|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | <div class="page-header" > <h1>Federation through Images</h1> </div> | + | <div class="page-header" ><h1>Five Insights: Collective Mind</h1></div> |
| | + | |
| | + | When we begin to use knowledge to show us what we don't see, so that we may see a theme or an issue as a whole, a vision of a world on the brink of change results; and of a whole new order of things, which is ready to emerge. We call the emerging order of things the [[holotopia|<em>holotopia</em>]]. The [[five insights|<em>five insights</em>]] are selected as sufficient to see the [[holotopia|<em>holotopia</em>]]. |
| | + | |
| | + | <p>The Collective Mind, which is introduced here, is one of them.</p> |
| | + | |
| | | | |
| | <div class="row"> | | <div class="row"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3">< h2> Reimaging the Enlightenment</ h2></div> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Interests</h4></div> |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Enlightening the everyday</h3> | + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| − | <p>Can you imagine a change in our society's sanctioned capability to comprehend that is comparable to the one that the Enlightenment brought?</p>
| + | <ul></li>Communication</li> |
| − | <p>Can you imagine a similar dispelling of prejudices and illusions – in our understanding of love, happiness, religion, social justice and democracy?</p> | + | <li>Media</li> |
| − | <p>In these detailed pages of our presentation we'll provide food for this line of thought. </p> | + | <li>IT innovation<li> |
| − | <p>In the first story of Federation through Stories we show how the developments in modern physics, and in science and philosophy at large, disrupted our notions of what knowledge and pursuit of knowledge are about; the notions that the 19th century science gave our popular culture, which still persist. The [[giants|<em>giants</em>]] of modern science saw that what they were discovering was not only the behavior of small quanta of matter, or the social mechanisms by which the idea of reality is constructed, or the neurological mechanisms that govern awareness – but that the bare foundations of our creation of truth and meaning were emerging from the ground. </p> | + | <li>Public sphere</li> |
| − | <p>Having thus lost its innocence, its "objective observer" self-image, science acquired a new capability – to self-reflect. And through self-reflection to understand the limitations of its own approach to knowledge. </p> | + | <li>Public informing</li> |
| − | <p>Here, in Federation through Images, we'll depict the academic and human situation this has brought us to. And propose how to take the consequences of what's been done and learned, and continue to evolve further.</p> | + | <li>Knowledge work</li> |
| − | <p>We are about to see how this disruption of our laminar academic flow we are facing can be turned into a <em>con</em>struction, and a whole <em>new</em> evolutionary flow. </p>
| + | </ul> |
| − | <p>We shall see how this can empower us to extend the extent of the scientific approach to knowledge to <em>any</em> theme that matters.</p>
| + | </div> </div> |
| | + | |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Our giant in residence</h3>
| |
| − | </div> </div>
| |
| | <div class="row"> | | <div class="row"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Seeing our collective mind</h4></div> |
| − | <div class="col-md-6"> | + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| − | <p> | + | [[File:KFvision.jpeg]] |
| − | <blockquote>
| + | <p> |
| − | In spite of all the fruitfulness on particulars, dogmatic rigidity prevailed on the matter of principles:
| + | By depicting our civilization as a Godzilla-like animal, this <em>ideogram</em> points to the main insight discussed here. The point is to see us all interconnected by modern IT as cells are connected in a human mind. We have gotten a new nervous system. How shall we use it? |
| − | In the beginning (if there was such a thing), God created Newton's laws of motion together with the necessary masses and forces. This is all; everything beyond this follows from the development of appropriate mathematical methods by means of deduction.
