25 April, 2026

One Lock for Lich.

Lich is a little known village in the snowy mountains of Bavaria, it doesn't have a lederhosen shop, nor a brewery, but it is imperfect in many other respects too. As in most such towns [maybe, Lich is more a town than a village, despite not being quite big enough, it lacks the charm you expect of a village, so].

There is a locksmith, with a large workshop on the high-street, and a comfortable residence in one of the less plebeian parts of town, indicating some skill in extraction from sensible Bavarians. Bavarians who aren't even liberal enough with their wallets to support a lederhosen shop, and don't mind paying for beer that's travelled some distance over poorly maintained country roads.

Herr Hermitte, the locksmith, a married man, despite his surname. might have complained, in fact did complain, of the weekend, late night and holiday call-outs, but even as he complained, he was aware of the specific pressure that being unable to enter your house, when your bladder is full, exerts on your proclivity to be munificent towards essential workers, as Herr Hermitte would certainly not have regarded himself.

This story does not directly concern the locksmith of Lich, but, rather, the strange mental disturbance which afflicted Fräu Felimann, a comfortably off widow of generally sunny and incurious dispositions. Or, rather, to be fair, though you'll know soon enough, what Katja revealed, inadvertently of the town's security.

Katja needed to get a chair from her garden shed, what, unromantically, being unsheddy people, Bavarians call a 'Gartenhaus', because her sister was due to visit. When she tried to open the shed door, she found the key bent, took it to the locksmith, had it repaired and started to return home, somewhat, only somewhat, peeved at what seemed the enormous cost of such a simple job. She was generous at heart, and thought that locksmiths needed to eat, though Herr Hermitte's portly presence made it clear his need was not quite as great as that of the skinny sexton, she saw digging a grave for poor Herr Henkle who'd had an unfortunate accident with his hedge trimmer the previous Sunday.

What the road to Damascus was, when Saul, soon to achieve fame, a yen for travel, a new name, and, eventually, sainthood, was like, at the time of his coming-out as not the full denarius, at least in the view of his erstwhile Roman Centurions companions, we don't know.

That road was probably dustier and hotter than Fräu Felimann's road home, but it's the road that does the metamorphosis, isn't it? Certainly something in Fräu Felimann's brain changed, because, just after passing the dour Calvinist church - not a single plaster saint, or bleeding heart lavishly rendered with no concern for anatomical accuracy, to relieve the boredom of a sermon.

She was about to pass Herr Dourbermann's large establishment, with the door to his wine cellar visible from the road, when what, in modern, vulgarism, might be labelled a 'brain fart' [a most unlikely phrase, brains lacking digestive systems and sphincters] occurred, by reason, as we've established, of being on-the-road.

The Constabulary of Lich were unaware how fortunate they were to have had no burglaries, no robberies, in fact no thefts of any sort at all, for several decades. They were sufficiently employed by the aftermath of the local Oktoberfest, incidents of respectable citizens being spotted by matrons in conditions of undress, usually, as it turned out, a result of sudden infestations of ants (usually found to have moved on when the constable appeared) in the lederhosen, and, naturally, the occasional murder.

Local detective lore put the local lack of larceny down to the deeply embedded honesty of the German psyche, and the security of the brass locks fitted by the local locksmith.

Fräu Felimann was as honest as any other citizen, more so, possibly, because she'd mentioned to her sister that the chair she was retrieving from her Gartenhaus might be too frail for the sororal seat. Since then, her sister, when the visit came up in 'phone conversations, had taken to mentioning various important appointments that might endanger the visit.

This day, though, the synapse storm, caused Fräu Felimann to look from the cellar door to her newly repaired key, and think how similar the lock looked to her own. This novel neuronal nexus [or nexi, if it needed more than just the one to achieve the mental metamorphosis] then impelled her to the door, where she tried the key.

