Does agency matter?

I'm currently on a solo adventure in the Cameron Highlands. Between tours, I should have some time to blog.

I have interesting discussions with my young students that aren't always about technology, and there's certainly a lot of anxiety about job availability because of AI. One area I suggest the students develop is agency. At that time, I defined it sociologically — what kind of constraints society places on a student and how they can overcome them to be successful on their own terms. My logic is sound: for most of my students, adopting the same success standards as their JC peers would do them little good, regardless of what their parents might think.

But a smart guy in my class has a valid counterpoint. If everybody exercises agency, then the spoils will go to those who exercise the most agency, so the competition remains fierce, and it's back to square one.

I'm a sporting guy; I'm happy to concede the point, although I'm not convinced by his argument yet, but I'm glad he put serious thought into this matter, which itself is an exercise of agency, as the lecturer is not always right.

Fortunately for me, Martin Seligman, the father of positive psychology, later published a thorough perspective on agency from a psychological standpoint. According to Seligman, agency is comprised of three parts:

• Efficacy - You must believe that you can be the author of your own fate.
• Optimism - You must believe your future will be better than your situation today.
• Imagination - You are creative enough to solve problems your way or envision a better life for yourself.

Surprisingly, most of the book isn't particularly useful to me, as Martin's work reads like a history book, showing that periods of great human flourishing correspond to words in the era's literature that reflect great human agency.

But for me, now I have a new tool to debate agency in class. As it turns out, a diploma program will ideally level up a person's efficacy by improving their skill set, making them more employable, etc.... But a certain proportion of optimism is genetic. Imagination is also a function of personality, like openness to new experiences.

So, in practice, few folks have the capacity for agency. In fact, I can imagine progressives trying to paint agency as something that has links to race, social status, and social capital. Some might say that tolerating agency will magnify inequality, which the political left and sociologists fetishize.

I've got one final point about the book. 

The best part about the book has nothing to do with agency.

As it turns out, Martin Seligman can lucid dream. 

So, as his colleagues begin to die of old age, he can summon them back in his dreams to discuss the topics that he is working on. He admits that these dream colleagues can only answer based on what he knows of their work, and that it's not too different from using AI.