Attention is the Schwerpunkt

Renaissance Humans, #55

Something Gollum would have said to Bilbo, under the Misty Mountains:

I’m stolen with ease, but worth more than gold.

Elusive to keep, though bought and sold.

I shape what you see, hear, and know.

Where I am given, focus will go.

What am I?

Gorillas in the Mist Lungs

In the original “Invisible Gorilla” experiment conducted by Daniel Simons and Christopher Chabris in 1999, approximately 50% of the decidedly WEIRD participants failed to notice a person in a gorilla suit walking through a scene while they focused on counting basketball passes. Another study examined this phenomenon among radiologists. 83% of radiologists did not observe an image of a gorilla embedded in a series of CT scans, despite the gorilla being 48 times larger than the average lung nodule they were searching for (Picture above). These studies highlight how focused attention can lead to inattentional blindness, where even significant unexpected stimuli go unnoticed.

As a man is, so he sees. —William Blake, 1799.

Marshall McLuhan’s concept of figure and ground is relevant here. He argued every medium or technology functions as a figure (the content or immediate effects of a technology) against a largely unnoticed ground (the deeper environmental and contextual changes the medium causes in our perception, cognition, and action).

We tend to focus on the figure while remaining blind to the ground.

We focus on social media’s content (figure) while ignoring its effects on attention spans and cognitive fragmentation (ground).

McLuhan saw media as extensions of human faculties. Video extends sight, radio extends hearing, and smartphones extend memory and communication. But these extensions create blind spots that fall outside the scope of what the technology prioritizes.

McLuhan would counsel whenever we adopt a new medium, we should not only examine what it overtly presents (figure) but also what it erases or reshapes (ground). Failing to do so leads to inattentional blindness—not just in a momentary psychological sense, but in a deep societal and perceptual transformation.

Psychologist Michael Posner breaks attention into three distinct but interconnected systems.

• The Alerting Network (Sustained Attention) maintains a state of vigilance (Remaining focused while waiting for a traffic light to change).

• The Orienting Network (Selective Attention) directs attention toward specific sensory information by shifting focus (Turning your head when you hear your name called in a crowded room).

• Finally, the Executive Control Network (Cognitive Control) regulates high-level control over thoughts and actions, resolving conflicts between competing stimuli (ignoring a ringing phone while tending to a crying baby).

Neuroscientist Dr. Amishi Jha has a similar framework. In Peak Mind, she discusses what she terms the Floodlight, Flashlight, and Juggler.

• The Floodlight (Alerting Attention) is broad, open awareness that detects changes in our environment. It’s essential for safety, situational awareness, and rapid response to new information.

• The Flashlight (Focused Attention) represents our ability to concentrate on a specific piece of information while ignoring distractions. Like a flashlight beam in the dark, it helps us focus on a single task, conversation, or detail.

• The Juggler (Executive Control) is the system that manages and regulates our attention, keeping us on task. It helps us switch between tasks, resist distractions, and self-regulate.

Former Google advertising strategist, now Oxford-trained philosopher James Williams takes a slightly different approach. In Stand Out of Our Light: Freedom and Resistance in the Attention Economy¹, he breaks attention into what he terms Starlight, Spotlight, and Daylight—to explain how technology and distractions affect our ability to focus on what truly matters.

• Starlight is oriented toward our life goals and aspirations—comparable to using the stars for navigation. It helps us stay aligned with broader goals, like completing a degree, writing a book, or maintaining meaningful relationships.

• Spotlight is our immediate, task-focused attention—akin to a flashlight illuminating a small area in the dark. Digital distractions (device notifications, social media updates, clickbait) constantly hijack this form of attention, preventing deep work and sustained focus.

• Daylight is our metacognitive and reflective level of awareness, where we step back and question our priorities, values, and life’s direction—like seeing everything clearly in daylight. It allows us to reflect on whether we are living the life we want, making wise decisions, and aligning our actions with our values.

What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence, a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention, and a need to allocate that attention efficiently among the overabundance of information sources that might consume it. —Taylor Swift Herbert Simon, Designing Organizations for an Information-Rich World, 1971.

The Sirens' Call: How Attention Became the World's Most Endangered Resource is a new book by Chris Hayes. He examines the commodification of human attention in the digital age, exploring how modern technologies and media platforms exploit our cognitive vulnerabilities for profit, leading to fragmented focus and societal implications. ​Hayes is an interesting messenger—he’s self-aware enough to note his day job involves grabbing and holding attention as a cable TV host.

Hayes draws parallels between the current "attention economy" and historical shifts, suggesting that just as labor became a commodity during the industrial revolution, our attention has become a valuable resource extracted by corporations. He argues that this relentless pursuit of attention has reshaped public discourse, politics, and individual well-being. ​

To counteract these trends, Hayes proposes both personal and collective measures. Individually, he suggests practices such as engaging with print media, reducing reliance on smartphones, and participating in community activities that foster genuine human connection. On a broader scale, he advocates for regulatory interventions to address the exploitative aspects of attention markets, drawing analogies to labor regulations that protect workers' rights.

---

My experience is what I agree to attend to. —William James, 1890.

When Polymath Iain McGilchrist says, "Attention is a moral act," he means the way we direct our attention shapes not only our perception of the world but also our ethical and moral engagement with it. Attention is not neutral; it determines what we value, what we bring into existence in our minds, and ultimately how we act.

