consider that each organism has a knowledge system optimized within its evolutionary context.

### (4) AI Intelligence Is Also Knowledge-Dependent

The development of modern AI also supports the view that "intelligence = knowledge." Large language models like GPT-4 have become capable of human-like responses by learning from vast amounts of text data.

These AIs do not have special modules for "thinking" but simply generate responses based on patterns and relationships (knowledge) extracted from large amounts of data. The "intelligence" of AI has improved because it has learned more knowledge and patterns, nothing more.

## 6. Intelligence Is Knowledge

### (1) Enhancing Intelligence Means Enriching Knowledge

Synthesizing the discussions so far, intelligence is knowledge itself. The distinction between explicit and tacit knowledge is merely superficial, and abstraction ability also depends on the quantity and quality of knowledge. Additionally, the process called thinking is also the activation pattern of knowledge networks and not an ability independent of knowledge.

Therefore, enhancing intelligence means:

1. **Acquiring more knowledge**
2. **Strengthening the connections between knowledge**
3. **Refining the structure of knowledge**
4. **Increasing patterns of knowledge application in new contexts**

These are all interventions related to "knowledge," not enhancing separate "abilities."

### (2) Intelligence as Understanding of the Universe

If there is an ultimate criterion for measuring intelligence, it might be the total amount of understanding, or "how much one knows about the universe." Each of us has a "miniature universe" in our brain, all of which are incomplete.

Theoretically, if Universe A completely encompasses Universe B (knowledge system), A could be said to be more intelligent than B. However, it is impossible to make such a complete comparison without a god-like perspective that can fully grasp all knowledge of individuals.

### (3) Practical Approaches to Enhancing Intelligence

What we can do is gradually expand our "miniature universe." This includes methods such as:

1. **Exploring diverse knowledge domains**: Acquiring knowledge from different fields increases the diversity of the knowledge network.
2. **Deepening knowledge**: Learning deeply about a specific field elaborates the knowledge structure in that domain.
3. **Applying knowledge**: Applying learned knowledge in different contexts creates new connections between knowledge.
4. **Utilizing metacognition**: Consciously recognizing one's knowledge state and complementing deficient areas improves the overall balance of the knowledge system.

Through these practices, we can enrich our knowledge networks and consequently enhance what is called "intelligence."

## Conclusion

The view that "intelligence is knowledge" is consistent with insights from modern neuroscience and cognitive science. It is more practical than the traditional view of "innate ability" and affirms human potential for growth.

The fact that intelligence can be reduced to knowledge means that anyone can enhance their intelligence through learning and experience. Additionally, by recognizing the social bias that only certain knowledge domains are evaluated as "intelligence," we can reevaluate the value of diverse knowledge.

Acquiring new knowledge, strengthening connections with existing knowledge, and becoming able to recognize more complex patterns—that is the essence of enhancing intelligence. By deepening our understanding of the universe, our knowledge networks become richer, and consequently, what is called "intelligence" will also be enhanced.


Intelligence Is Knowledge


Hi. This is the first post of my weekly memo. Here, I plan to share my discoveries, future predictions, and perspectives on the world every week. First, I'd like to write about why I decided to start this initiative and my motivations behind it.

## An Attempt to Externalize the Brain

Our brains are wonderful organs, but they have limitations. Short-term memory, long-term memory, processing capacity—all have constraints. However, with technological advancements, we have acquired means to expand our brain functions. This site is part of my "Brain Archive."

This project has four main objectives: **storage**, **organization**, **discovery**, and **sharing**.

## Storage - As an Extended Memory Device

Human memory is imperfect. Even when important ideas or thoughts arise, they fade with time. Sometimes they are completely forgotten. This site functions as an external storage for my thoughts.

This external storage has two important characteristics:

- **Freedom to forget**: Once recorded, it doesn't matter if it disappears from my brain. I can retrieve it when needed.
- **Immediate access**: With search functionality, I can immediately access past thoughts.