| + | </p> |
| − | </blockquote>
| + | <p>The point here is that we've inherited the 'algorithm' – which we use to handle knowledge. In the small, and in the large. It has to be federation, not broadcasting. Federation leads to collective intelligence; broadcasting to collective madness.</p> |
| − | While we build on ideas of a whole generation of [[giants|<em>giants</em>]], in this condensed presentation they will all be represented by a single one – Albert Einstein. Einstein will here appear in his usual role, as a modern science icon.</p> </div>
| + | <p>The new information technology is a nervous system. It was conceived to make us 'collectively intelligent'. Yet we've used it to only re-implement the printing press way of working – broadcasting. And the same type of documents.</p> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"> [[File:Einstein.jpg]] <br><small><center>[[Albert Einstein]]</center></small></div>
| + | <p>Federation leads to collective intelligence; broadcasting to collective madness!</p> |
| − | </div>
| + | <p>How does this affect us personally? Nietzsche's can be quoted to point to a most interesting possibility: We may be operating in a cognitive and emotional spasm. Unable to comprehend and to act, and only reacting...</p> |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7">
| |
| − | <p>The above lines from Einstein's Autobiographical Notes, where he described physics at the point when he entered it as a graduate student, around the turn of last century, will set the stage for what is about to follow.</p> | |
| − | <p>It is a daring change <em>on the matter of principles</em> that made modern physics possible. We'll now see how this change can percolate further.</p></div> | |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"><h2>These images are ideograms</h2></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Pictures that are worth one thousand words</h3>
| |
| − | <p>Not all pictures are worth one thousand words; but these [[ideograms|<em>ideograms</em>]] are! </p> | |
| − | <p>Each of them will not only summarize for us the insights of a some of the last century's most original minds – but also allow us to "stand on their shoulders" and see beyond. What we'll then be able to see is a vast creative frontier that their combined insights reveal; and the opportunities for <em>fundamental</em> contribution and achievement this frontier offers. </p> | |
| − | <p>By using [[ideograms|<em>ideograms</em>]] we shall at the same time <em>demonstrate</em> big-picture science and its power. Recall that the philosophical systems of Hegel and Husserl took thousands of <em>pages</em>! Here only a handful of [[ideograms|<em>ideograms</em>]] will prove sufficient. </p>
| |
| − | <p>Our purpose being to ignite a conversation, this concise presentation will serve us best.</p>
| |
| | </div></div> | | </div></div> |
| − | ----
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"><h2>Invitation to academic self-reflection</h2></div>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Mirror ideogram</h3>
| |
| − | <p>We use this metaphorical image, of the academic mirror, to point to the nature of the academic condition to which the insights reached in 20th century science and philosophy have brought us.</p>
| |
| − | <p>Just as the case was in Lewis Carrol's story from which this metaphor has been borrowed, the academic [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]] will turn out to be a trapdoor into a whole <em>new</em> academic reality.</p>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | [[File:Magical_Mirror.jpg]] <br><small><center>Mirror ideogram</center></small>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | <p>You may imagine that every university campus has one – although we are normally much too busy to see it.</p>
| |
| − | <p>If we would, however, stop and take a look, we would see in this [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]] the same world that we see around us. But we would also see <em>ourselves</em> in the world! </p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Seeing ourselves in the mirror</h3>
| |
| − | <p>As a symbol, the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]] is an invitation to reconsider our conventional academic self-conception.</p>
| |
| − | <p>Seeing ourselves in the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]] symbolizes that we've understood and internalized the fact that we are not the "objective observers" we believed we were – hovering above the world, and by looking at it through the objective prism of "the scientific method", seeing it as it truly is. </p>
| |
| − | <p>In a moment we'll stop and reflect; it took us 25 centuries to come to where we are, and to see ourselves in this [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]]. How much is our academic ethos, and culture, marked by this self-image that we must now grow beyond? And what <em>is</em> beyond? In a moment we'll let you pause and think of those questions. But for now, let's just look at a couple of short quotations from Einstein, a couple of words of wisdom – which will <em>already</em> be sufficient for us to see the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]]. </p>
| |
| − | <p>The first will explain why "the correspondence with reality" is a shaky foundation for truth and meaning – because this correspondence can never be verified.</p>
| |
| − | </div></div>
| |
| | <div class="row"> | | <div class="row"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3">< /div> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Consequences</h4></div> |
| − | <div class="col-md-6">
| + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| − | <p><blockquote>
| + | <p>Text</p> |
| − | Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world. In our endeavor to understand reality we are somewhat like a man trying to understand the mechanism of a closed watch. He sees the face and the moving hands, even hears its ticking, but he has no way of opening the case. If he is ingenious he may form some picture of a mechanism which could be responsible for all the things he observes, but he may never be quite sure his picture is the only one which could explain his observations. He will never be able to compare his picture with the real mechanism and he cannot even imagine the possibility or the meaning of such a comparison.</blockquote>
| + | </div></div> |
| − | </p></div> | |
| − | <div class="col-md- 3"> [[File:Einstein.jpg]] < br> <small><center>[[Albert Einstein]]</ center></small></div> | |
| − | </div> | |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><p>Einstein's second note will suggest that "the correspondence with reality" has largely been a product of illusion.
