Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS): Understanding Social Exclusion as a Trauma-Induced Self-Referential Loop

Unraveling the Cycles of Social Exclusion: A New Framework Integrating Trauma, Neurodiversity, and Systems Thinking for Inclusive Social Change

Prologue: The Roots of Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS)

TThe Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS) emerged from my own journey of trauma healing, navigating feelings of exclusion, and blending both academic inquiry and lived experiences. As a neurodivergent individual, I've frequently encountered the sharp sting of exclusion across various communities—whether academic, professional, or online.

These experiences not only deepened my understanding of exclusion but also led me to explore its complexities, particularly in relation to neurodiversity. Holding a degree in the psychology of addictions and being a survivor myself, I've been honored to facilitate spaces for others to share their trauma experiences. This has provided me with a unique lens through which to view systemic and psychological patterns of exclusion.

My interactions across diverse social contexts—from grassroots organizations to social media platforms—highlighted a recurring pattern: exclusion often reinforces itself, becoming a cycle that perpetuates social isolation and trauma. As I navigated my own trauma recovery, I began to see how exclusion operates as a self-referential feedback loop. This insight, aligned with my interests in complexity theory and cognitive science, led to a significant realization: perhaps exclusion is not merely an isolated event but a trauma-induced loop that feeds back into itself.

These reflections, combined with my passion for systems thinking and transformative social change, inspired the development of the Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis. EFS is an integrative framework that synthesizes personal experience with theoretical knowledge, aiming to understand and disrupt the cycles of exclusion for individuals and within larger social systems.

By introducing this synpraxis, I hope to enrich the conversation around exclusion, neurodiversity, trauma, and social dynamics. My goal is to offer a new perspective that promotes empathy, understanding, and healing across all areas of interaction, from academic discussions to community engagements and everyday social exchanges.

Introduction: Understanding Social Exclusion

Social exclusion is a deeply rooted phenomenon that affects individuals and communities across various life domains—whether in personal relationships, workplace dynamics, or broader societal structures. Traditionally, exclusion has been studied in terms of social behaviors, psychological impacts, and evolutionary strategies (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). However, these perspectives often fail to capture the complexity of exclusion as a dynamic, self-sustaining process. This essay introduces the Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS), a novel framework that conceptualizes social exclusion as a trauma-induced self-referential feedback loop, synthesizing insights from complexity theory, cognitive science, trauma psychology, social dynamics, and spiritual practices.

A Note on Perspective and Praxis

Before diving deeper into Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS), I want to acknowledge that the frameworks and ideas I explore come from a confluence of diverse traditions and experiences. As someone who practices Transpersonal psychology and Buddhism, I find that both spiritual and psychological perspectives help me navigate complex systems and understand interconnectedness. My Indigenous roots and neurodiversity also play a critical role in shaping my worldview and systems thinking approach.

I recognize that discussions around exclusion, trauma, and social dynamics can be sensitive, particularly when they draw on concepts from multiple disciplines and cultural traditions. My intent is not to appropriate these ideas but to synthesize them through my own lived experiences of exclusion and healing. I hope to contribute to a broader, more inclusive dialogue that respects and honors the origins of these concepts while applying them in new ways that resonate with my personal journey and the communities I am part of.

In sharing Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS), I aim to explore how exclusion operates as a self-referential feedback loop, a concept deeply rooted in systems thinking but informed by diverse cultural and psychological insights. My hope is to foster a compassionate understanding that bridges both academic theory and lived experience, creating pathways for healing and inclusion for all.

Illustrating Exclusion Feedback Loops at Different Levels

To better understand the Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS), consider how exclusionary feedback loops manifest and reinforce themselves at different levels:

• Micro Level (Individual or Small Group Dynamics):
  Imagine a classroom group project where a small group of students always works together because they share similar ideas. Over time, they unconsciously start excluding classmates who think differently. This exclusion leads them to become more convinced that their way is the best or only way to approach the project, reinforcing their original choice to stick together. As a result, the group becomes even less open to new members or perspectives, further isolating themselves and perpetuating a self-referential loop where exclusion strengthens the belief in the group's correctness and cohesion, making future inclusion less likely.

