Mystery of Putin's brain

From supermemo.guru
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This text is incomplete. It is being worked on incrementally. Please come back in a few weeks, or see other texts at SuperMemo Guru

Introduction

In 2018, I wrote "Mystery of Donald Trump's brain". I was provoked by frequent references to Trump's alleged insanity. Instead, I argued how brains like Trump's emerge naturally in select environments. I was not surprised when someone mailed me a request to analyze Putin's brain in the same way (December 2022). Could we use some basic knowledge of neuroscience to estimate the probability Vlad might push the nuclear button?

It is instantly obvious that Putin's is far tougher a case. While Trump is a notorious blabbermouth who never stops talking, Putin is the most secretive person set to rule a major global power. Even worse, the key characteristic of Putin's brain is its training to be secretive and deceptive. For his whole life, Vladimir was rewarded for deceiving others about his goals and strategies.

We can safely say that Putin is not insane, and that his brain is well-crafted. Apart from the unusual daily level of risk to his own existence, Putin's brain shows solid resilience. As such, it keeps developing and adapting. It is getting stronger and better. Still, the task of predicting Putin's future actions is daunting (as for the risk of nuclear Armageddon, Timothy Snyder has already provided necessary reassurance).

I treat this text more as a challenge than an attempt to reveal the truth. I doubt I can come up with much more novel material than what is already known. However, it is still a very valuable exercise to look at factors that shape a brain, esp. a brain that may decide the fate of humanity.

Core motivation

To predict the behavior of an individual, we need to list his core values. We need to understand forces that drive individual moves on a daily basis. In this department, Putin's makes predictions relatively easy. The ease comes from a fact that Putin's brain is highly disciplined and consistent. We can be pretty sure that he is not driven by wild emotions that make him resort to changes in strategy. His core is likely solid. His stubborn nature provides indisputable evidence. However, the fact that Putin's core is stable does it not make it obvious as to what that core is. Putin's whole life is all about deceiving. He does not want the world to know his next move. He will dump red herrings at any opportunity of diversion. Figuring out Putin's core is essential for making any predictions on his ultimate decisions.

The difficulty with core motivation is that the entire knowledge valuation network is complex. It is hooked on many pieces of knowledge, pieces of emotions and grand skeletal philosophies. The difficulty of the task is best illustrated by the fact that I claim to have the purest and simplest core imaginable. By definition, my core motivation is the core of the core of the simplest motivation: Intrinsically Valuable State (IVS).

Despite this seeming clarity and simplicity, as the owner of my own brain, I may still struggle to understand some simple decisions I make (see details in my personal anecdote insert).

Having observed Putin for over two decades, and having studied him for nearly a year, I can hypothesize roughly on his core values:

  • Great Russia: this is his oft-declared goal; it is essential to observe that in all likelihood, Putin is ready to kill millions for Russia to be even greater; this includes his own citizens; Great Russia is not IVS. There is no underlying math or logic. It is just a label indoctrinated in young Russians of Putin's generation
  • Self-preservation: as Putin's life is in constant danger, the fight to preserve it might become an obsession, if he believes he is the best savior of Russia, the two goals may merge; Putin will do anything to survive, and his excuse is to survive for Russia
  • Self-esteem: there are many indicators that Putin is extremely sensitive about his self-worth; again, Great Russia might be his way of sticking up a finger to bullies; it is his way of showing the world his own greatness

Note that many sources claim that Putin of the 1990s was driven by greed, and that today's Putin isn't likely to think differently. I am not sure. Even if the rumors are correct, and greed drove Putin to unimaginable riches, there does not seem to be much value in multiplying fortune that is unlikely to ever be used, while the issues of self-preservation loom large? At the moment, greed is not a significant part of my hasty model of Putin's brain.

Upon this cursory analysis, a scary picture emerges. It is quite likely that Putin is a little man with an obsessive urge of self-aggrandizement under a noble disguise of Great Russia. If that analysis is correct, Putin might be the most dangerous man alive today.

