Agenticity — Why You Assume Someone's Behind Everything

10/30/2026

Thinking Well & Why

0:00

57:05

Lee lost a parking spot and concluded it was a coordinated conspiracy. Mario, Creek, and Lee examine agenticity—the habit of assigning intentional agency to random events—and why it kills your ability to actually solve problems. Using Michael Shermer, Karl Popper, and the Enneagram as a case study in self-deception, they show how maturity means knowing when something is just stuff that happens.

Mario, Creek, and Lee start with Lee's parking spot—a perfect case study in how fast we generate agents and narratives. They examine agenticity, the cognitive pattern of assigning conscious intentional agency to events that may be entirely random, and connect it to locus of control: the difference between believing you control everything or nothing. Using Michael Shermer's work and Karl Popper's philosophy, they show why seeking simple certain answers feels good but costs curiosity. Yesterday's best explanation becomes today's less useful one, and that's not failure—that's how knowledge works. The crucial turn: applying agenticity to Enneagram work. When someone says "Why am I a Four?" or "My mother loved me too much, so now I'm a Two," they're using the Enneagram to stop thinking rather than start it. They attribute behavior to type instead of taking responsibility for change. The hosts connect this to Stockdale's paradox—surviving not through hope in rescue but by accepting circumstances and continuing to act skillfully. Closing challenge: notice when you say "the reason this happened was" and test whether that reason actually holds up.