(logo) Natural Genesis (logo text)
A Sourcebook for the Worldwide Discovery of a Creative Organic Universe
Table of Contents
Genesis Vision
Learning Planet
Organic Universe
Earth Life Emerge
Genesis Future
Recent Additions

II. Planetary Prodigy: A Global Sapiensphere Learns by Her/His Self

C. Mindkind Sapiensphere: WorldWise Collective Intelligence

Levy, Pierre. Collective Intelligence. New York: Plenum, 1997. From France comes another report on the rudiments of an embryonic planetary mind arising from integrated human cognition.

Levy, Pierre. The Semantic Sphere: Computation, Cognition and Information Economy. New York: Wiley-ISTE, 2011. The latest volume by the University of Ottawa communication philosopher and Canada Research Chair in Collective Intelligence illumes the fulfillment over the past decade of a worldwide cerebral faculty, which is in fact the conceptual basis and occasion of this website.

The new digital media offers us an unprecedented memory capacity, an ubiquitous communication channel and a growing computing power. How can we exploit this medium to augment our personal and social cognitive processes at the service of human development? Combining a deep knowledge of humanities and social sciences as well as a real familiarity with computer science issues, this book explains the collaborative construction of a global hypercortex coordinated by a computable metalanguage. By recognizing fully the symbolic and social nature of human cognition, we could transform our current opaque global brain into a reflexive collective intelligence. (Publisher)

Lightman, Alex and William Rojas. Brave New Unwired World: The Digital Big Bang and the Infinite Internet. New York: Wiley, 2002. The book contains both technical details and visionary perspectives on a wireless network now enveloping the globe. When it is accomplished, anyone, anywhere should have free, instant access to the totality of human knowledge.

We are not an accident of the Universe. Our intelligence is not random. We are generators of information content in the universe. (142)

Liu, Jiming and K. C. Tsui. Toward Nature-Inspired Computing. Communications of the ACM. 49/10, 2006. Prof. Liu, a leading innovator of an autonomous, self-organizing, worldwide web intelligence, is presently Director of the School of Computer Science at the University of Windsor in Canada. Check his website via Google for an extensive list of publications. Here he is joined by an IT manager from the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp. The broad intent of this project is to carry forth natural developmental and cognitive viability to enhance the Internet. These include autonomous agents, distributed decision-making, emergent complexity, adaptive responses, all of which are able to organize themselves.

Llinas, Rodolfo. I of the Vortex: From Neuron to Self. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001. A veteran neuroscientist explains how the brain achieves “perceptual binding” by a simultaneity of communicative modules. These theories lead to speculations about whether the Internet is becoming a rudimentary species mind.

One of the few ways in which local order can increase is through the generation of such things as a nervous system that employs modularization of function. If modularization is indeed a universal to combat disorder, such a geometric and architectural solution may have happened at other levels as well. (258)

Lyon, Pamela. The Biogenic Approach to Cognition. Cognitive Processing. 7/1, 2006. A paper in two special issues, previously 6/4, 2005, on Memory and the Extended Mind. Lyon here proposes an evolutionary basis that proceeds as a self-organizing, autopoietic complex system with a propensity for increased free agency in an environment. These dual issues also explore the views of Richard Menary, John Sutton, Robert A. Wilson, and others on a situated and embodied social cognition. Google for more info. Cognitive scientists and philosophers seem to be closing in on the realization that human communities indeed have minds of their own, and if so appreciated can be a source of salutary knowledge.

Malone, Thomas. Collective Intelligence. www.edge.org/conversation/collective-intelligence. A video and text posting on the edge.org salon from a November 2012 presentation by the MIT management scientist and director of its Center for Collective Intelligence. As many citations herein confirm, it is recognized that human individuals, especially today but through history, abide in group situations, which then take on cognitive attributes (for better or worse) of their own. This occasion is being studied in itself, and to facilitate improved team engagement and actions. Malone alludes that the Internet, via Google and Wikipedia, appears to manifest rudimentary worldwide cerebral abilities.

But within his talk is a fascinating finding. Three factors were are said to aid group intelligence. The first two are a “social perceptiveness” or empathic awareness of the project at hand, and “conversational turn taking” so no one person can rule. But the third and most important, as the quote notes, was the direct relation of cognitive acumen with the number of women members. The more the better, and smartest with all women. Search Anita Woolley for more, could this be the most balanced, bicameral arrangement? The talk closes with advice that a proper witness and avail of such local and global cooperative cognizance, proceeding much on its own, may be the world’s saving resource.

Finally, we found that the collective intelligence of the group was significantly correlated with the percentage of women in the group. More women were correlated with a more intelligent group. Interestingly, this last result is not just a diversity result. It's not just saying that you need groups with some men and some women. It looks like that it's a more or less linear trend. That is, more women are better all the way up to all women. It is also important to realize that this gender effect is largely statistically mediated by the social perceptiveness effect. In other words, it was known before we did our work that women on average scored higher on this measure of social perceptiveness than men.