| |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | During philosophy’s childhood it was rather generally believed that it is possible to find everything which can be known by means of mere reflection. (...) Someone, indeed, might even raise the question whether, without something of this illusion, anything really great can be achieved in the realm of philosophical thought – but we do not wish to ask this question. This more aristocratic illusion concerning the unlimited penetrative power of thought has as its counterpart the more plebeian illusion of naïve realism, according to which things “are” as they are perceived by us through our senses. This illusion dominates the daily life of men and animals; it is also the point of departure in all the sciences, especially of the natural sciences.
| |
| − | </blockquote></p>
| |
| − | <p>But if the purpose of our pursuit of knowledge is to distinguish reality from illusion – how can we base it on a criterion (the correspondence with reality) that is impossible to verify? And which is itself a product of illusion?</p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Seeing ourselves in the world</h3>
| |
| − | <p>So what <em>is</em> really the purpose of our (academic) pursuit of knowledge? </p>
| |
| − | <p>Or perhaps better said – <em>what should our purpose be</em>?</p>
| |
| − | <p>The space in front of the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]] is the space for academic self-reflection.</p>
| |
| − | <p>By seeing ourselves in the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]], we see that our academic values, and culture, and ethos have grown on false premises – which we now <em>known</em> to be false.</p>
| |
| − | <p>By seeing ourselves in the world, we see a world in dire need; and we see ourselves as obliged to answer to our society's needs. We see ourselves as liable.</p>
| |
| − | <p>But self-reflection – however necessary it might be – is not an end in itself. It is only a beginning.</p>
| |
| − | </div></div>
| |
| − | -----
| |
| | <div class="row"> | | <div class="row"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"><h2 style="color:red">Reflection</h2></div> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Formulation</h4></div> |
| − | <div class="col-md-6"><h3>It took us 25 centuries</h3>
| + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| − | <p>So here we are! This space, in front of the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]], is exactly where we need to be. </p>
| + | <p>Text</p> |
| − | <p>It took us 25 centuries to come to where we are. And so much will depend on how we'll continue. </p>
| |
| − | <p>Before we continue, let's make sure we understand what exactly is going on here; what exactly it is that we are talking about.</p>
| |
| − | <p>You may consider this whole website as an invitation to this self-reflection in front of the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]]. And as an invitation to the academic reality on the other side.</p>
| |
| − | <p>In Federation through Stories we'll share stories of four ignored [[giants|<em>giants</em>]], who each in his own way were pointing to the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]], and the opportunities beyond. </p>
| |
| − | <p>And in Federation through Applications you'll find a down-to-earth description of that <em>wonderful</em> new creative realm. </p>
| |
| − | <p>In Federation through Conversations you'll see how our civilization's evolution, and our <em>understanding</em> of that evolution (which is still only in the writings of [[giants|<em>giants</em>]]) brought us to this turning point.</p>
| |
| − | <p>But here our theme is <em>academic</em> evolution. </p>
| |
| − | <p>And this evolution has its own logic, and its own <em>intrinsic</em> course! Academic knowledge has its own standards of excellence. Standards that have been evolving for 25 centuries; we cannot just turn around, we cannot just abandon them!</p>
| |
| − | <p>Our point here is that <em>both</em> the <em>intrinsic</em> and the <em>extrinsic</em> or pragmatic concerns are now urging us to take the next step in the evolution of knowledge.</p>
| |
| − | <p>But what <em>is</em> the next step?</p></div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"><h2>We can go through!</h2></div>
| |
| − | | |
| − | <div class="col-md-7" ><h3>The next step</h3> | |
| − | <p>This metaphorical act, of stepping through the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]], points to a surprising, nearly magical resolution to our quest for self-identity and purpose.</p> | |
| | </div></div> | | </div></div> |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-6">
| |
| − | <p>What makes this apparent violation of basic laws of nature academically possible is what Villard Van Orman Quine called [[truth by convention|<em>truth by convention</em>]].
| |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | The less a science has advanced, the more its terminology tends to rest on an uncritical assumption of mutual understanding. With increase of rigor this basis is replaced piecemeal by the introduction of definitions. The interrelationships recruited for these definitions gain the status of analytic principles; what was once regarded as a theory about the world becomes reconstrued as a convention of language. Thus it is that some flow from the theoretical to the conventional is an adjunct of progress in the logical foundations of any science.