Personal anecdote. Why use anecdotes?
It is hard to figure one's own driving concept, let along someone else's. As I write those words, the main motivational current is to figure out Putin, and have a conversation with whoever is interested in the topic. This in turn is motivated by the wish to improve the course of mankind towards IVS. However, as I type, I am being distracted by additional motivators: I am unusually hungry. My exercise slot is still 140 minutes away and being hungry that early is a bad sign (I blame that on circadian misalignment). That hungry feeling keeps popping up and interrupting my train of thought. Shall I drink some milk to silence the hungry brain? I answer "yes" thinking it will benefit my self-analysis useful for this text. Later in the day, I will enter various stages of chaos in which I will be pushed in various directions and different motivational factors will start playing their roles. A chance encounter with a friend will make me discuss drug addictions in the context of schooling in the context of IVS. I will observe a scary drop in water levels in nearby woods, which will prompt 20 minutes investigation in the context of climate change in the context of IVS. My life is simple, the more prompts I get the harder it is to understand winning decision, priorities, emotions, etc.

Hubris syndrome

British politician David Owen is less known for his background in psychiatry.

In 2008, he proposed a novel psychiatric category: Hubris Syndrome.

The label is very useful and pretty universal; however, the associated behavior is no definite pathology. It can be explained by natural adaptation to the environment, and the main difference between overconfidence and hubris is the associated danger stemming from tools of power.

The development of the hubris syndrome in adaptation is analogous to other forms of sinusoidal probing algorithms that gradually improve performance and confidence. A child may learn to swim in dangerous waves by exploring the borderlines of risk with her own life at stake. Sampling results in gradual deeper ventures, improvement of swimming skills, improvement of retreating skills, and an overall improvement of the model by which the organism learns to explore a potentially lethal environment and learn to operate at ease at minimum risk.

The exact same process took place in Napoleon's adaptation while exploring areas of conquered land. The main difference between a swimming child and the Napoleonic conquest is the complexity of models involved and the distribution of the probabilities of risk. In his 1812 invasion of Russia, Napoleon might have been at the peak of his skills, knowledge and confidence. His calculations on risks, logistics, and the balance of forces yielded a false estimate due to an accumulation of minor adversities. Moscow might have been one of Napoleon's victories, but it turned out to be an unmitigated and a proverbial disaster. We can then say it is a case of the hubris syndrome, but it is no psychiatric disorder. The syndrome reveals itself by a computational failure, which is a norm in high-stake high-risk explorations on the level of a continental conquest.

A famous analogy comes with Hitler. After a series of easy victories, Hitler's enthusiasm peaks at the conquest of France in 1940 (see picture). Where there is a major gain over the expected value of success, the brain tends to update the risk models and naturally increase the estimate of success in successive missions. Hitler thought he could conquer Soviet Union and his calculation was not much worse than that of Napoleon. However, miscalculations added up to failure that ultimately resulted in Hitler's undoing. That's hubris syndrome without a necessary underlying psychiatric condition.

Putin in Ukraine is a classic case of the hubris syndrome. A simple formula that worked for Crimea 2014 was supposed to be enhanced by a couple of "improvements" that would help Putin unite brotherly Ukraine into the body of Mother Russia. Putin was failed by his intelligence people, and his intuitions. His corrupt totalitarian power structure made it hard for him to stay grounded in reality. His alleged reluctance to use social media made him simply ignorant about the status quo. He opted for models that worked in the past and committed one of the wildest military and political blunders of recent history.

Putin is not insane, and he is not stupid. Putin grew overconfident in the use of his sinusoidal probing algorithm. The brain is a perfect device, but many a child drowns while exploring deeper waters. Reasons may be a trivial as a stray stick stabbing a foot at a wrong time. Putin's calculations might have turned out differently if a little-know chaotic event such as Battle of Antonov Airport turned out differently. In the end, Putin will lose for the same mismatch of resources that made Hitler's failure inevitable. The only component missing thus far was the unity of the rest of the world. Now, with unity in place, Putin's end is near.

This is no reason for celebration though. While Putin is still reasonably sane, his brain may disintegrate under pressure. With every day he may get less sleep, his homeostasis may go haywire. He will become more emotional, and more unpredictable.

