Maybe It’s Time to Decentralize

Bigger isn’t necessarily better when it comes to politics and technology

George Dillard
5 min readDec 30, 2022
Photo by davide ragusa on Unsplash

Robin Dunbar first noticed it in the grooming patterns of primates.

In the 1990s, Dunbar, a British anthropologist, was trying to understand primate grooming behavior — why did these animals spend so much of their time on the practice, and how did they choose whom to groom? He theorized that a primate’s number of grooming partners was connected to the size of its brain. Basically, bigger-brained primates could have larger social groups. Dunbar eventually realized that his findings could also apply to the biggest-brained primate: you.

Dunbar calculated that the size of human brains would support a close social network of about 150 people. Then he looked to see if his ideas were supported by real-world data, and he found that there was a lot of evidence that “Dunbar’s number” was meaningful for the human species. He found that, throughout history, military companies, hunter-gatherer bands, corporate departments, and even British Christmas card lists indicate that our brains are wired to accommodate about 150 social contacts.

Dunbar’s model has become more complex over time: he argues that most people have around 5 close loved ones, 50 “big-weekend-barbecue people,” 150 in your “weddings and…

--

--