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | If this is how the sciences progress – why not allow our knowledge work at large to progress similarly?</p></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"> [[File:Quine.jpg]] <br><small><center>[[Willard V.O. Quine]]</center></small></div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Truth becomes a convention</h3>
| |
| − | <p>Truth by convention is the kind of truth that is common in mathematics: "Let <em>x</em> be... Then..." It is meaningless to ask whether <em>x</em> "really is" as stated.</p>
| |
| − | <p>It is the truth by convention that makes the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]] academically penetrable.</p>
| |
| − | <p>All manner of departures from the tradition – not only the departure from the <em>scientific</em> traditional interests and methods but also all others, including the departure from the traditional use of language (where we are obliged to inherit the meaning of words) – are made possible by truth by convention. </p>
| |
| − | <p>There is a basic convention that states this; the convention that makes all other conventions possible. We call this basic convention a [[methodology|<em>methodology</em>]]. </p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Truth becomes rigorous</h3>
| |
| − | <p>It stands to reason that our foundation for creating truth and meaning must itself be as solid as possible.</p>
| |
| − | <p>The foundations we've just outlined are unshakeable for three reasons:
| |
| − | <ul>
| |
| − | <li>They are a convention – and what's asserted in that way is true by definition</li>
| |
| − | <li>They are an expression of the state-of-the-art epistemological findings, of the insights of [[giants|<em>giants</em>]]</li>
| |
| − | <li>They (that is, the convention or the [[methodology|<em>methodology</em>]] that defines them) are conceived as a [[prototypes|<em>prototype</em>]]; and as a prototype it has provisions for updating itself, when relevant new insights are reached</li>
| |
| − | </ul></p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Knowledge becomes useful</h3> | + | <div class="row"> |
| − | <p>Just as the case is in Lewis Carrol's story, by stepping through the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]] we find ourselves in an academic reality that is in many important ways a reverse image of the one we are accustomed to.</p> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Story</h4></div> |
| − | <p>On the other side of the [[mirror|<em>mirror</em>]] we can <em>assign</em> a purpose to knowledge, and to our work, by stating it as a convention.</p> | + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| − | <p>Notice that this convention is not making any claim to reality, or universality. Someone else can make <em>another</em> convention – and give knowledge a <em>different</em> purpose. </p> | + | <p>Text</p> |
| − | <p>We, however, give our work the purpose we've already explained on our front page – the one pointed to by the Modernity [[ideograms|<em>ideogram</em>]], and the [[design epistemology|<em>design epistemology</em>]]. According to this convention, knowledge is conceived of and handled as a functional element in a larger system – our civilization, society, democracy... Knowledge can then be created, evaluated and used accordingly.</p>
| + | </div></div> |
| − | <p>By creating an [[epistemology|<em>epistemology</em>]] by convention, we <em>both</em> liberate knowledge and knowledge work from its age-old subservience to "reality" (and therewith also with the age-old traditional procedures and methods which, as it has been assumed, secured that knowledge would correspond with reality) – and by the same sleight of hand assign it another purpose – of helping us, contemporary people, orient ourselves in the complex reality we've created.</p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Knowledge work changes sides</h3>
| |
| − | <p>By combining truth by convention with the creation of a [[methodology|<em>methodology</em>]] (which is an organized system of fundamental conventions), knowledge work becomes solidly established on the academic ground that Herbert Simon called "the sciences of the artificial" – which do not study what objectively exists in the natural world, but man-made things, with the goal of adapting them to the purposes they serve in the human world.</p>
| |
| − | <p>Our [[prototypes|<em>prototype</em>]] [[methodology|<em>methodology</em>]] – by which this reversal is made concrete, or even possible – is called [[Polyscopic Modeling]]. What we call [[polyscopy|<em>polyscopy</em>]] is the [[praxis|<em>praxis</em>]] this [[methodology|<em>methodology</em>]] fosters. Usually, however, we simply refer to both simply as [[polyscopy|<em>polyscopy</em>]]. </p>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | ----
| |
| | <div class="row"> | | <div class="row"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3">< h2> We can liberate knowledge</ h2></div> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Action</h4></div> |
| | + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| | + | <p>[[bootstrapping|<em>bootstrapping</em>]]</p> |
| | + | </div></div> |
| | | | |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Creating the way we look at the world</h3>
| |
| − | <p>Our next image will point to a way to liberate academic knowledge work, or "science", from the terminology, methods and interests of traditional disciplines.</p>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | [[File:Polyscopy.jpg]] <br><small><center>Polyscopy ideogram</center></small>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | <p>The Polyscopy [[ideograms|<em>ideogram</em>]] stands for the fact that once we've understood that our traditional concepts and methods are <em>human</em> creations, which both enable us to see certain things <em>and</em> hinder us from seeing others – it becomes mandatory to <em>adapt</em> them so that we may see whatever <em>needs</em> to be seen. </p> </div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| | <div class="row"> | | <div class="row"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Keywords</h4></div> |
| − | <div class="col-md- 6" ><h3>From the pen of our giant</h3> | + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| − | <p><blockquote> | + | <p>[[knowledge federation|<em>federation</em>]] </p> |
| − | Science is the attempt to make the chaotic diversity of our sense-experience correspond to a logically uniform system of thought.