8 days before his suicide Hitler is reported to have said (source):

Everyone has lied to me. Everyone has deceived me. No one has told me the truth. The armed forces have lied to me, and now the SS has left me in the lurch. The German people have not fought heroically. It deserves to perish

Probabilistic chain reaction

I used to believe that Putin was a good person. This section explains my story of self-disabuse.

Today, I am uniquely qualified to call Putin a tyrant, a liar, and a killer. I am the last person on the planet to recover from being naive about Putin. I used to be a Russophile. Apart from my living in the "west", and being exposed to western media, I have no reasons to be biased or emotional. I am still sensitive to Putin's round words in his well-crafted speeches.

It all started in grade 5, in communist Poland, when we started learning Russian. It was a time when I discovered I had good memory for new words. I was soaking Russian very fast. Despite being encoded in Cyrillic, Russian has many similarities to Polish. I was probably the best in class. I liked to show off. Learning Russian at school was a pleasure. The teacher's name was probably Dziewianovska. She was probably Russian or half-Russian. From my love of Russian, I transition to loving Russian soldiers in Poland. Under mild influence of communist propaganda, I never thought of Russians as occupiers. They were our friends from the times of World War 2. When a column of Russian tanks trundled through a little town of Czlopa (around 1975), I was delighted to chat to soldiers standing by the side of the road and directing traffic. I was a classic Russophile at that time. One day, in another city, I curiously approached a Russian "Geep". I was shooed off by the soldiers. Disappointed, I realized Russians are people too. Good and bad.

When Gorbachev announced his perestroika and glasnost, I was delighted. Gorby was God. 1989 was the start of the transition from communism to capitalism. Having benefited from 10 years of free college education, I moved on to benefit from a newly born market economy by setting up my own company (SuperMemo World). Those were the beautiful days of freedom in which Clinton and Yeltsin became buddies and the world seemed destined for eternal peace.

When Putin was anointed by Yeltsin, my natural naivete and love for people made me assume, we had a new young dynamic smart leader in Russia. George Bush jr. looked into Putin's eyes and saw his good soul. I had no reason to believe he was wrong.

When rumors started swirling around Putin, I consistently rejected them as inconsistent with my model of good Putin. I was mildly interested in Chechnya. I accepted official interpretation of Nord-Ost siege with my attention focused on the mysterious chemical agent that put the entire theater to sleep. I did not question Beslan massacre. When Anna Politkovskaya was murdered in 2006, I recall my interpretation as "someone is trying to make Putin" look bad. Murder after murder, coincidence after coincidence, I was deaf and blind. Political mascarade of powers swap between Putin and Medvedev, I dismissed as "one of those things in politics". Even the annexation of Crimea did not wake me up. After all, there was a referendum. I naively asked my friend from Ukraine "What do you think?".

I love Gary Kasparov, but his rants about Putin I attributed to Gary's hot head. He must really dislike his president. The stories of Bill Browder I saw like a good material for a novel.

In February 2022, I listened only to my favorite experts who all agreed, Putin will not enter Ukraine. Only the "radicals" predicted otherwise. But I tend not to listen to the radical.

And then the war started. My model of Putin, like all models in the brain, are based on a network of pieces of knowledge that are accompanied by valuations and probabilities. The statement "Putin is good" is based on a complex decision tree populated by interdependent probabilities. In a chain reaction propagating through the network, the model revaluations had to occur. If he can bomb civilians, he is more likely to stand behind the poisoning of Navalny, and then Skripal, the death of Nemcov, Litvinenko, Berezovsky, Politkovskaya, etc.

Then I recalled Georgia, Chechnya, Syria, and a new model of Putin crystallized. Even the sinister interpretation of apartment bombings 1999 looms plausible.

Putin destroyed three decades of progress in Russia in a couple of weeks. He instantly helped me revaluate my wrong naive model of the Russian leader. The house of cards based on lies and indifference collapsed. I woke up. I showed to myself how we live lives of ignorance and wrong models, and no amount of learning can remedy our blinds spots until it is often too late.

