Understanding Blockchain Through the Lens of Intersubjectivity

“I am all that I see, I am an intersubjective field, not despite my body and historical situation, but, on the contrary, by being this body and this situation, and through them, all the rest." – Edmund Husserl

Blockchain technology hinges on the principle of objectivity. Data stored on-chain is immutable, attributable, and verifiable, establishing a form of unchangeable truth akin to the scientific fact of gravity. This objectivity fosters transparency and trust within the system.

In contrast, subjectivity involves reality as experienced by an individual. For instance, someone might believe ETH will outperform BTC in the long run based on personal convictions, making this a subjective truth.

Intersubjectivity: Bridging Objectivity and Subjectivity

The concept of intersubjectivity, introduced by Austrian-German philosopher Edmund Husserl, refers to shared understanding developed through interactions between entities. Husserl argued that personal experiences are always mediated by multiple factors—our bodies, historical contexts, and relationships with the world. Intersubjectivity thus extends Descartes’ “I think, therefore, I am” to “I exist in relation to others and all my experiences are based on a shared understanding with the world.”

Money: An Intersubjective Agreement

Money is a prime example of intersubjectivity. Society collectively agrees to attribute value to coins, paper currencies, or digital bank entries, creating a social construct based on collective trust.

Jurgen Habermas, another philosopher, emphasized the role of intersubjectivity in communication. He argued that social norms are established through discourse and discussion, relying on participants' ability to recognize and validate each other's perspectives.

Eastern philosophies, particularly Buddhism, also reflect intersubjectivity. The Buddhist concept of dependent origination posits that all phenomena arise in dependence on a multitude of causes and conditions. For example, a person named Jane is not just her body, mind, relationships, thoughts, or internal organs. It’s the harmonious coming together of these diverse elements that make up Jane, emphasizing interconnectedness and challenging the notion of an independent, permanent self.

Intersubjective Consensus: A New Economic Framework

“The first law of tokenomics: don’t get your advice from people who use the word tokenomics” – Vitalik Buterin

Current consensus mechanisms, such as Bitcoin’s Proof-of-Work, reward miners with BTC tokens and transaction fees for solving complex cryptographic problems. This static and linear model is based on data ownership and computational power. However, the real economy demands diverse incentive models to address the motivations of a pluralistic user base. Instead of focusing solely on data ownership, intersubjective consensus mechanisms shift the focus to data usage, fostering an interactive economy.

Imagine a decentralized AI platform where users contribute in various ways. One user provides a high-quality dataset to train the AI model, while another offers processing power for simulations. Even among those contributing data sets, rewards can be based on the quality, frequency, and accuracy of their contributions. Payments can be diversified—tokens for data quality and staking rewards for maintaining algorithm integrity. Intersubjective consensus supports services and interactions rather than just ownership.

By promoting diverse incentive mechanisms, intersubjective consensus can create robust, decentralized systems that encourage complex economic interactions.

Beyond Incentive Mechanisms

The application of intersubjectivity extends beyond incentive mechanisms in decentralized systems. Its principles can foster more inclusive and dynamic interactions, paving the way for a more interconnected and cooperative digital economy.