| + | </div></div> |
| − | </blockquote>
| + | |
| − | This, and the next quotation of our chosen [[giants|<em>giant</em>]], will give us a clue how exactly we may use this approach to liberate our view of the world from disciplinary and terminological constraints.
| |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | I shall not hesitate to state here in a few sentences my epistemological credo. I see on the one side the totality of sense experiences and, on the other, the totality of the concepts and propositions that are laid down in books. (…) The system of concepts is a creation of man, together with the rules of syntax, which constitute the structure of the conceptual system. (…) All concepts, even those closest to experience, are from the point of view of logic freely chosen posits, just as is the concept of causality, which was the point of departure for this inquiry in the first place.
| |
| − | </blockquote></p></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"> [[File:Einstein.jpg]] <br><small><center>[[Albert Einstein]]</center></small></div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| | <div class="row"> | | <div class="row"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Prototypes</h4></div> |
| − | | + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-7" ><h3>Generalizing science</h3> | + | <p>Text</p> |
| − | <p>Central in [[polyscopy|<em>polyscopy</em>]] is the notion of [[scope|<em>scope</em>]] – which is, by definition, whatever determines how we look at the world and how we see it. </p>
| + | </div></div> |
| − | <p>Based on what we've just seen, [[polyscopy|<em>polyscopy</em>]] generalizes the traditional-scientific approach to knowledge in two steps.</p> | |
| − | <p>The first step is to allow for free definition of concepts and methods. This is, of course, made possible by defining them <em>by convention</em>. As you may be guessing, this is what our [[keywords|<em>keywords</em>]] are about; we have given them a specific meaning, by defining them in that way.</p>
| |
| − | <p>The second step is to consider also our statements or models or pieces of information as no more than – ways of looking or [[scope|<em>scopes</em>]].</p>
| |
| − | <p>Just as in Einstein's "epistemological credo", in [[polyscopy|<em>polyscopy</em>]] too there is experience, which is not assumed to have any a priori form, and there are our models or [[scope|<em>scopes</em>]]. Then the whole point is to organize experience in a way that <em>sufficiently</em> fits the scope. </p>
| |
| − | <p>We refer you to the Polyscopy [[prototypes|<em>prototype</em>]] in Federation through Applications, and the links provided therein, to see how exactly this general approach to knowledge works in practice.</p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Simplicity and clarity are in the eyes of the beholder</h3>
| |
| − | <p>Since [[scope|<em>scopes</em>]] are human-made by convention, they can be as precise and rigorous as we desire – <em>on any level of generality</em>.</p>
| |
| − | <p>Simplicity and clarity, by convention, are "in the eyes of the beholder" – (a consequence of our [[scope|<em>scope</em>]]). Hence we can freely and legitimately create them – even in a complex world!</p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Models are scopes</h3>
| + | * Back to [[five insights]]. |
| − | <p>An interesting "philosophical" question is – What do we really mean when we make a statement, that something is so-and-so, if we are not claiming that this is how the reality "really is"?</p>
| |
| − | <p>The answer provided by [[polyscopy|<em>polyscopy</em>]] is that our statements, and models, are (by convention) just [[scope|<em>scopes</em>]], just our own created ways of looking at experience and of organizing experience. They are a way of saying "See if you can see things (also) in this way, and if this way of looking may reveal to you something that you may otherwise have overlooked."</p>
| |
| − | <p>As Piaget wrote, "Intelligence organizes the world by organizing itself"</p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Multiple scopes are needed</h3> | + | <!-- CLIPs |
| − | <p>Think about inspecting a cup you are holding in your hand, to see if it's whole or cracked. You must look at it from all sides, before you can give a conclusive answer. And if any of those points of view reveals a crack – then the cup <em>is</em> cracked!</p>
| |
| − | <p>In [[polyscopy|<em>polyscopy's</em>]] technical language we say that to acquire a correct [[gestalt|<em>gestalt</em>]], all relevant [[aspects|<em>aspects</em>]] need to be considered.</p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>No experiences are automatically excluded</h3>
| |
| − | <p>Another consequence of this approach to knowledge is that no experience is excluded because it fails to fit into our "reality picture".</p>
| |
| − | <p>On the contrary – since the substance of information, and of knowledge, is ultimately human experience, then <em>all forms of experience are considered to be potentially valuable</em>. The method sketched here allows for combining a variety of heterogeneous insights and forms of experience to create a [[high-level|<em>high-level</em>]] view. Examples of this are shared below.</p> </div></div>
| |
| | <div class="row"> | | <div class="row"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Ideogram</h4></div> |
| | + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| | | | |
| − | <div class="col-md-6"><h3>Descartes would agree</h3>
| |
| − | <p>The overall result is a general-purpose method which – like a portable flashlight – can be pointed at any phenomenon or issue.</p>
| |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | The objective of studies needs to be to direct the mind so that it brings solid and true judgments about everything that presents itself to it.