• Meso Level (Community or Organizational Contexts):
  In a workplace, a team consistently invites the same people to meetings and values their opinions above others. Over time, this group begins to see themselves as the “core team” or the “most competent,” reinforcing the idea that they are the best suited to make decisions. This belief leads them to continue excluding new or different voices, as they are seen as unnecessary or disruptive. The exclusion of new perspectives then creates an echo chamber where only similar ideas are heard and valued, further entrenching the team's belief in its own exclusivity and perpetuating the exclusionary loop.

• Macro Level (Societal or Institutional Scale):
  Consider national policy debates where decision-makers predominantly listen to certain groups that share their own views while sidelining minority voices. This practice creates a feedback loop where the existing power holders perceive their perspective as the most valid and authoritative, reinforcing their tendency to exclude alternative voices. As policies continue to reflect the biases of those in power, marginalized groups remain underrepresented, and stereotypes are reinforced. This exclusion justifies further marginalization, creating a cycle that becomes normalized within societal structures, perpetuating the loop of exclusion.

• Meta Level (Global or Ideological Contexts):
  On a global scale, powerful countries or groups dominate discussions on critical issues like climate change, setting the agenda based on their interests and perspectives. Less powerful communities, who are significantly affected but excluded from these conversations, have little influence over decisions. This exclusion reinforces the dominance of certain perspectives, which leads to solutions that primarily benefit those already in power. As a result, the feedback loop of exclusion continues—where the same voices control the narrative and decision-making, preventing a diverse range of solutions from emerging and reinforcing the existing power structures.

By showing how these loops operate at different levels, we can see that exclusion is not merely an event but a dynamic, self-referential process. The Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS) seeks to break these cycles by understanding exclusion as a complex, trauma-induced feedback loop that functions across multiple domains.

Defining Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS)

Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS) is a multidimensional framework that explains social exclusion as a complex, self-reinforcing cycle arising from trauma responses. In EFS, exclusion is not merely a one-time event or isolated social behavior; instead, it is understood as a dynamic process embedded within self-referential feedback loops. These loops are characterized by their recursive nature—outputs of the system (e.g., exclusionary behaviors or beliefs) are fed back into the system as inputs, reinforcing the original state of exclusion (Maturana & Varela, 1980).

EFS integrates principles from:

• Complexity Theory: Exclusion is viewed as a self-referential feedback loop, where the outcomes (e.g., feelings of rejection, avoidance behaviors) continually feed back into the system, creating a reinforcing cycle that becomes increasingly difficult to break (Sterman, 2000). These loops can stabilize and perpetuate exclusionary dynamics both at an individual level (personal trauma) and at a systemic level (institutional and cultural biases).

• Cognitive Science: EFS draws on the concept of neuroplasticity and cognitive biases to explain how exclusion, as a traumatic experience, can rewire the brain (Kays, Hurley, & Taber, 2012). Individuals who experience exclusion may develop cognitive biases such as confirmation bias (Nickerson, 1998) and negativity bias (Rozin & Royzman, 2001), thereby reinforcing a self-referential feedback loop of exclusion.

• Trauma Psychology: Exclusion is framed as a trauma response that affects emotional regulation and attachment styles (van der Kolk, 2014). For those who have experienced exclusion, the trauma can activate defensive responses—either avoidance (withdrawing from potential relationships to prevent further rejection) or hypervigilance (over-sensitivity to perceived slights), both of which reinforce the cycle of exclusion.

• Social Dynamics: EFS incorporates theories of ingroup-outgroup bias, suggesting that humans are inclined to favor their own group and exclude others (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). This exclusion can be seen as a defense mechanism against perceived threats, which, when repeated, becomes a self-referential feedback loop where exclusion begets more exclusion, leading to entrenched social divisions.

Exclusion as a Self-Referential Feedback Loop

At the heart of EFS is the concept of a self-referential feedback loop—a cyclical process where the effects of exclusion perpetuate its cause (Luhmann, 1995). For example:

• Individual Level: An individual excluded from a social group may develop a belief that they are inherently unworthy of inclusion. This belief shapes their future interactions, causing them to behave in ways that unintentionally reinforce their exclusion (e.g., not reaching out, appearing disinterested). This reinforces their initial belief, creating a loop.

• Systemic Level: At a systemic level, exclusionary practices (e.g., institutional racism or sexism) lead to marginalized groups being underrepresented in decision-making processes. This underrepresentation reinforces stereotypes and biases that justify further exclusion, creating a self-reinforcing feedback loop that becomes normalized within the system (DiAngelo, 2018).

