"I love that you've brought this to attention. An extensive database of uncommon but resistant and hardy plants/foods could be developed and organized by climate. Ease of growth and processing should also be taken in to account. I will try to…"
A crash course in changing the world.
A question of scale.
“Don’t you hear ‘em out there? It’s block war, man!” - from Judge Dredd, a dystopian depiction of the human “behavioral sink”.
Section 1… The Spark
Pandemic influenza was the topic of week nine of urgent evoke, and although influenza is a very real and dangerous threat, it was not the real threat of the comic. The enemy was not the flu, but rather one “Citizen X” who was supposedly scare mongering about a pandemic flu. It was a crisis of “information” or so it was put in the comic strip. Forgive me, but I’m calling foul here. So… we are asked to accept that the motive for Citizen X was… to cause a breakdown in societal function, resulting in the potential deaths of millions? And that he supposedly wants to go on to “destroy evoke”? Ok… whatever lol. Is this really the best these authors can come up with? Unfortunately, I don’t believe that this is simply a case of bad script writing.
We’re given the impression through the comic that the influenza is not a pandemic, but that the x-man is being a bad boy and somehow spreading massive lies about the extent of the disease. Ok… so… the media outlets are… inept? People can’t, oh I don’t know… verify these details? Ever hear of something called the internet? It’s “grade A” bull****. Rumors are nothing new, and people rarely panic when panic is not warranted. These people know damn well it’s denial that people are susceptible to, not panic, which leads me to ask: why the focus on what they call “misinformation”? What is that really about? It is a form of fostering denial.
Let’s make a supposition. Let’s say that the pandemic in the story was indeed a pandemic and that the problems associated with the pandemic were real, and not the misinformation of Mr. X-man. What exactly is to be done in that event? Well I’m sure certain people would just love for there to be a ready means to deny the situation. And wouldn’t it be great if we could forcibly silence these “bad guys”? We couldn’t have a panic on our hands, could we? No? Couldn’t happen? Well let’s think about this: why, during a supposed panic, is one of the characters playing the locals, trying to get them to accept loans? It’s not as if that is pertinent to the situation at hand. All it comes off as is trying to take advantage of a fearful situation. So I have to ask: is the problem the flu or the flu scare? If it’s the former, then why the implied push for “counter information” (which in my mind is simply denial)? If it’s the latter, then why the talk about “loans” and “micro finance”? Seriously, W…T…F does that have to do with a ****ing flu? Are loans the way the World Bank deals with a God **** flu?
If people are at the point where they’re panicking, along with all the associations of panic (e.g. looting, rioting, general mayhem), then that panic is usually justified. Other people panicking is justification enough for people to panic (i.e. rational panic). The denial of panic-inducing information (via a “dark site”… ugh, can’t they come up with a name that doesn’t patronize us?) is nothing more than a band-aid solution. It may be one that’s ready to go at the flip of a switch, but the idea is inherently reactionary, whereas the goal should have been a proactive one.
Section 2… The Question
So what exactly is the problem? The comic would like you to believe that it is a hysterical reaction (panic) to a perceived problem (influenza). So why is it exactly that crowds are reacting hysterically? The cause the comic would like you to believe is misinformation. The solution provided is one of spreading “accurate” information (i.e. propaganda) and denying misinformation (i.e. denial). Question: If the “misinformation” portrayed in the comic suddenly becomes accurate information, is panic warranted?
So why do people panic? I previously mentioned that other people panicking becomes justification for panic, but again the question is why?
Quote:
[One] theory suggests that, in crowded and disrupted populations, it is increasingly important for members to be able to predict crises and danger, which requires that each individual keep all other members of the population in view. Altmann (1967) has pointed out that the survival of social animals often depends upon instant recognition of, and correct response to, the social signals emanating from other individuals in the group. Thus, in critical social situations it may become necessary to crowd together to increase the probability of receiving important social signals as rapidly as possible. In other words, the individual who is not constantly in touch with the group may miss some essential social cue. It is at least reasonable to expect, therefore, that crowding may stimulate more crowding.