She was so surprised when it worked. She stumbled into the dim interior, with its dusty bottles. The shock of the cold, musty air, the sudden loss of the sunshine, and the feeling of being an intruder, must have reset Katja's momentary lapse. Her brain backup systems surged into action, impelling her to leave, closing the door afterwards. She went home, deeply shaken, to find not only that the key opened the door to her shed, but also her front door, back door, and the door to her pantry. The lock to the pantry had been fitted during a previous sibling visit, when jars of specially baked plätzchen had emptied, and a leftover leg of lamb shrunk to naked bone, overnight.

She was shocked to find herself with a magic skeleton key, and returned to Herr Hermitte the next morning to complain. Outside the locksmith, for it was still closed and half-past eight, no doubt a late night call out would be the excuse, Fräu Felimann bumped into her old friend from school, who lived the other side of the village, and told her the story. As a result, they compared keys - only to find they were identical. They tried opening the door of the locksmith's shop, and gained entry immediately, alarming Herr Hermitte who'd been practicing his Tai Chi in his underpants, a secret vice he'd picked up from following too many on-line advertisements, and being hugely impressed by the rippling torsos the adherents all seemed to have, along with, no doubt, a skin condition that made the wearing of shirts uncomfortable.

After a very polite, but ruthlessly thorough interrogation, the two of them, persuaded Herr Hermitte to confess the full extent of the dastardly fraud he, and his father, grandfather, and, possibly great-grandfather, had been perpetuating on the townspeople. There was only one lock in every door in town, all keys fitted all locks - there was no need for a special skeleton key, because every key was haunted with free access everywhere.

It was only the general lack of curiosity, avarice, and a strong disdain for whatever their neighbours had bought to reveal their terrible lack of aesthetic taste, that had kept the town safe. Nobody had bothered to look closely at the keys, nobody had, before Fräu Felimann's road home moment, tried a key in the wrong door, or, if they had, hadn't noticed.

Eventually, Herr Hermitte managed to persuade the two women that taking him to the police, or writing to the local newspaper, to expose his wicked exploitation, trickery and, indeed, threat to the security of every single person in town, would be counter-productive. After all, theft was not a problem, if nobody knew, the situation could continue.

When Fräu Felimann's sister did, eventually visit, she was surprised to find not the rickety rattan heirloom, but a new, plush, drawing-room suite, and, incidentally, a new oaken dining room table. When she quizzed Katja, she was extremely, uncharacteristically, vague, mentioning 'Road revelations', 'Pauline experience', 'unlocking unexpected gifts' and 'the key to life being obvious to everyone, if only they looked'.


The Aetiology and Dynamics of the Ultra-Greedy

By Ultra-Greedy I mean individuals whose accumulation of wealth has passed any practical or defensible use and extreme greed has become an end in itself, sustained by the position they occupy within reinforcing networks. The term is descriptive rather than rhetorical. It points to a condition, the persistence of hoarding, well beyond any need, driven by the structure that enables it.

The starting point is unequal entry. People begin with differing resources, education, capital, introductions, early opportunities. What matters is not each element on its own, but the position it confers within a web of firms, investors, institutions, and acquaintances. From that position, further opportunities arise.


These networks, webs of power, influence and money, are not neutral. Connections tend to gather around those who already have them; information travels along established paths; trust follows familiarity. The result is a dense arrangement of reinforcing relations, financial, social, reputational, informational, each strengthening the others. Early advantages are therefore not merely retained but amplified.


It is a mistake to reduce this to “position and timing” alone. The entire configuration matters: who is connected, who overlaps with whom, who is visible, who is vouched for, and how circles intersect. An individual candidate for the equivalent of a ‘viral tweet’ is embedded in a structure that generates further advantage across several dimensions at once. Accumulation follows from that structure.


For example, two equally able, equally connected, founders may begin different companies, in similar circumstances; one by network happenstance, gains entry to a circle that brings investors, skilled colleagues, and favourable terms, while the other does not. The initial difference is then widened by subsequent rounds of hiring, financing, and exposure. Skill and effort are common requirements, of course, but they do not account for the huge size of the eventual gap.