Integrating the Drama Triangle: Understanding Roles in Exclusionary Feedback Loops

To further understand how these self-referential loops operate, we can apply the Drama Triangle, a psychological model introduced by Stephen Karpman in 1968. The Drama Triangle identifies three roles—Victim, Persecutor, and Rescuer—that people unconsciously adopt in conflict situations. These roles often perpetuate dysfunctional social dynamics and can help explain how exclusionary patterns are maintained within the EFS framework (Karpman, 1968).

• Victim: In exclusion dynamics, the Victim feels powerless and perpetually wronged. In the context of EFS, this role can emerge when individuals repeatedly experience exclusion, leading them to internalize feelings of unworthiness or helplessness. This can result in withdrawal or avoidance behaviors, reinforcing the exclusion loop. Recognizing this role is essential for breaking the cycle by empowering those who feel excluded to reclaim their voice and agency.

• Persecutor: The Persecutor imposes control or criticism, often from a place of perceived superiority. In exclusionary dynamics, this role is evident in behaviors that enforce boundaries, keep others out, or maintain dominance (e.g., dismissive remarks, microaggressions). Understanding this role within EFS helps identify how exclusion is actively enforced and normalized, often without conscious intent.

• Rescuer: The Rescuer seeks to "help" or "save" the Victim, often in ways that undermine the Victim’s autonomy and reinforce dependency. In metamodern spaces, this role can manifest as individuals attempting to correct or fix others, inadvertently sustaining the exclusionary loop by denying marginalized voices the opportunity to speak for themselves or assert their own power.

By recognizing these roles, we can better understand the psychological dynamics that sustain exclusionary feedback loops and find ways to foster more inclusive, psychologically safe environments.

Spiritual Praxis that Parallels EFS

The concept of EFS also finds resonance in spiritual traditions that emphasize non-dual awareness, collective healing, and mindfulness practices:

• Non-Dual Awareness and Self-Referential Loops: Traditions like Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism challenge the idea of separation between self and others. This perspective can break the loop of exclusion by dissolving the ego’s attachment to identity and difference (Tolle, 2005). Practices like meditation help transcend the illusion of separateness, fostering inclusion and oneness.

• Mindfulness and Cognitive Reframing: Mindfulness practices, such as those in Vipassana meditation, encourage observing thoughts and emotions without attachment (Kabat-Zinn, 1990). This awareness helps individuals recognize internal feedback loops and respond to feelings of exclusion more constructively.

• Collective Healing and Trauma-Informed Practices: Indigenous and community-based spiritual practices often focus on collective healing, recognizing exclusion as both an individual and communal experience. These practices parallel EFS by targeting systemic feedback loops of exclusion and fostering inclusion (Menakem, 2017).

Applications of Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS) Across Different Fields and Systems

• Psychology and Mental Health: In therapeutic settings, EFS can help individuals recognize and break the self-referential feedback loops that keep them trapped in cycles of exclusion and trauma. Trauma-informed therapy can focus on reprogramming cognitive biases and fostering new behaviors that interrupt exclusionary loops (Herman, 1992).

• Education: Schools can apply EFS to understand how exclusion impacts students' development. Programs can be designed to identify exclusionary behaviors early and promote inclusion through empathy, collaboration, and conflict resolution (Freire, 1970).

• Organizational Behavior and Workplace Dynamics: EFS provides a framework for addressing exclusionary practices in the workplace. Organizations can design more effective diversity and inclusion initiatives that address both overt and subtle feedback loops of exclusion (Dovidio et al., 2010).

• Sociology and Cultural Studies: Sociologists can use EFS to analyze how social and cultural systems perpetuate exclusion and identify points of intervention to promote greater social inclusion (Foucault, 1977).

• Political Science and Policy-Making: Policymakers can use EFS to understand how exclusionary practices in legislation and governance perpetuate social inequality and craft inclusive policies to prevent marginalized communities from being trapped in cycles of exclusion (Crenshaw, 1991).

• Complex Systems and Artificial Intelligence: In AI and complex systems theory, EFS can inform the development of algorithms that detect exclusionary patterns and promote inclusive behaviors in social networks and online platforms (Bryson & Theodorou, 2019).

• Trauma-Informed Social Work and Community Building: Community leaders can apply EFS to develop trauma-informed approaches to community building, focusing on healing and creating inclusive environments (Porges, 2011).