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | <p>René Descartes is often "credited" as the philosophical father of the limiting (reductionistic) aspects of science. This Rule 1 from his manuscript "Rules for the Direction of the Mind" (unfinished during his lifetime and published posthumously) shows that also Descartes might have preferred to be remembered as a supporter of [[polyscopy|<em>polyscopy</em>]].</p>
| |
| | </div> | | </div> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"> [[File:Descartes.jpg]] <br><small><center>[[René Descartes]]</center></small></div>
| |
| | </div> | | </div> |
| − | ----
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"><h2>Redirecting knowledge work</h2></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Illuminating what's hidden</h3>
| |
| − | <p>[[polyscopy|<em>Polyscopy</em>]], as we've just outlined it, is like a flexible searchlight, which can be pointed in whatever direction we choose.</p>
| |
| − | <p>The [[methodology|<em>methodology</em>]] provides specific criteria (in place of the traditional "correspondence with reality") to orient the all-important choice of [[scope|<em>scope</em>]] (what we'll be looking at, and in what way). One of them is the [[perspective|<em>perspective</em>]]. </p>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | [[File:Perspective.jpeg]]<br><small><center>Perspective ideogram</center></small>
| |
| − | <p></p>
| |
| − | <p>The [[perspective|<em>perspective</em>]] criterion postulates that every thing or issue has a visible and a hidden side. And that the purpose of knowledge work is to illuminate what is hidden, and make the whole visible in correct shape and proportions.</p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | </div>
| + | |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | <!-- XXXXXXX -->
| |
| − | ----
| |
| | <div class="row"> | | <div class="row"> |
| − | <div class="col-md-3">< h2> Growing knowledge upward</ h2></div> | + | <div class="col-md-3"><h4>Intuitive idea</h4></div> |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Science on a crossroads</h3> | + | <div class="col-md-7"> |
| − | <p>The [[Science on a Crossroads ideogram]] points to the possibility to reverse the narrow and technical focus in the sciences – and create general insights and principles about any theme that matters.</p>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | [[File:Crossroads.jpg]]<br><small><center>Science on a Crossroads ideogram</center></small>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | <p>The [[Science on a Crossroads ideogram]] depicts the point in the evolution of science when it was understood that the Newton's concepts and "laws" were not parts of the nature's inner machinery, which Newton <em>discovered</em> – but his own creation, and an approximation. Two directions of growth opened up to science – downward, and upward. The sequence of scientists "converging to zero" in the ideogram suggests that only the "downward" option was followed.</p></div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-6"><h3>The moment when this happened</h3>
| |
| − | <p>It has turned out that the very moment when science reached those crossroads has been recorded!</p>
| |
| − | <p>In his "Autobiographical Notes", after describing how the successes of science that resulted from Newton's classical results led to a wide-spread belief that there wasn't really much more than that, as we saw above, Einstein discusses on a couple of pages the anomalies, results of experiments and observed phenomena that were not amenable to such explanation. He then concludes:
| |
| − | <blockquote>Enough of this. Newton, forgive me; you found just about the only way possible in your age for a man of highest reasoning and creative power. The concepts that you created are even today still guiding our thinking in physics, although we now know that they will have to be replaced by others further removed from the sphere of immediate experience, if we aim at a profounder
| |
| − | understanding of relationships.</blockquote></p></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"> [[File:Einstein.jpg]] <br><small><center>[[Albert Einstein]]</center></small></div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Why the direction "up" was ignored</h3>
| |
| − | <p>The direction "up" is a natural direction for the growth of anything – and of knowledge in particular. Hasn't the insight, the wisdom, the general principle, always been the very hallmark of knowledge? So why did science continue its growth only downward – toward more technical, more precise – and more obscure results?</p>
| |
| − | <p>The reason is obvious, and it is also suggested by Einstein: It had to be done, "if we aim at a profounder understanding of relationships" – that is, of natural phenomena. They turned out to be far more complex than it was originally believed.</p>
| |
| − | <p>The bottom-level reality picture turned out to be retreating ever deeper – as the scientists aimed "at a profounder understanding of relationships".</p>
| |
| − | <p>So why not do as Newton did <em>in all walks of life</em> i.e. wherever solid knowledge is needed – create <em>approximate</em> models that serve us <em>well enough</em>? </p>
| |