Here’s the challenge: Does a band-aid type response of denying misinformation actually solve a crisis, particularly when the underlying cause is ignored? Which brings me to my next issue… what is the underlying cause? Hypothesis: The underlying cause is a combination of factors resulting from the growth of population density; most notably a correlation between regressive behaviorism (i.e. attributes of the “behavioral sink”) and population density as well as the increased inter-linkage associated with a dense population.
Section 3… The Investigation
"Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one." -Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds
Population density has been a growing part of humanity with the rise of civilization, and indeed, even recent trends towards urbanization are more and more obvious. This is due to the cost/benefit ratio associated with urbanism. Certain benefits are accrued as population density increases, for example lower distribution costs and centralized management. More than that though, population density is an impetus for increased technological and social complexity, more so than either resources or simply a high population. This theme was explored here.
Quote:
The process of endogenous technological change […] may also be influenced by population density. For instance, a country with a large population may not possess a higher growth rate of technology than a country with a medium sized population, because the population density in the second country is higher. This may be true because the need to invent new technologies […] will be higher in the second country, compensating for the disadvantage of having less inventors in absolute terms. The speed of communication, the diffusion of knowledge, and division of labor could also be higher in the second country, which could lead to a faster pace of technological progress than in the more populous country […]; or higher population density increases the effective market size and thus raises the returns to innovation. This is not only theoretically plausible but supported empirically by cross-country growth research (e.g. Gallup and Sachs, 1998; Bloom at al. 1999; Nestmann, 2000).
[…]While population increases the number of potential suppliers of new technology, population density generates the linkages, the infrastructure, the demand, and the effective market size for technological innovations.
The article goes on to explore historical trends of population density and regions of the world and the corresponding technological progress, which supports this theory. In a phrase, population density’s attributes are increased networking and resource share, which, when combined with the demand created by increased population density, assist in the progression of societal and technological change.
However, increased population density also has its costs, starting with an eventual decline of benefits:
Quote:
The influence of population density on technological change is positive but decreasing over time. The transfer of knowledge is faster, the higher population density becomes, but note that the speed of this transfer is not unlimited. Although the absolute value still increases over time, the marginal increase of the growth rate in technological diffusion declines. For a single country, its own level of technology may, at lower levels of population density, also be more influenced by population density than at higher levels.
But population density does not only represent the diffusion of technology but also the need and the ability to use a new technology. […] Once the infrastructure has been built [for technological change], the influence of population density is concentrated only on the diffusion process and less on the demand factors and the basic infrastructure necessary for efficient technological spillovers, which could account for the falling marginal returns from population density. Moreover, if population density becomes too high, the costs of selecting the right information increases and this could lower the benefits of a faster knowledge transfer. The inference from the empirical evidence, which lead to a positive but declining influence of population density on the growth rate of technology is consistent with these arguments.
More troubling problems arise with increased social interaction all on its own. The question is one of: Does contact breed conflict?
Quote:
In his book Division of Labour in Society, Durkheim elaborates on his theory: “The closer functions come to one another, however, the more points of contact they have; the more, consequently, are they exposed to conflict. The judge never is in competition with the business man, but the brewer and the wine-grower often try to supplant each other. As for those who have exactly the same function, they can forge ahead only to the detriment of others (Durkheim 267).”
One case study aimed at answering that question was John Calhoun’s studies of mice in enclosed environments and increasing population density. Disturbing trends arose with increasing density (and hence increasing societal interaction):
Males became aggressive, some moving in groups, attacking females and the young. Mating behaviors were disrupted. Some males became exclusively h***sexual. Others became pansexual and hypersexual, attempting to mount any rat they encountered. Mothers neglected their infants, first failing to construct proper nests, and then carelessly abandoning and even attacking their pups. In certain sections of the pens, infant mortality rose as high as 96%, the dead cannibalized by adults. Subordinate animals withdrew psychologically, surviving in a physical sense but at an immense psychological cost. They were the majority in the late phases of growth, existing as a vacant, huddled mass in the centre of the pens. Unable to breed, the population plummeted and did not recover. The crowded rodents had lost the ability to co-exist harmoniously, even after the population numbers once again fell to low levels. At a certain density, they had ceased to act like rats and mice, and the change was permanent.
[…]As population density increased it became ever more difficult for an individual to control the frequency of social contact. The result was unwanted interaction, leading to adverse reactions such as hostility and withdrawal, and ultimately, to the type of social and psychological breakdown seen during the latter stages in his crowded pens.
