Why Eigenvector Centrality quietly shapes who gets seen—and why it leads us away from real leadership.
What is Eigenvector Centrality
In network theory, there’s a ranking method called Eigenvector Centrality. It doesn’t just count how many connections someone has—it ranks you based on how important the people you’re connected to already are.
It’s used in everything from search engines to hiring algorithms. But more quietly, it’s embedded in how we evaluate people:
“They must be good—look who they know.”
“They must be right—look who follows them.”
“They must be trustworthy—look who supports them.”
How it works
This system rewards closeness to perceived power. If your connections are “important,” your value increases—regardless of your actual contribution.
So status becomes a feedback loop:
those with access to power are seen as valuable → they get more visibility → their connections get boosted → and new voices stay unseen.
Why it fails
It looks efficient. But it’s deeply flawed.
- It rewards charm, strategy, and proximity, not wisdom or clarity.
- It filters out dissenting voices, no matter how accurate they are.
- It prioritizes legacy over insight, making change nearly impossible.
- It buries innovation, because it doesn’t come from the “right” place.
When value is measured by closeness to status, we don’t uplift leaders.
We uplift performers.
We don’t reward truth.
We reward network fluency—even if it’s manipulative, self-serving, or empty.
The result:
A world where the most emotionally intelligent, visionary, or healing voices are often invisible—because they’re not part of the right circle.
Why Eigenvector Centrality Fails When Humans Are Involved
What works in math fails in emotion.
Eigenvector Centrality measures importance based on connections to other “important” nodes. It works in mathematics, search engines, and neutral systems where emotion doesn’t matter.
But in human systems, it breaks.
Why?
Because emotional intelligence isn’t counted.
Trauma, power dynamics, and manipulation are invisible.
It rewards people who are close to the powerful, not people who are emotionally aware, kind, or wise.
So what rises to the top?
- Charisma over care
- Influence over insight
- Prestige over truth
This creates a world where manipulators outperform visionaries, and emotional clarity is ignored—until it’s too late.
In short:
The math works.
The system fails.
Because humans aren’t numbers.
← Back ┃ Main Page Map 5 ┃ Next →
Connection to other frameworks:
- Map Level 1 – The Emotional Gradient Framework
- Map Level 2 – Ego Persona Construct Framework
- Map Level 3 – Our Three Inner Layers
- Map Level 4 – Emotional Harm & Defense
- Map Level 5 – False Models of Society
- Map Level 6 – Healing Our Inner Child
- Map Level 8 – Neurodivergence & Evolution
→ Proximity to power shifts how emotions are interpreted. If you’re close to status, your emotions are seen as depth. If you’re not, they’re dismissed as weakness or drama—even when both express the same feeling.
→ Many people chase association (followers, credentials, names) as a way to feel real—because they’ve been taught that who endorses you matters more than who you are. This fuels persona over self.
→ This system keeps us stuck in the outermost layer. It rewards polish and performance—not the raw emotional truth beneath. The more connected to capital you seem, the more you’re allowed to bypass the cost of visibility.
→ When worth is based on association, survivors and truth-tellers are filtered out as “nobodies”. Harm gets validated if the person doing it has power—and healing voices are ignored if they don’t.
→ This is a perfect example of a false model: where value is not assessed by integrity or impact, but by proximity to legacy systems. It’s why real leaders often go unseen, and abusive ones rise.
→ Children learn early that being liked by the “right people” keeps them safe. This shapes their self-worth around approval. If their pain didn’t fit what adults wanted to hear, they learned to hide it.
→ ND people are rarely part of elite networks. Their unconventional style keeps them out of “central nodes.” But this system overlooks that innovation often comes from the outside edge—not the middle.
← Back ┃ Main Page Map 5 ┃ Next →