Hi Folks Before we get into another pointless political debate about the wonderfulness of the magnificent individual versus the marvelous collective could we try and think about this maybe from a slightly better perspective - i.e. mine! :)
The term 'collective intelligence', IMO, is probably a misnomer in terms of the MoQ as it, incorrectly, appears to conjoin social and intellectual patterns. It may be better to think of it as 'collective knowledge' which can then be placed at the social level as patterns that accumulate and persist over time within a social context. All learned behaviours and other forms of knowledge that persist from one generation to the next but are not transmitted by biological means can now be neatly placed in this holder. Anything from how to crack an oyster open to the mangled grunts that constitute primitive language can be included, as can more complex language and whatever other social patterns you choose to include. When this 'collective knowledge' becomes sufficiently ordered and complex emergent patterns will start to appear - for an example think in terms of how a city develops and persists over many decades and even centuries. Awareness and contemplation of these patterns gradually gives rise to ordering and restructuring which leads to intellectual activity and the emergence of the intellectual level. So just as the biological patterns of life are available to the social level, so the developing social patterns of collective knowledge are available to the intellectual level. Any thoughts? Horse moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
