Re-staking on EigenLayer: Why is EIGEN token needed instead of ETH?

If you are wondering “what is re-staking” or “what is intersubjective forking,” the answer lies in a simple yet profound philosophical concept.

The Three Types of “Truth” in Blockchain

To understand EigenLayer, first grasp the three different categories of truth:

First is objective truth. These are things that can be proven absolutely, such as 1+1=2 or code that executes on the EVM always producing a deterministic result. In blockchain, verifying whether a smart contract executes successfully is an objective truth.

Second is subjective truth. These are personal judgments that cannot be refuted or proven. For example: “I think EigenLayer’s early token distribution was too small” — that is a personal opinion.

Third is “truth between subjects” (intersubjective). This is the most difficult concept. It originates from social consensus, not absolute truth but recognized by the community. For example: Bitcoin is the leader of the crypto industry, or a node has been accused of misconduct for hiding data. No one can fully prove these, but the community accepts them.

The problem of re-staking with truth between subjects

Re-staking operates on a simple principle: you use ETH as collateral, perform validation tasks. If successful, you earn a reward; if failed, your assets are subject to (slashing).

But the question is: who decides whether you failed or succeeded?

With objective truth, this is straightforward. Code does not lie — it either works or it doesn’t. Using ETH as collateral is no problem.

However, when validating “truth between subjects,” the evaluation criteria are ambiguous. Who makes the decision? Majority voting? A dispute resolution council? Both approaches have issues:

• Majority voting can lead to “tyranny of the majority” — powerful actors may collude to exclude weaker participants.
• Dispute resolution councils conflict with the decentralized spirit of crypto.

The solution: intersubjective forking

EigenLayer proposes a fundamental approach: using forks as a mechanism to resolve disagreements.

If a major dispute arises over “truth between subjects,” the community is allowed to fork the token. Supporters on one side fork into one version, supporters on the other side fork into another. Time will test these forks — eventually, one version will become the canonical, legitimate one, while the other will lose value.

For example: suppose a node is accused of misconduct. Supporters of that node fork the EIGEN token, confiscating assets from opponents. Meanwhile, opponents also fork, confiscating assets from supporters.

When the truth is ultimately revealed, the correct version becomes the official EIGEN. The incorrect version will go to zero, making past confiscations meaningless — they have already lost everything.

This is the power of intersubjective forking: it relies on market forces and time to determine truth, rather than a single authoritative decision-making body.

Why use EIGEN instead of ETH?

Using ETH for re-staking with “truth between subjects” would make forking ETH extremely difficult and dangerous for the network’s security. Moreover, ETH holders do not want their tokens to be split.

EIGEN tokens are specifically designed for this purpose. They can fork infinitely without affecting other applications or the security of Ethereum.

The two-token model of EIGEN

A detail often overlooked: EIGEN is essentially a two-token model:

• Standard ERC-20 token: cannot be forked, tradable on exchanges or used in DeFi.
• Validation token: used to determine truth, can be forked infinitely if needed.

These two tokens are separate but linked via a mapping, allowing flexible risk management.

Conclusion

EigenLayer has identified a loophole in traditional re-staking models. When validating “truth between subjects” — things that cannot be proven absolutely but require community acceptance — traditional mechanisms are insufficient.

EIGEN tokens are not just a marketing gimmick but a necessary architectural solution. They enable communities to decide truth through forks, rather than relying on a centralized authority. It’s a unique combination of philosophy, economics, and blockchain engineering.