Empowering Change Through Awareness and Action

Understanding exclusion as a self-referential feedback loop is only the first step. To create meaningful change, we need to actively intervene in these cycles, both within ourselves and within the communities and systems we are part of. Here are some practical steps for breaking these exclusionary loops in your personal, social, and workplace dynamics:

1. Self-Reflection: Regularly examine your own biases and behaviors. Ask yourself, "Am I excluding someone by not considering their perspective or by assuming they don’t belong?" This awareness can help you recognize and challenge exclusionary patterns in your daily interactions.

2. Challenge Cognitive Biases: Practice mindfulness to notice when you are falling into confirmation or negativity bias. Replace negative assumptions with curiosity and empathy. For example, if you find yourself excluding someone based on past experiences, try to approach them with a fresh perspective.

3. Foster Inclusive Practices: In your community or workplace, advocate for diverse voices in decision-making. Actively seek out perspectives that differ from your own and create environments where all voices feel welcome and valued.

4. Build Emotional Resilience: Use tools like meditation or therapy to process feelings of exclusion and build resilience. This can help prevent automatic defensive reactions and encourage healthier social engagement.

5. Encourage Open Dialogue: Create spaces where people feel safe to share their experiences and perspectives. Fostering a culture of inclusion and mutual respect can help break down exclusionary barriers and build stronger, more empathetic communities.

6. Cultivate Courage to Break the Loops: It takes courage to confront exclusion, especially when it involves standing up to social norms, authority, or long-standing practices. Be prepared to face discomfort and resistance when challenging exclusionary behaviors, whether they occur in your personal interactions or larger systems. Recognize that each act of courage—no matter how small—disrupts the cycle of exclusion and contributes to a more inclusive world.

By implementing these practices, we can disrupt exclusionary feedback loops in our own lives and help others feel seen, heard, and valued.

Potential for Future Research and Development

The Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS) opens several avenues for future research and practical application:

• Empirical Validation: Conduct longitudinal studies to observe how exclusionary feedback loops develop, sustain, or dissolve in various contexts (e.g., schools, workplaces, online communities).

• Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Engage researchers from psychology, sociology, cognitive science, systems theory, and AI to develop comprehensive models that map exclusionary feedback loops and suggest points of intervention.

• Developing Tools and Frameworks: Create practical tools, like training modules, workshops, or AI-based detection systems, that can be used in various settings to break exclusionary loops.

• Philosophical and Ethical Exploration: Explore the ethical implications of using this framework for social engineering, behavioral modification, and policy development, ensuring that interventions promote genuine inclusion rather than superficial conformity.

Expanding Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS): Integrating Historical Systems of Exclusion - Added 2/6/25

EFS as an Open-Loop System

As Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS) continues to evolve, it is essential to recognize that exclusion is not just a personal or psychological experience—it has been intentionally structured into social, political, and economic systems for centuries. Walter Rodney’s How Europe Underdeveloped Africa (Rodney, 1972) provides a critical historical lens through which we can better understand exclusion as an engineered mechanism that perpetuates systemic inequities. Integrating his work into EFS reinforces its open-loop nature, ensuring that it remains an adaptive framework capable of incorporating diverse cultural and historical perspectives.

Historical Exclusion as a Systemic Mechanism

Rodney’s analysis reveals that exclusion was not simply a consequence of colonization—it was a deliberate strategy used to extract resources, maintain economic dominance, and reinforce psychological dependencies (Rodney, 1972). European colonial powers structured African economies to serve European interests, ensuring that Africa remained dependent on Western markets while stripping its ability to develop autonomous industries. This model of engineered exclusion mirrors many modern forms of systemic marginalization, reinforcing the idea that exclusion is not just a byproduct of oppression but a mechanism of control.

By applying EFS to Rodney’s insights, we can see exclusionary feedback loops operating at multiple levels (Rodney, 1972):

• Economic: Colonization created cycles of economic dependency that persist through modern trade agreements and structural adjustment programs imposed by international financial institutions.

• Political: Former colonies gained independence but remained subject to neocolonial pressures that limited their autonomy, keeping decision-making power concentrated in the hands of global elites.

• Psychological: Colonial education systems reinforced narratives of African inferiority, shaping collective identities and perpetuating self-referential exclusionary loops long after direct colonial rule ended.