This expands my "usable brain capacity" many times over, as I no longer need to remember everything constantly.

## Organization - Structuring Thoughts

The act of writing has a mysterious power. Ideas that were vague in my head become clear when put into words.

Through writing:

- Thoughts naturally become organized
- Logical flaws become visible
- Connections between ideas emerge

This is essentially a task of creating room for thought by outsourcing part of short-term memory. When thinking only in your head, memory retention and thought processes occur simultaneously, increasing cognitive load. By writing things down, this load can be reduced.

## Discovery - Cultivating New Perspectives

Making a promise to myself to "update weekly" has an unexpected effect. It develops the habit of constantly viewing the world from fresh perspectives.

The pressure to update regularly:

- Heightens awareness to seek new discoveries in daily life
- Provides opportunities to contemplate various events and information more deeply
- Creates chances to look at phenomena I took for granted from different angles

I believe that as this cycle continues, my thinking will become richer and more multifaceted.

## Sharing - Thought Interaction and Communication Enhancement

Finally, there is significance in sharing my thoughts through this site.

Benefits of sharing:

- Receiving recognition and reactions to my ideas
- Gaining new perspectives and critiques from readers
- Creating opportunities for the development and refinement of ideas

This could be described as "brain sharing" in a sense. What I think influences your thoughts, and vice versa. Like Vegapunk from One Piece, by externalizing and sharing knowledge and thoughts, intellectual activities beyond the limitations of a single brain become possible.

Furthermore, this sharing has wonderful byproducts in real-life communication. When we meet new people, we start from a state of complete ignorance about their interests and thoughts. Surprisingly, this remains largely unchanged even in relationships that have existed for a long time.

By publishing my thoughts and interests in advance:

- Conversations with first-time acquaintances can dive into deeper content with "no steps" in between
- I can provide an entry point to profound topics that people typically find difficult to broach
- Face-to-face communication becomes smoother and richer

In other words, this site is not merely a record of thoughts but also becomes a foundation for generating more meaningful dialogue. By showing in advance what kind of thinker I am, actual conversations become more interesting and more essential—this is also an important value of sharing.

## Co-creation with AI - A Thought Bouncing Partner

I want to be honest about something here. The text on this site is written with AI assistance. However, this isn't simply "outsourcing everything to AI."

My process looks something like this:

- First, I come up with the main ideas myself
- I develop them through dialogue with AI
- I organize and shape my thoughts while bouncing ideas off the AI
- I leave the final textualization work to the AI
- I do a final check and make light adjustments

Additionally, I write my original content in Japanese with AI, and then have AI translate it into English. While I do review the English version after it's generated, there might be slight differences in nuance and meaning between the Japanese and English versions. I try my best to ensure the core ideas are accurately conveyed, but some subtle cultural or linguistic elements may shift slightly in translation.

This might be a new form of thinking. By using AI, the hurdle from idea to textualization is lowered, allowing me to externalize more thoughts. It removes the barrier of the tedium involved in shaping what's in my head. Actually, lately I spend more time asking various things to AI than reading books or talking to people. I'd like to talk about this topic more in the future.

I've actually wanted to start this initiative for a while, but being quite lazy, I kept postponing writing daily. However, recently generative AI has finally evolved to enable idea bouncing and textualization, making this "Brain Archive" possible. Well, the text might become a bit unnatural as a result, but as long as the content is conveyed, it shouldn't be a problem. It's more readable than if I wrote it myself anyway.

## Conclusion - Would You Like to Try It Too?

This "Brain Archive" has just begun, but it's already changing how I think. If you're interested, I recommend you try a similar approach. It will likely become more than just a blog—it should become your own thought expansion device and a place for intellectual exchange with others.

From the next post onward, I will write about interesting discoveries and predictions I've made.
If you have any opinions or impressions, please feel free to share them with me. If you know me personally, you can contact me via social media or email, or I plan to create such channels on this website as well. Thank you.


Weekly Memo