Familiar cases illustrate the mechanism. Early backers of Google or Facebook entered networks that yielded continuing advantage, such as co-investment, access to scarce talent, preferential terms, that are well beyond the initial decision. Firms such as Myspace, though not devoid of competence, did not sustain such reinforcing ties. The contrast is structural rather than purely personal.


Those who become Ultra-Greedy often recognise, at least, to themselves, sometimes privately, the arbitrary nature of their path. That recognition does not moderate accumulation but drives extreme greed. Wealth that arrives arbitrarily can disappear just as arbitrarily. Fear produces anxiety, and anxiety produces overcompensation in the form of persistent, pathological greed. This also explains why so many Ultra-Greedies make catastrophic errors when they mistake their accidental position for genuine skill and attempt to extend their competence into domains, such as  politics, epidemiology, and city design, where the fractal network does not favour them. These repeated failures while publicly denied or ignored, drive the cycle of fear, anxiety and compensatory greed even more strongly. This hoarding disorder is discussed in Canale, A. and Klontz, B. T. (2013). Hoarding disorder: It’s more than just an obsession – implications for financial therapists and planners. Journal of Financial Therapy [1]


Fear drives other behaviour as well, positions are defended, access is controlled, and known associates are preferred. Public certainty is maintained because confidence secures standing within the network. What appears as individual disposition is, to a large extent, an adaptation to a very unusual situation. Others unaffected by the fear of failure, and thus the extreme greed, select themselves out by retiring, taking up a more rewarding pursuit than hoarding. A benefit from understanding the fractal aetiology is that even Ultra-Greedies may stop being surprised by the arbitrariness, and normal people  will stop blaming themselves  for not being one of them.


The result is a tiny group whose behaviour is not explained by need, utility, or even ambition. Continued extreme hoarding serves to preserve position within the network that produced it. The Ultra-Greedy are best understood as products of a system of reinforcement than as particularly unusual agents.


If such outcomes are routinely generated, then the structure that produces them is the proper object of attention. The question is not how to admonish individuals, but how to alter the conditions under which extreme hoarding proceeds unchecked. Possible remedies include:


Where investment, appointments, or contracts are confined to narrow circles, widening the field can admit capable outsiders. Clear criteria, published in advance, and a requirement to consider a broader set of candidates would change patterns of entry. Where applicants are many and broadly comparable, selection by lot among those who meet the standard could serve as a corrective.


When the same small set of people accumulate roles, sitting across multiple statutory bodies and advisory groups, influence becomes self-reinforcing. Fixed terms and intervals before reappointment would reduce these overlaps without excluding experience.


Where terms of business, hiring practices, and procurement decisions remain obscure, those already inside retain a decisive edge, inside information. Requiring disclosure above a reasonable threshold—bounded in scope and time—would allow others to learn and compete more effectively.


Regional funds, co-operative ventures, and pools for first-time founders could create additional centres of activity. They do not displace existing arrangements, but they reduce dependence on a single set of connections.


Where large public decisions are influenced by private wealth, independent scrutiny is warranted, genuine independence, not one that might take reputation as a bona fide. External assessment of claims, would raise the standard and limit the substitution of status for substance.


Each of these possible measures has costs. They can, though, all be seen as extensions of sustainability, and sound governance. The sensible course is to proceed in a bounded and observable manner, defining the change, enabling it within clear limits, and assessing results. Some adjustments will fail, others may show that modest changes to access and information can alter outcomes.


The ‘butterfly effect, where a tiny, remote event, a butterfly flapping its wings, can cause a hurricane thousands of kilometres away is famous, in a fractal network, very small nudges, if in the right direction, can make major changes to the result. That’s how small changes can result in very different outcomes to the benefit of human thriving.