In my list of Putin's core motivations, I did not list greed. That part of my model has not been rectified yet. Putin's palace story never seemed plausible. Why would he need a Palace he would never be able to enjoy? I realize that this is probably another blind spot that stems from ignorance and projection stemming from personal disinterest in wealth. Putin was a wheeler-dealer of St Petersburg. He lived in a culture that promoted adaptation via greed. Perhaps I will wake up to the truth in that area as well? (see: Putin's way)

Fear of death

Death is part of natural process in which the biological world drives towards higher intelligence. Death may seem wasteful; however, it is a cheap implementation of macroscopic evolution of the global brain in which individual brains progress from high plasticity to high stability. Despite all the accumulated wisdom, older brain may find it hard to keep up with the change in society, and the brain replacement brings relatively little cost. With this realization, in the context of the Intrinsically Valuable State, death is just part of life and should bring no dread, fear or even anxiety.

We are naturally wired for love, and we mourn losing those who we love, but we also have fantastic ability to move on accepting that "the show must go on". Only slow and painful death is a true human burden. Luckily, the default biological pathway goes towards a life of a centenarian who dies unexpectedly in his sleep at the age which seems so natural that is easily accepted by the surrounding family and friends.

Considering the above, why are we usually so horrified with the prospect of dying or experiencing death in family? No other species shows much panic or distress about death. This includes apes who are cognitively not far behind humans despite popular myths and perception. Brave soldiers on the fronts of Ukraine, rush to battle despite an astronomically increased risk of dying. Hunter-gatherer societies seem to be far more stoic about death.

I think the fear of death is instilled culturally, and religion may play a role here. The promise of afterlife is attractive because it labels death as a transition stage, often to better life. However, when doubts creep in, the contract between the celestial life and the option of being consumed by the maggots seems horrifying.

Cultural imprint of the concept of death is best illustrated for me by the outrage in my own family caused by a simple rule: I do not attend funerals. For me it is obvious that doing something good for SuperMemo or for education provides tangible value. Walking a funeral procession among a bunch of highly depressed people does not bring much good to humanity. I find very little understanding in my family expect for the young generation who have always known me for taking that rationalistic stance.

It seems the fear of death is minimized when we inevitably, incrementally and at the very slow pace, progress towards the end. It is also minimized by not spending too much time pondering the consequences. Funerals might by a cultural act that potentiates the fear of death. It is associated with maggots and gloomy faces. I find a great deal of pleasure in thinking of my own brain dissected by scientists to study the effect of decades of incremental reading. My chief regret is that I won't be able to peek over their shoulder or read the results in literature. On second thoughts, the progress in artificial intelligence is so lightening that I might actually train AI to think like myself and let it soak in the experience?

The fear of death is maximized when it is sharply contrasted with the beauty of living. People who have those two alternatives tittering on a brink, are most susceptible to the fear of death. If that tittering complies with the rules of variable reward, the brain may be conditioned to enter the state of panic when the prospect of death looms large.

It is easy to see then that the life of a dictator is a perfect breading ground for brains that fear death. When a soldier confronts death voluntarily and survives, he may experience elation that may condition hte brain to love the risk-taking. A dictator does not get many opportunities to experience this kind of attenuation and conditioning. The dictator faces death in his worst nightmares. The dictator fears his own people, his surrounding, perhaps even his own dog. The prospect of losing the power and the riches due to a quirky accident is all surrounding and ever present.

Historical records seem to indicate that fear of death was part of life for Stalin, Idi Amin, Khadaffi, or Kim's dynasty. Interesting, Stalin allegedly confessed to sleeping best after a good act of vengance. it seems his fears would be best mitigated by the death of those who might pose the risk to his own life. For Stalin, vengance was a way to trade nightmares for good sleep. This may explain why a human brain, which is naturally euipped with the tools needed to develop fantastic empathy is ready to acceps the death of millions.

Many observers speculate that Putin's fear of death is intensifying. They hypothesize about the fear of covid, fear of assassination, fear of a popular uprising, fear of travel, fear of untested foods, etc. On that body of evidence, I would claim that Putin's fear of death is likely astronomical. With this level of fear accompanied by never-ending stress, Putin's health will deteriorate at a vastly accelerated rate. However, it may also increase the risk of wildly irresponsible self-defense that may cost millions of lives. I am pretty sure that Putin's brain computes that is own life is worth far more than the lives of millions who might die in war or in a nuclear exchange.