Section 4… The Analysis
The term “behavioral sink” was used to describe the regressive behavior of the mice as a culmination of individual erraticisms:
The behavioral sink is not a pathological behavior per se, but a sort of para-pathology, which seemingly appears from, and supervenes upon, the behavior of individual animals within the crowded group. (44) The way Calhoun describes it, behavior becomes more and more erratic until, eventually, the behavioral sink emerges like a vortex. Thereafter it acts as an accelerant, exacerbating the effects of the other pathological behaviors: "The unhealthy connotations of the term are not accidental," Calhoun wrote, "a behavioral sink does act to aggravate all forms of pathology that can be found within a group." (45) It is important to note that the behavioral sink was not inevitable, but emerged as a consequence of individual rats and mice becoming so used to contact when eating and drinking that they begin to associate these processes with the presence of others. By altering the feeding arrangements to reduce social contact, Calhoun found he was able to prevent its development. Without the sink, crowding was less lethal, but remained grotesque: infant mortality in severely overcrowded enclosures levels out at about 80%. With a behavioral sink, that figure skips to 96%. (46) Crowding pathology, therefore, was not dependent upon the behavioral sink, but it seemed to mark a point at which the animals are overwhelmed by the crowding, leading to a societal state-change.
The behavioral sink, as a description of crowd behavior, came to represent the culmination and exhibition of the erraticisms of individuals, multiplied by the societal interconnectedness associated with “crowds”. “The crowd had long been associated with pathology: with mass panic, with the spread of disease, with political radicalism, aggression, and unruly social behavior.” Could panic be an attribute of the “behavioral sink”? Biologically, social networking serves a purpose of acting as an alarm for potential problems. Examples of this are abundant in nature and I would suggest that humans are no different. What’s interesting here is that the very reasons for increased population density (increased societal interaction) become the problem that is being addressed. The solution begets the problem. "The only known counter to the effect of the behavioral sink is to reduce the frequency and intensity of social interaction." This means reducing social complexity.
Regression is a form of simplification. It is the shedding of complex constituent aspects of an ordered society. The results of regression are aspects now associated with the behavioral sink: panic, rioting, looting, mass hysteria. This recalls the idea of the diminishing marginal returns of complexity: when complexity no longer confers benefits greater than simplification, society will regress.
So what does this have to do with the flu? In this case, the influenza becomes a physical manifestation of our apprehension for (and the hazards of) excessive social interactions. Greater complexity (i.e. social interactions) does not yield greater benefits than the regressive behaviorisms of the behavioral sink. People naturally would want to isolate themselves to avoid possible illness and if necessary will even go to such lengths as looting if the perceived benefits are worth it. Panic, being a rational act when others are panicking, further exacerbates and spreads such behavior. The result is a rise in the regressive erraticisms of individuals spread across a “crowd” (i.e. the behavioral sink).
The question now asked is: Can the increasing social networking of urbanism solve the problems caused by increased social networking? The band-aid solution must either try to increase the benefits of complex social interactions beyond that of regressivism or must at least give perceived benefits (i.e. lying). A “dark site” (or denial) could act as a band-aid solution if it at least accomplishes that latter goal.
Perhaps what this really is, is a question of scale. Where can the benefits of social density coincide with simplification to a point that regressive erraticisms of the behavioral sink no longer are appealing? Is the answer further complexity… or not?
-Iron Helix
Views: 160
-
Comment by A.V.Koshy on May 3, 2010 at 11:55pm
-
yes
i agree with one point
quote: To try and control a response is indeed futile, because for it to be effective in the long run, you would have to have foreseen every stimulus and created a plan for such contingencies.
but i want to stretch it further
stimuli cant be foreseen there are too many
disasters waiting to happen cant be foreseen there are too many
responses cant be foressen they are too many
0-0
good aint it?