These insights validate the foundational premise of EFS: exclusion is not an isolated incident but a deeply embedded, self-reinforcing structure that sustains global power hierarchies.

EFS as a Framework for Systemic Disruption

Rodney’s work enhances EFS by demonstrating how historical exclusions shape present conditions (Rodney, 1972), reinforcing the necessity of systemic restructuring rather than mere inclusion efforts. Because EFS is an open-loop system, it does not impose a singular interpretation but invites ongoing integration of new knowledge, allowing it to remain dynamic and responsive to emerging insights.

Incorporating Rodney’s perspective highlights key interventions within EFS:

1. Recognizing Historical Patterns: Understanding that exclusion is a designed system rather than an incidental social failure shifts our approach from reactive inclusion efforts to proactive systemic transformation.

2. Interrogating Power Structures: Identifying who benefits from exclusionary loops and challenging the policies and institutions that maintain them.

3. Creating Alternative Systems: Developing frameworks that do not simply assimilate individuals into existing systems but reimagine structures to center equity, reciprocity, and self-determination.

Conclusion: Expanding the EFS Open-Loop Model

The integration of Rodney’s work into EFS underscores the necessity of historical awareness in addressing exclusion today. By maintaining an open-loop framework, EFS allows for the continuous incorporation of lived experiences and diverse cultural perspectives, ensuring that it remains a dynamic tool for understanding and dismantling exclusionary cycles. Rodney’s analysis strengthens the foundation of EFS, illustrating that exclusion is neither accidental nor passive—it is a deliberate structure that requires intentional disruption (Rodney, 1972).

As EFS continues to evolve, this expansion serves as a call to action: to recognize, challenge, and dismantle exclusionary systems at every level.

The Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS) offers a comprehensive, interdisciplinary framework for understanding social exclusion as a trauma-induced self-referential loop. By synthesizing insights from complexity theory, cognitive science, trauma psychology, social dynamics, and spiritual praxis, EFS presents a new way to understand and address exclusion across different systems. This synpraxis encourages a shift from merely identifying exclusionary behaviors to understanding and intervening in the dynamic processes that perpetuate exclusion, paving the way for more inclusive, empathetic, and trauma-informed approaches in diverse fields.

By applying these ideas, we can collectively work towards breaking the loops of exclusion that limit us, fostering environments where everyone feels valued, included, and empowered to participate fully.

Note to Readers

Thank you for joining me in this exploration of Exclusion Feedback Synpraxis (EFS) and the deeper patterns of trauma and exclusion shaping our world. I hope this piece sparks new insights and encourages us all to rethink how we approach social change and inclusion.

If this essay resonates with you, please give it a heart or share it with others who might find it meaningful. Your thoughts and reflections are always appreciated—let’s keep the conversation going!

There will never be paywalls here. If you'd like to support this work and help sustain our shared space for transformative ideas, consider subscribing. Your support helps grow The Compassion Collective and fosters our community of change-makers.

---

References

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.

Bryson, J. J., & Theodorou, A. (2019). How society can maintain human-centric artificial intelligence. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(2), 175-182.

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299.

DiAngelo, R. (2018). White fragility: Why it’s so hard for white people to talk about racism. Beacon Press.

Dovidio, J. F., Hewstone, M., Glick, P., & Esses, V. M. (Eds.). (2010). The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination. SAGE.

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Vintage.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder and Herder.

Herman, J. L. (1992). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror. Basic Books.

Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness.Delta.

Karpman, S. B. (1968). Fairy tales and script drama analysis. Transactional Analysis Bulletin, 7(26), 39-43.

Kays, J. L., Hurley, R. A., & Taber, K. H. (2012). The dynamic brain: Neuroplasticity and mental health. Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 24(2), 118-124.

Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford University Press.

Menakem, R. (2017). My grandmother's hands: Racialized trauma and the pathway to mending our hearts and bodies.Central Recovery Press.

Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. D. Reidel.

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220.

Porges, S. W. (2011). The polyvagal theory: Neurophysiological foundations of emotions, attachment, communication, and self-regulation. W.W. Norton & Company.

Rodney, W. (1972). How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Washington, DC: Howard University Press.

Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(4), 296-320.

Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Irwin/McGraw-Hill.

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Brooks/Cole.

Tolle, E. (2005). A new earth: Awakening to your life's purpose. Penguin Group.

van der Kolk, B. A. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. Viking.