AIM Framework glossary
Extraction-Direction Asymmetry
Canonical definition
A corollary to the Relative-Position Computation Principle. PM extraction is asymmetric in direction: a downward attribution (lowering another's computed position) extracts more Mimetic Premium per unit of effort than an upward attribution (raising one's own), by a factor Rdir > 1. Two independent grounds compound. (i) Channel-gain ground: lowering (whether of a Rival or the threat of being lowered oneself) is processed on the alarm channel (amygdala, anterior insula, dorsal anterior cingulate, with downstream hypothalamic engagement), which carries the Observer's negative-signed Salience, is felt under Phenomenological Collapse as threat to the body, and is higher-gain, slower-decaying, and rumination-prone; raising oneself is processed on the ordinary approach/reward channel, which decays normally. Hence a gain ratio gdn/gup > 1. (ii) Structural ground: relative position is a difference, so a single down-move widens the computed differential from the counterpart's end and registers additionally as a threat resolved, contributing a both-ends bonus ρ ≥ 0. The combined per-act extraction ratio is Rdir = (gdn/gup)(1 + ρ), which exceeds 1 wherever either ground is active. The two grounds are deliberately retained as separate multiplicative terms so the asymmetry survives the loss of either. Rdir is a per-act extraction ratio and is distinct from the internal loop gain G of Appendix A.5; it does not enter Gcrit. Empirical signature: real-world positional moves, the orthogonal launder, scapegoating, and elite reform-resistance are predominantly downward-directed (denigration of others) rather than self-elevating.
Explanation
Putting someone else down buys you more standing, for less effort, than building yourself up does. Two reasons stack. First, your brain runs "being lowered" and "lowering a rival" through the same fast alarm system it uses for physical threats (high-strung, slow to settle, prone to brooding) whereas "raising yourself" runs through the ordinary reward system that calms down normally. Second, rank is a gap between you and someone else, so knocking them down widens the gap from their side and feels like a threat dealt with, all in one move. That is why the cheap, dominant move everywhere (in politics, in gossip, in elite push-back against reform) is to run others down, not to praise yourself. Governing expressions. (1) Per-act extraction asymmetry: Rdir = (gdn/gup)(1 + ρ), with Rdir > 1 whenever gdn > gup or ρ > 0. (2) Collective-alignment dynamics (population-scale coarse-graining, not the fast loop of Appendix A.4): the collective positional alignment m(t) obeys a forced damped oscillator m'' + 2βm m' + ωm² m = F(t), where the positional forcing F(t) = Rdir · k · sign(m)(1 + c|m|) is scaled by the asymmetry Rdir; withholding sets F → 0, leaving pure damping, and m(t) decays to the equilibrium m* = 0. (3) Floor invariance: PM ≥ 0 throughout, per P = PA + PI + PM; attenuation governs the rate and baseline of accrual, never the sign. Full derivation at Appendix A, Section A.10. Falsification. (1) If neuroimaging shows status-gain engaging the alarm channel at gain equal to or exceeding status-loss, the channel-gain ground fails. (2) If, controlling for effort, upward attribution is found to extract equal or greater PM than downward in observed status economies, R_dir ≤ 1 and the asymmetry is falsified. (3) If the orthogonal launder and scapegoat-construction are found to be predominantly self-elevating rather than other-lowering, the empirical signature fails. (4) For the Mutual-Regard Equilibrium: if populations practising either route (universal private withholding of downward attribution, or symmetrised mutual regard) show no shrinkage of the computed regard differential relative to controls, or if symmetric regard at a given level is found to sustain a non-zero PM differential, the equilibrium claim fails.
Epistemic status
Framework-Specific Construct.
Derivation
Chapter 10, Section 10.3.5; Appendix A, Section A.10.2; Appendix A, Section A.10.3.
Related terms
- Mutual-Regard Equilibrium (the population-scale net-benefit consequence)