McGilchrist emphasizes attention as deeply tied to the structure of reality itself. Different types of attention bring forth different worlds—fragmented, decontextualized attention (associated with the left hemisphere) leads to a mechanistic, utilitarian view, while holistic, relational attention (associated with the right hemisphere) fosters depth, meaning, and interconnectedness. He had this to say in The Master and His Emmissary:

The kind of attention we bring to bear on the world changes the nature of the world we attend to, the very nature of the world in which those ‘functions’ would be carried out, and in which those ‘things’ would exist. Attention changes what kind of a thing comes into being for us: in that way it changes the world. If you are my friend, the way in which I attend to you will be different from the way in which I would attend to you if you were my employer, my patient, the suspect in a crime I am investigating, my lover, my aunt, a body waiting to be dissected. In all these circumstances, except the last, you will also have a quite different experience not just of me, but of yourself: you would feel changed if I changed the type of my attention. And yet nothing objectively has changed.

This is the shortest McGilchrist clip I can find. He has a lot of great talks on Youtube and Podcast land. And he’s on substack here:

By labeling attention a moral act, he suggests our choices about what we attend to are ethical, because they shape not only our own consciousness but also the world we create with others. In McGilchrist’s view, what we choose to attend to—and how we attend—determines the moral and spiritual texture of our lives.

---

Enter the Boyd

Fighter pilot and strategist John Boyd developed the OODA framework to describe a method for humans to “improve their capability for free and independent action.” It is a continuous cycle of Observation (Sensory inputs), Orientation (Sense-Making), Decision (What to do) and Action (Doing the thing). For Boyd, observation, orientation, and action are continuous flows, with new decisions made only as circumstances dictate. The entire cycle feeds forward and backward in order to better harmonize itself to the context.

OODA represents a template for humans and groups to prevail amid a dynamic reality, full of adversaries. It is an iterative, constantly updating way of being. Boyd identified Cultural Traditions, Analysis and Synthesis, Previous Experiences, New Information, and Genetic Heritage as the critical factors within Orientation.

Note: If you’re curious about the OODA framework, pick up Science, Strategy, and War by Frans Osinga, then check out my friend Mark McGrath’s substack:

Schwerpunkt is a German word that translates to center of gravity or focal point in English. It has different meanings depending on the context. In military doctrine, Schwerpunkt refers to the main point of effort or focus in an operation. It was a key concept in Blitzkrieg tactics, where German forces would concentrate overwhelming strength at a decisive point to break through enemy lines. A common aphorism among students of Boyd today is Orientation is the Schwerpunkt—meaning the act of Orienting is the most critical step in the OODA framework. Orienting and reorienting faster than your adversary will bring victory in a competitive engagement.

Part of my issue with Boyd’s work is there is no true spiritual component.² It’s a very instrumental, utilitarian system focused on prevailing in a contest. Now I can’t stress this enough—that is of great importance. You can’t sit around and philosophize about any larger meaning if you don’t survive. Survival requires adapting to ever-flowing conditions, responding rapidly to threats, and innovating to match ourselves to a dynamic, often kinetic environment.

But humans are built for more than this.

Attention, not orientation, is the schwerpunkt.

OODA does not orient (boom, dad joke) toward matters of the numinous. Boyd does highlight a Moral realm to conflict³, and that the human/group who is best able to harmonize their values and goals will prevail over others who become isolated and incoherent.

Attention is upstream of orientation— in fact, part of orientation is simply subcomponents of attention, like Posner’s Orienting Attention. Without properly focused attention, you can’t orient to your environment. It’s more than simple observation, because with your attention you select the frame with which you view reality.

On an instrumental level, attention is now the primary determinant of the success or failure of individuals, companies, and movements in the world.

Can you both attend to the world and gain the attention you require to accomplish your aims?

To be clear, I am a fan of John Boyd’s work. I think his framework is revelatory about how humans should make moves to achieve success. But he says little about why humans would want to do this, beyond survival.⁴ Success, victory— yes. Boyd’s OODA work is useful for war and business domains.

Is it enough to survive, stripped of any higher purpose? In a Mad Max world, maybe.

Boyd’s OODA loop emphasizes orientation as the key to prevailing in a dynamic environment, but it assumes one critical thing: that our orientation is actually our own.

Orientation is only as good as the attention that feeds it.

If your attention is hijacked—by digital distractions, media manipulation, algorithmic persuasion—your orientation is compromised before you even begin. You aren’t adapting to reality—you’re adapting to an engineered perception of reality.

McGilchrist asserts “attention is a moral act”—not simply a cognitive function, but an act of choosing what world we inhabit. The way we attend determines what is real to us, what we value, and ultimately, who we become. If we allow our attention to be fragmented, externally controlled, or reduced to mere reaction, then our entire process of orientation is corrupted at its foundation.

Orientation is tactical.

Attention is existential.

If we elevate orientation above attention, we build a world optimized for efficiency, competition, and survival—but not meaning, wisdom, or flourishing. We get a hyper-competitive, reactionary reality where speed and dominance matter more than depth and purpose.

What if we place attention first?

If we cultivate open, receptive, and meaning-filled Attention, we participate in a richer, more human reality.

Boyd always insisted his work was a protosynthesis, not dogma.

Attention, not orientation, is the schwerpunkt.

Without it, the battle is lost before it even begins. With it, we can survive, flourish, and seek our own relationship with the divine.

Currere Certamen Tuum — Run Your Race

1. A sweet hat tip to the epic Diogenes-Alexander the Great exchange.

2. Boyd never intended it to have a spiritual component. It’s designed to help humans prevail in competitive endeavors.

3. As in Physical, Mental, and Moral realms.

4. He says we want to win because it will improve our capacity for free and independent action. But to Boyd, that is good in itself; there is no higher purpose beyond that.