Death penalty

In early 2023, Putin is the most hated man on the planet. There is no one alive today who got as many observers wishing for the death of the dictator. As social media equates to social awareness, Putin might even beat Hitler in the number of ill-wishers.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Putin on Mar 18, 2023. This decision was accelerated by the global outrage with massive war crimes committed in Ukraine. At the same time the world woke up to the long series of political murders. A meme of Putin enemies flying from high floor windows became a morbid joke. Mysterious deaths started making sense. Before the actual sentence, Putin is already universally seen as a murderer and a war criminal. No wonder then that many people call for his assassination or a death sentence.

I strongly oppose the idea of a death sentence. Death sentence of psychopaths and tyrants is particularly harmful. These are the brain that should be studied. How can we possibly understand the darkest minds without looking deep into the psyche. On Dec 30, 2006, I mourned the death of Saddam Hussain, who might have been Putin predecessor and competitor in attracting global hate. The hate in his own country was Saddam's undoing. On that day, I became the user of YouTube. I created an account for the sole purpose of witnessing the unfortunate execution.

If Putin survives all assassination attempts that will multiply prolifically in coming months, I will hope for his trial in Hague. The rest of Putin's life should be spent on providing testimonials on actual reasons and motivations behind his destructive rule over Russia.

Studying Putin in jail will be a great form of prevention for the future!

Tucker Carlson Interview

Tucker was branded a "useful idiot" and "Putin's microphone stand". I disagree. Putin's interview (Feb 9, 2024) was too boring to provide much value for the dictator's propaganda.

Even if I am wrong, for my present text, the interview was a goldmine of information.

For the first time, Putin entered a lengthy monologue aimed at global audiences. With sufficiently detailed analysis, this should provide many answers we seek in reference to his brain.

Tucker's not-so-stellar journalism helped Putin reveal his interview goals. Moreover, with interview time passing, Putin fell into self-complacent mode in which his ramblings could well reveal emotions associated with individual topics.

Putin is a well-trained liar. Troubled childhood has well been exploited by the KGB training. We know that human lives and the truth can easily fall victim to the "justified cause".

When Putin speaks, he speaks for the effect on the audience. He is ready to paint an alternative reality. Great people were fooled but Putin before. I was also naive like a baby. He fooled me easily.

This is why individual words and claims are of little significance. We cannot ever be sure what Putin thinks. This is why the emotions on his face are so essential. There is a lot of contempt, self-satisfaction, hate and anger. There is almost no love, no warmth, and the pensive ponderings over the "soul" sound staged and theatrical.

To me, the interview seems to settle the question of the "driving concept" behind Putin's reasoning. This concept seems to be the Great Russia. A very revealing moment was a presumably fake story in which allegedly Ukrainian soldiers refused to surrender and shouted in perfect Russian "Russians never surrender". The soldiers perished proudly. The story does not hold water, but its retelling reveals what Putin thinks of Russia. He really wants to be the next Peter the Great.

The entire beginning of the interview, some 40+ minutes, was an incoherent story of Russian history starting with the founding myth of 862. I bet a vast majority of audience quit at that point or skipped to later parts of the interview. The effort was futile or counterproductive. Amazingly, Smerkonish took the bait and used the intro to classify Putin as the leader who is as smart as a razor. I disagree. This bit of history could be well crammed by a student at school. It might easily be rendered in a class as a high school project. The degree of error and distortion was disqualifying. The entire story was written for the thesis of Great Russia. In addition, China and Mongolia quickly used Putin's logic to makes their own territorial claims on Russia (half seriously). Recall Mongol Empire.

In an interview, Putin confirmed his contempt for the weak enemies of Russia, hate of "traitors", and self-satisfied belief in his own skills and power. There was an omnipresent smirk: "I tell you what I want, and you better listen". He believed he was believable.

Interestingly, Putin seems to be outraged at times with brutality and injustice. The only problem is that those feelings are not symmetric. He claims to care about women and children, while lobing rockets at Ukrainian cities.

I plan to review the entire two hours again, slowly, and incrementally. This time I won't miss a blink or smirk. Facial tics provide the only language of truth we have available.