i have to say jane's top secret dance game was a better one any day
for that she needs a prze i dont know which one maybe even the nobel
-
-
addendum - nobody reads the fark sites before hand there are too many on too many various topics
people prefer the comic version
a dark site in he form of a comic would draw a lot of people to read it
even if misinormation was on it
someone posted on a seed bank vault
awesome post
no one noticed
the crowd never lies in one things
where the crwods are it's pretty frivolus stuff floating around
like the for beginners series
second hand stuff that can be pedalled to africa like those shirts someone was tlaking of
boy do i sound bitter
just engaging my cynic
-
Comment by Iron Helix on May 4, 2010 at 8:58am
-
Quote: but i want to stretch it further
stimuli cant be foreseen there are too many
disasters waiting to happen cant be foreseen there are too many
responses cant be foressen they are too many
0-0
I see where you’re going. Usually I try to avoid making statements like that, although I may agree with them. I do so because it’s a form of arguing the unknowable, and the unknowable is always a certainty (strange statement I know). However, this particular unknowable has a certain conclusion aspect about it, a conclusion of “why bother?”
At this point, the conversation becomes less about society and more about metaphysics, and for me it verges on the cusp of what I consider insanity, hopefully not due to a lack of logic, but due to a conclusion that when thoroughly accepted questions the very meaning of existing.
While you read this, I suggest listening to some Jefferson Airplane, because that’s what I’m listening to as I write this. It puts you in the mood.
Let me start by saying that the purposes to which we apply actions are very superficial, and in a way, when you want to get at the heart of an issue, as I have tried to do with my blogs, you must address these superficial explanations for human motivation. We eat. But why do we eat? Because we want to continue to exist? To eat again? Is it because of a biological impulse? The pain of not eating? Do we eat simply to ameliorate the pain caused by our biology if we don’t?
Let’s say we have a person. His name is Robert. Robert represents the wh*** of humanity. Robert has suddenly become sentient. He is acutely aware of his existence and has a strong sense of what he calls the “self”. Himself.
Robert is now faced with a situation. He’s hungry. He knows, as a sentient being, that if he does not address this issue of “hunger” the being referred to as the “self” will cease to exist. Robert would like to keep existing, for no reason in particular, except for perhaps a slight fear of not existing, so he must feed. He gives himself about a couple weeks before his lack of nourishment leads to his ceasing to exist.
With great effort and ingenuity, Robert manages to kill a wild beast to consume. Robert, for the time being can continue to exist. Shortly thereafter, however, Robert is faced with an immediate and physical threat. In this case it’s a lion. Robert must either defeat the lion or cease to exist. Robert could choose to not put in the effort of defeating the lion, but Robert still enjoys existing. He enjoyed the emotions he felt in pursuing an endeavor (killing a wild beast) and consuming its flesh (satisfying a biological desire which also elicits an emotional response). He relished in the memory of a victorious moment, a tribute to the brief existence of the “self” up to this point. Robert has made a decision to keep existing, so he expends an effort into defeating the immediate and physical threat of the lion. Roberts existence has just increased from the brief few seconds until the lion would have killed him until the next unknown threat Robert is faced with.
Further threats and challenges are asked of Robert and he must respond to each lest the being known a “self” cease to exist. Robert, having existed as a sentient being for some time has come to appreciate the emotions elicited from his biology more and more, to the point where it is largely his raison d’être. These emotions encompass love, hate, fear, respect… all emotions. But these emotions are due to his biology, much like the need to feed and the pain of not feeding was also an aspect of his biology.
The number of scenarios that could lead to the extinction of humanity are extensive to say the least. Robert must overcome them all. But what happens if he doesn’t? What happens if Robert is unable to cope with…
A virus?
Nuclear war?
A comet?
A gamma ray burst?
Genetic breakdown?
A change in the structure of matter?
A decomposition of physical matter?
Each one he overcomes garnishes him a greater period of existence. But when one does him in, can it be said that it was even worth it to fight that lion from way back when? Does it matter if the ceasing of the “self” was due to a lion, nuclear holocaust, or the crumbling of physical matter? The result is inevitably the same. There are only differences. One is time. And what can be said about that time difference? What was it that made it the duration that it was (or will be)?
Biology.
What was the second difference? The number of people experiencing that biology. Is that the goal? The purpose of existing? To increase the time span and numbers of the “self”?
Here’s more. What if, somehow, the “self” was able to exist in perpetuity. Robert has overcome every possible threat to his existence. He has achieved what some may consider as deification. He has gained control of existence as we know it. What then? What is his continued purpose to exist? Looking back, does Robert now care whether or not he ceased to exist because of a lion or a blackh***?