You might well argue that human intelligence has all along been primarily a collective phenomenon rather than an individual one. Most of the things we think of as human intelligence really arise in the context of our interactions with other human beings. We learn languages. We learn to communicate. Most of our intellectual achievements as humans really result not just from a single person working all alone by themselves, but from interactions of an individual with a culture, with a body of knowledge, with a whole community and network of other humans. I think and I hope that this approach to thinking about collective intelligence can help us to understand not only what it means to be individual humans, but what it means for us as humans to be part of some broader collectively intelligent entity.

Malone, Thomas, et al. The Collective Intelligence Genome. MIT Sloan Management Review. Spring, 2010. With co-authors Robert Laubacher and Chrysanthos Dellarocas, a report on an MIT Center for Collective Intelligence project that seeks to implement this nascent evolutionary emergence by way of, as the quote states, an equivalent genetic capability. Although not pressed, it implies that our common cognition may indeed take on such a creative identity. Malone, CCI founder-director and MIT management professor, goes on to note in the MIT Spectrum, (Summer 2010), that the “collective brainpower” of a worldwide cerebral consortium, properly accessed and availed, is really our only hope to save earth’s sustaining environment. Search Malone for a 2012 Collective Intelligence conference report.

We define a gene as a particular answer to one of the key questions (What, Who, Why or How) associated with a single task in a collective intelligence system. Like the genes from which individual organisms develop, these organizational genes are the core elements from which collective intelligence systems are built. The full combination of genes associated with a specific example of collective intelligence can be viewed as the “genome” of that system. (22-23)

Malone,, Thomas and Michael Bernstein, eds. Handbook of Collective Intelligence. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2015. The MIT Center for Collective Intelligence director, and a Stanford University computer scientist assemble initial considerations about how animal and human groupings can exhibit a modicum of cognition, learning, and composite knowledge. Chapters are divided into Economic, Biology, Human-Computer, Artificial Intelligence, Psychology, Organizational, and Social domains such as The Wisdom of Crowds by Andrew Lo and Collective Behavior in Animals by Deborah Gordon.

Intelligence does not arise only in individual brains; it also arises in groups of individuals. This is collective intelligence: groups of individuals acting collectively in ways that seem intelligent. In recent years, a new kind of collective intelligence has emerged: interconnected groups of people and computers, collectively doing intelligent things. Today these groups are engaged in tasks that range from writing software to predicting the results of presidential elections. This volume reports on the latest research in the study of collective intelligence, laying out a shared set of research challenges from a variety of disciplinary and methodological perspectives. Taken together, these essays -- by leading researchers from such fields as computer science, biology, economics, and psychology -- lay the foundation for a new multidisciplinary field.

Marien, Michael. The Future of Human Benefit Knowledge: Notes on a World Brain for the 21st Century. Futures. 39/8, 2007. The long time editor of the Future Survey newsletter explores how this concept advocated in the 1930s by H. G. Wells could become a salutary reality in years to come.

Marijuan, Pedro, et al. Scientomics: An Emergent Perspective in Knowledge Organization. Knowledge Organization. 39/3, 2012. Aragon Institute of Health Science, Zaragoza, Spain, bioinformation researchers continue their reconception of cells and societies as most distinguished by a genetic-like communicative and informational quality that is universally recapitulated in each and every evolutionary and organismic instance.

In one of the most important conceptual changes of our times, biology has definitely abandoned its mechanistic hardcore and is advancing “fast and furious” along the informational dimension. Biology has really become an information science; and, as such, it is also inspiring new ways of thinking and new kinds of knowledge paradigms beyond those discussed during past decades. In this regard, a new “bioinformational” approach to the inter-multi-disciplinary relationships among the sciences will beproposed herein: scientomics. Biologically inspired, scientomics contemplates the multifarious interactions between scientific disciplines from the “knowledge recombination” vantage point. In their historical expansion, the sciences would have recapitulated upon collective cognitive dynamics already realized along the evolutionary expansion of living systems, mostly by means of domain recombination processes within cellular genomes, but also occurring neurally inside the “cerebral workspace” of human brains and advanced mammals. Scientomics, understood as a new research field in the domain of knowledge organization, would capture the ongoing processes of scientific expansion and recombination by means of genomic inspired software like in the new field of culturomics. (Abstract)

Marsh, Leslie. Introduction to the Special Issue: “Extended Mind”. Cognitive Systems Research. 11/4, 2010. Articles on this school of thought initiated by Andy Clark and David Chalmers in the late 1990s which is presently spawning much interest that human cognitive faculties go much beyond brains alone, and reach out into bodily, societal, artifactual, and environmental domains.

Previous   1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10  Next  [More Pages]