Bill Browder's theory

Bill Browder claims that Putin is all about money. His sole goal is to accumulate as much personal wealth as possible. His imperial ambitions might be real, but they are just a smokescreen, and a tool toward his goal of self-enrichment. The invasion of Ukraine was needed to distract the population from Putin's crimes (source). It was a way to prolong the rein of the tsar.

Navalny's document on Putin's palace seems to be a great piece of evidence towards that theory. The opulence of the palace is pathological, and if it indeed stems from Putin's desires, Browder's theory holds water.

It is true that in every brain, goals are networked. The brain is a concept network. It is hard to separate hunger, libido, lofty goals, curiosity, minor distractions and major values. They all play a role in mental computation, and the outcomes are never clear. In diagnosing a brain, we need to identify dominant concept maps. This identification has predictive powers. We may never know if Putin's libido has withered or if he is just hiding it neatly underneath his image of the great leader. However, we can easily find evidence that his love for the Great Russian Empire is genuine.

As for the love of money, it tends to shrink in conditions of "resource contentment", and be suppressed by greater drives, including the drive for greatness, which has its roots in the force of intelligence.

Analogously, love for money thrives in conditions of scarcity when monetary reward has the characteristics of variable rewards. Putin's Petersburg period has all the hallmarks of such conditions. Putin started poor, and yet he was set in the environment where easy access to big money would combine with threats of imprisonment, death or loss of power. Such mafia-like environments breed the greediest personalities. However, after 2000, as president, Putin had all his whims easily satisfied. As much as in the case of Elon Musk, in conditions of contentment, human brain tends to focus on greater things.

For Putin, variable reward plays now itself more prominently in the area of political survival. In 2011, when Putin faced the greatest opposition and calls of "Russia without Putin", his own survival might have become his greatest obsession.

In 2022, the forces driving Putin's passions seem focused on his survival and the process of building the empire. All the gold of the planet won't buy Putin peace of mind. All his palaces are worth little as he is never likely to experience a peaceful minute enjoying their grandeur. Personal wealth is nearly worthless for the cornered rat. Russia's wealth matters as a means of conducting the war, which again is a means of survival through imperial games.

I believe Bill Browder is right. His knowledge of Putin's finances might surpass that of anyone in the West. However, we need to take a correction. Putin has spent the last quarter of the century unlearning his passion for money. At the same time, the image of a Great Empire played bigger and bigger in his mind. Now it blends with personal survival.

Putin's greed for personal wealth is waning

Conclusion

The ultimate diagnosis of Putin's brain may turn out pretty simple in the end. The analogy with Hitler's brain is striking and the evidence keeps coming to confirm it. Paradoxically, the roots of Putin's behavior are still in the force of intelligence, and the drive for productivity. Doing Great Things is the extreme and most valuable variant of productivity.

The elements needed to assemble to diagnostic jigsaw puzzle are simple: the dream of the empire, Peter the Great, Stalin, Hitler's escalating appetite for land, and ruthless aberrations to empathy. Putin wants to build Great Russia. That's his Great Thing. He keeps in mind historic examples of model heroes. His appetite for land and size is limited only by what he deems achievable with available means.

Putin can sacrifice lives of millions for the sake of the Great Thing. This causes global outrage, but it is also a natural outcome of the calculus in which any brain weights up pros and cons (reward and penalty). The Great Thing matters more than a sum of million minor lives. Truman had to make a similar calculation in weighing up the atom bomb. In his case, American lives mattered more than Japanese lives. A great proportion of people outraged with Putin's barbarity makes the same calculus. They would love to blast a human life to smithereens. In their case, it is Putin's life that would readily be dispensed with to save the lives of millions. Everyone has this capacity for callousness when computing the value of life.

Part of the presented diagnosis is optimistic. Putin will not push the nuclear button as long as it might ruin his Great Plan. However, once he is in the ultimate corner, in Hitler's bunker, suffering from multiple pathologies, a fleeting emotion might make him do mad move. Hopefully, the button will not work by then. Putin should be jailed or disposed of cleanly. He will become a great risk only when cornered, and falling apart as a biological entity.

Putin is a modern version of Hitler. He will pose the greatest risk at the end of his life

Comment

Help make this text accurate by submitting suggestions via Facebook