More interestingly, what if at some point, Robert (and the wh*** of humanity) chose not to exist?
Reflecting on myself, I come to the conclusion that the purpose of my existence is such that I contemplate… my existence. I like to contemplate existence in certain comfort. If I were a hunter on the Serengeti a few thousand years ago, I might be contemplating more on my next meal than the meaning of existence. Modern society has provided many luxuries to my life, but they really add no more meaning to my life than the next meal of the person on the Serengeti. At most, they can only prolong my existence. Biology drives me to continue to exist, but at the end of the day, even biology has its end. What drives existence then? Is the purpose of existing to contemplate existence? Is that insanity?
Socrates was quoted as saying, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Certainly I can agree with that. What I wonder though, is even the examined life worth living? At some point, is it worth it?
Do we really just eat… to eat again? To [insert action here]… to [insert action here] again?
Is humanity really so different from the bomb from the movie Dark Star?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjGRySVyTDk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_47mmt5SZY&feature=related
We know we’re going to explode one day. What difference if it’s now or later?
These questions disturb me on a level more profound than any other question I have yet come across, which is part of the reason I try to avoid the topic.
-
Comment by Gabriel Martin on May 4, 2010 at 9:32am
-
You are doing it wrong
-
-
^_^
-
-
dear iron
i agree this argument seems to border on the verge of insanity and can lead to a why bother
but it doesnt
let us say the self exists
let us say it exists as selves that are in a flux that somehow have some kind of tenuous unity that came into existence when like robert it wanted its first breast milk drink and cried for it and then wanted to alleviate the discomfort of pee and piss and warmth and cold then and slowly by these things being met imperfectly or not a stronger notion of the self begins to form - that which was nebulous begins to take a certain shape and form
this self/selves/flux called robert or iron or koshy doesn't know why it came into sentience though it may figure out why it came into physical being -through desire which is a bilogical need
biological determinism makes robert keep living
but it also makes him examine why
it's in built
he learns not only to look for the next meal but also ask why look for it
and he learns about as you said emotional capital
he learns about the other selves and fins a dual satisfaction now in feeding opon and being fed as well as feeding others or not all giving him food and emotional sustenance
the question of why one exists haunts him and he contempates himself, life, others
but the end also bothers him
i will die anyway
i fought the lion and the black h*** and overcame but i will die
i dont know why i came into existence or sentience but i go on but whats the use i dont kow why i have to die anyway
the biological clock is running down
but he also sees that the three co-ordinates
a. making something from nothing
b. keeping self and others eternally alive and young
c. bringing someone back from death for self or the other
have not been made possible - time, space and energy dont permit it - and he sees all the sentient human selves striving for these things and feels maybe that is a worthwhile enteprise
the name alchemy being repeated here was inevitable - some patterns do recur
he knows life may go on but what bothers him is his death and death of loved ones and death of human race
this is the limit of his sentience
if he empathised with lion and beast he killed his sentience would widen but he wouldnt survie even the lion
so it is human life he is fighting for ultimately to go on along with all his partial preservation of other forms of life mainly for himself
he thinks
if i die someone at least will be around to contempate existence
sciences like eugenics, cryogenics, gene mapping ,cloning all come from this desire to continue as self and at least as race if not as self
it's christianity in scientific guise
it comes from a judgement passed on oneself that despite the fact that one is only a bilogical drive to live and then die there is something in one and others that is worth continuing
option one - give up the hankering for immortality in any form
option two - lessen the suffering of the question by settling for death
sonner or later - hence the rise of euthanasia and doctor death
option three - live in the moment ( a lifetime) here and now, in the present
option four - lessen suffering and dont ask why
of course there are other options like turn destructive but at the level at which we are talking which is a serious metaphysical discussion i prefer to list only the ones that matter to me as of now - regarding things like suicide and madness i already went through that phase also destructivity so been there done that not interested anymore
i have set before myself the same question of the examined life and the know thyself one
well i have no answer to the why sentience or existence questions and these are seeming solutions i picked up from socarates, jesus, buddha and j krishanurthy and science which also deals with matter and energy in the forms of facing entropy and turning lead into gold
but i dont really know
at present it seems to me that the only thing to do is live till i die and try to lessen suffering, all kinds of suffering
the jains have pushed it to its logical extent where they finally eat only nuts and berries that ripen and fall and quietly pass into the great unknown with only the body for house and some water and almost no food passing away quietly like a candle being blown out gently by the wind - the concept is called sallekhana of fasting to enrich the universe by my dying - they do not kill any sentient form by which they mean earth flora fauna - the real ones i mean ( most of them are only usurious people nowadays)
"the light gleams an instant, then it's gone - samuel beckett
we are not living, we are dying at least as individuals and communities
cant predict about the race and other roberts and other communities do come up
meanwhile the limits remain - time, space, energy, matter, my body, its needs, the emotional prerequisites i now need
how do i offset it?