| − | <p>The answer is obvious. The disciplinary organization of knowledge had already taken shape. Einstein being "a physicist", his job was to study the physical phenomena, in terms of the masses and velocities and mathematical formulas. </p>
| |
| − | <p>The job of updating the whole production of knowledge – <em>and</em> the job of creating high-level insights – happened to be in nobody's job description. And hence they remained undone.</p>
| |
| − | <p>Think of [[knowledge federation|<em>Knowledge federation</em>]] as a road sign or banner, demarcating the creative frontier on which this oversight can be corrected.</p>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <h3>Gestalt criterion</h3>
| |
| − | <p>The criterion by which [[polyscopy|<em>polyscopy</em>]] reorients knowledge to grow upward is [[gestalt|<em>gestalt</em>]], as we have seen on the front page.</p>
| |
| − | <p>By convention, having a correct [[gestalt|<em>gestalt</em>]] is what "being informed" is all about. You may know the exact temperature i every room, and even the CO2 percentages in the air. But it is only when you know that your house is on fire that you know that you need to evacuate the house and call the fire brigade.</p>
| |
| − | </div></div>
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"><h2>Knowledge federation in two pictures</h2></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Information</h3>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | [[File:Information.jpg]] <br><small><center>Information ideogram</center></small>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | <p>The [[Information ideogram]] points to the structure of the information that [[knowledge federation|<em>knowledge federation</em>]] aims to produce. Or metaphorically, to the principle of operation of the 'light bulb'.</p>
| |
| − | <p>The “i” in this image (which stands for "information") is composed of a circle on top of a square. The square stands for the technical and detailed [[low-level|<em>low-level</em>]] information. The square also stands for examining a theme or an issue from all sides. The circle stands for the general and immediately accessible [[high-level|<em>high-level</em>]] information. This ideogram posits that information must have both. And in particular that without the former, without the 'dot on the i', the information is incomplete and ultimately pointless.</p>
| |
| − | <p>This [[ideograms|<em>ideogram</em>]] also suggests how to create high-level views based on low-level ones. And to <em>justify</em> high-level claims based on low-level ones – by 'rounding off' or 'cutting corners'. </p></div></div>
| |
| | | | |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Knowledge</h3>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | [[File:Holarchy.jpg]]<br><small><center>Knowledge ideogram</center></small>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | <p>The [[Knowledge ideogram]] depicts [[knowledge federation|<em>knowledge federation</em>]] as a process – and also the kind of knowledge that this process aims to produce.</p>
| |
| − | <p>It follows from the fundamentals we've just outlined that (when our goal is to inform the people) [[knowledge federation|<em>knowledge federation</em>]] will do its best to federate knowledge according to relevance – and adapt its choice of [[scope|<em>scope</em>]] to that task. The rationale is that "the best available" knowledge will generally be better than no knowledge at all. Knowledge, and information, are envisioned to exist as a <em>holarchy</em> – where the [[low-level|<em>low-level</em>]] "pieces of information" or <em>holons</em> serve as side views for creating [[high-level|<em>high-level</em>]] insights. Multiple and even contradictory views on any theme are allowed to co-exist. A core function of [[knowledge federation|<em>federation</em>]] as a process is to continuously negotiate and re-evaluate the relevance and the credibility of those views.</p></div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"><h2>Two examples</h2></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Power structure</h3>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | [[File:Power_Structure.jpg]] <br><small><center>Power Structure ideogram</center></small>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | <p>As a way of looking at the world or [[scope|<em>scope</em>]], the [[power structure|<em>power structure</em>]] empowers us to conceive of the traditional notions of "power holder" and "political enemy" in an entirely new way – and to reorient our ethical sensibilities and our political action accordingly.</p>
| |
| − | <p>The [[Power Structure ideogram]] depicts the [[power structures|<em>power structure</em>]] as a structure, where seemingly distinct and independent entities such as monetary or power interests, the ideas we have about the world, and our own condition or health are tied together with subtle links, so that they evolve and function in co-dependence and synchrony. </p> </div></div>
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-6"><p>
| |
| − | In "A Century of Camps", from which we've quoted the above paragraph, Zygmunt Bauman explained how even massive and unthinkable cruelty (of which the Holocaust is an example) can happen as a result of no more than (what we are calling) the structure of the system – and people just "doing their jobs".</p>
| |