Ultra-Greedies are not a puzzle to be explained away by psychology. They are an output of a particular network geometry. Change the geometry, and the outcome changes. Leave it untouched, and the next Ultra-Greedy is already in the basin


Since existing networks consistently produce Ultra-Greedy individuals, these are outcome of the system rather than its justification. Improving the system, to limit the extreme outcomes and close the wealth gap is the only durable remedy.


References


  1. Canale, A. and Klontz, B. T. (2013). Hoarding disorder: It’s more than just an obsession – implications for financial therapists and planners. Journal of Financial Therapy, 4, p. 4. Available at: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:55044977 
  2. Yashiro R, et al. Networks, power and inequality: mechanisms and interventions. Nature Communications. 2026. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44260-026-00077-z
  3. Smith A, et al. Modelling elite amplification and networked advantage. PLOS ONE. 2024. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11193797/
  4. Zhang Kimberly “The Mind of a Billionaire: Traits of Narcissism and Risk Appetite Revealed” https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/35496498/8844295415271052296#



19 April, 2026

No, nihilism does not lead to anhedonia, depression, and suicidal ideation

The problem - a peculiar correlation


This is a strange article, in Psychology Today, that seeks to claim that there may be a causative link from nihilism to anhedonia.

The specific reference it relies on is a study of people with bipolar disorder and depression, which does not suggest such a causative direction at all, though it does look at links between depression, anhedonia, and nihilism: 

"
Specifically, for those with MDE/bipolar disorder, increases in positive affect/current pleasure were less effectively predictive of subsequent MIL as compared with healthy controls, albeit those with MDE/bipolar disorder were less likely to be upshifted in cognitive appraisals (MIL) in response to emotional experiences (positive affect/current pleasure) in daily life.

This finding highlights the weaker temporal pairing of cognitive and affective symptom constructs in those with MDE/bipolar disorder, which could be elucidated using a biopsychosocial model. Biologically, those with MDE/bipolar disorder tended to exhibit less cognitive-affective synchrony, Reference Batmaz, Kaymak, Soygur, Ozalp and Turkcapar diminishing their ability to integrate previous positive emotional experiences into a cohesive sense of self and life purposes
"
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bjpsych-open/article/bidirectional-associations-among-positive-affect-anhedonia-and-meaning-in-life-during-major-depressive-episode-ecological-momentary-assessment-study-in-unipolar-and-bipolar-individuals-and-healthy-controls/18ABC677C332419B24B5E1A64F47B37D

It looks like scaremongering, but I'm not sure to what end.


https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/home-base/202604/are-you-a-nihilist-or-anhedonic


Where the problem comes from


I think I've found the problem.

It turns out that there's a scale, for measuring 'existential nihilism' , the ENS ( https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10862-023-10052-w).

It is based on this highly flawed definition of 'existential nihilism':

1. An understanding that there is no essential meaning - the perfectly normal, reasonable position, known generally as 'nihilism', that recognises that 'meaning' is a purely linguistic construction and does not exist as any sort of free-floating part of the world.

And, this being the problematic part:

2. The belief that: "any attempt to change or rectify this, with the goal of establishing meaning, is futile."

The second part is certainly not part of normal philosophical nihilism. Camus even says 'we must imagine Sisyphus happy'. Rather this is a clinical symptom of anhedonia, usually part of depression. It's part of a diagnosis of 'helplessness'.

Obviously, conflating these entirely different things will lead to a spurious link between 'nihilism' and 'depression', 'suicidality' and so forth. It's built into the false definition!
I'm not sure what the motivation was for this deeply misleading definition, that begs the question. I imagine that it must have been some researcher or researchers who had some objection to nihilism.

It seems unlikely that any scientist would produce such a conflation as a definition.
The propaganda has worked. LLMs push the notion that nihilism is linked to anhedonia and suicidal ideation without the qualification that this is inevitable as part of the definition. I had to go and find the original papers and read them, then come back and press the LLM (grok as it happens), before it would sheepishly admit that it knew this all along.