by just living?
or thinking meta? as for oyu that just drives me insane so i dont want to do that
so yeah by just living and also because i am a human by learning to deal with suffering and trying to lessen it for others
maybe this sentience which is in me and all around me i can somehow become a part of so i remain even when i dont remain and i go on that way or i comfort myself that it at least probably remain though im no longer there to witness it
so just going on basically
:not the best , not the worst, just like all the rest - pink floyd
you're right best not to think of all these things too much
oh yeah i do have a safety valve
art
i just put up roy batty's poem from bladerunner
and theres a video by me and my brother in my videos list
my theme is waiting
on the cusp yes very
but its not scary in the sense it makes me not help others or dysfunctional fully
dont know what im waiting for lige and my life goes on anyway meanwhile
i love jefferson airplane by the way
peace
-
-
not like, lige
and yeah my son being autistic has made me think must go on living and lessen suffering
personal solution
but if race would identify with it in the sense they/we consider all as autistic like my son - whether humans or flora or fauna - as being in need along with themselves
then i guess they too would go on and try and lessen suffering? for acc**ulating emotional capital?
hence my autism for help orject which means help autistics but also let them help you to not ask why bother
dunno..
-
-
sorry , project..
-
-
not lige- like , and not oyu, you.... damn never learned typing excusa !!!
-
-
of course one could use all the old words and say what i mean is im trying to move towars love, empathy, compassion but the words dont cut any ice any more
its something more real im grappling with ....
Comment
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Latest Activity
Fourth of July on the Lake
This past weekend was the annual celebration at the lake house in Connecticut. It is amazing that the lake is still so clear and beautiful after all these years. The watershed association has done a wonderful job protecting these waters from the damaging effects of development.The wood grill was finally ready to cook on, so we didn't miss the propane tank fueled grill anymore. The food actually tasted fresher than in the past and was easy to keep fueled.Dad was very proud of the solar hybrid…See More
Stinging Nettle
In this blog post I will focus on a plant that is abundant in our nature, and which is immensely nutritious. It's of course the Stinging Nettle. Let's start with the chemical constituents of this plant:37 % Non-Nitrogen-Extracts19 - 29 % Ash9 - 21 % Fiber4 % Fat22 % ProteinOnce the leaves are drid, their protein content can reach an astounding 40 %, which is much higher than beef, which even under the best of circ**stances can never exceed 31 % protein. In addition the Stinging Nettle consists…See More
The meal
It is 7'oclock, I was late home from work due to an assignment that i wanted to get ahead on. By the time I get home I am feeling extremley tired and I cannot be bothered to make a proper meal. I walk to the fridge and open it to see what there is for me to eat. All of the out of date foodstuffs have been automaticaly thrown away by the fridge, they will be recycled tomorrow as animal feed or something. I see i have organic local eggs and some local cheese. Foods are vacc** sealded for easy…See More
Future
FutureToday is 2020/1/1. It is just like yesterday. The war is still continuing. It has started since 2010. In 2010, that year was a horrible year. Almost every energy ran out. Every country’s governments were crushed down at the same time. There were riots everywhere. All of the big company’s bosses were killed xdeadx in the riots. Troops fought each other everywhere. Food was bought up xawayx at once. There were no more food supplies in any shops. The economy was all crushed down. All the…See More
public servants
The exchange works directly for state and public workers and servants. It gives them credit in exchange for the amount of public work they contribute to the community. The more constructive they are based off a base rate the more credit they recieve.
© 2024 Created by Alchemy.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Urgent Evoke to add comments!
Join Urgent Evoke