| − | <p>The [[power structures|<em>power structure</em>]] model explains in what way exactly malignant societal structures can evolve by the conventional "survival of the fittest".</p> </div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"> [[File:Bauman.jpg]] <br><small><center>[[Zygmunt Bauman]]</center></small></div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7">
| |
| − | <p>To legitimize the view in which <em>a complex structure</em> (and not a person or group endowed with intelligence and identifiable interests) is considered "the enemy", insights from a range of technical fields including combinatorial optimization, artificial intelligence and artificial life are combined with insights from the humanities – including Bauman's just quoted one.</p>
| |
| − | <p>An effect of this model (central to the [[paradigm strategy|<em>paradigm strategy</em>]] we are presenting as our larger motivating vision) is that it entirely changes the nature of the political game, from "us against them" to "all of us against the [[power structures|<em>power structure</em>]]". </p>
| |
| − | <p>By revealing the subtle links between our ideas about the world and power interests, the [[power structures|<em>power structure</em>]] helps us understand further why a new phase of evolution of democracy, marked by liberation and conscious creation of the ways in which we look at the world, is a necessary part of our liberation from renegade and misdirected power.</p>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7"><h3>Convenience paradox</h3>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | [[File:Convenience_Paradox.jpg]] <br><small><center>Convenience Paradox ideogram</center></small>
| |
| − | <p> </p>
| |
| − | <p>Redirecting our "pursuit of happiness" is of course a natural way to give a new direction to our 'bus'. Informing our "pursuit of happiness" is also a natural application where the ideas presented above can be put to test.</p>
| |
| − | <p>The [[Convenience Paradox ideogram]] depicts a situation where the pursuit of a more convenient direction (down) leads to an increasingly less convenient condition. The human figure in the ideogram is deciding which way to go. He wants his way (of life) to be more easy and pleasant, or more <em>convenient</em>. If he follows the direction that <em>seems</em> more convenient, he will end up in a less convenient <em>condition</em> – and vice versa. </p>
| |
| − | <p>By representing the way to happiness as yin (which stands for dark, or obscure) in the traditional yin-yang ideogram, it is suggested that the way to convenience or happiness must be illuminated by suitable information.</p>
| |
| − | <p>This ideogram is of course only the [[high-level|<em>high-level</em>]] part, the circle or the 'dot on the i'. Its [[low-level|<em>low-level</em>]] part or [[justification|<em>justification</em>]] consists of a variety of insights emanating from a broad variety of [[giants|<em>giants</em>]] and traditions. The rationale is to select the ones that resulted from the experience of working with large numbers of people – and which have something important to tell us about our civilized condition; and about ways in which this condition could be radically improved.</p>
| |
| | </div></div> | | </div></div> |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-6">
| |
| − | <p><blockquote>
| |
| − | The process of civilization, according to Alexander, has contaminated man’s biological and sensory equipment, with a resultant crippling in the responses of the whole organism. Tension and conflict are more and more substituted for coordination.
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | An example is the above core insight of F. M. Alexander, the founder of a therapy school called "Alexander Technique", which is now being taught worldwide.</p>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3 round-images"> [[File:Alexander.jpg]] <br><small><center>[[F. M. Alexander]]</center></small></div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
| − | <div class="row">
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-3"></div>
| |
| − | <div class="col-md-7">
| |
| − | <p>A more spectacular examples are from various Oriental traditions who pointed to the nature of "the way" (to happiness or fulfillment, represented by the dark Yin part of the ideogram), while calling it different names such as "Tao" or "Do" or "Yoga" or "Dharma" or "Tariqat". Taken together, they enable us to model the most interesting range of possibilities we are calling "happiness between one and plus infinity" – which is a direction in which our civilization's "progress" may most naturally continue. </p>
| |
| − | <p>We'll say more about both of these themes, and how they are related, in Federation through Conversations – where we'll also initiate a conversation to collectively refine them and develop them further.</p> </div>
| |
| − | </div>
| |
When we begin to use knowledge to show us what we don't see, so that we may see a theme or an issue as a whole, a vision of a world on the brink of change results; and of a whole new order of things, which is ready to emerge. We call the emerging order of things the holotopia. The five insights are selected as sufficient to see the holotopia.
The Collective Mind, which is introduced here, is one of them.
