Difference between pages "Holotopia: Collective mind" and "Holotopia"

From Knowledge Federation
(Difference between pages)
Jump to: navigation, search
m
 
m
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<center><h2><b>H O L O T O P I A: &nbsp;&nbsp; F I V E &nbsp;&nbsp; I N S I G H T S</b></h2></center><br><br>
+
<div class="page-header" ><h1>Holotopia</h1></div>
  
<div class="page-header" ><h1>Collective mind</h1></div>
+
<div class="row">
 +
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>Imagine...</h2></div>
 +
<div class="col-md-6">
 +
<p>You are about to board a bus for a long night ride, when you notice two flickering streaks of light emanating from two wax candles, placed in the circular holes where the headlights of the bus are expected to be. Candles? <em>As headlights</em>? </p>
 +
<p>Of course, the idea of candles as headlights is absurd. So why propose it? Because <em>on a much larger scale</em> this absurdity has become reality.</p>
 +
<p>By depicting our society as a bus without a steering wheel, and the way we look at the world and try to comprehend it and handle it as a pair of candle headlights, the Modernity <em>ideogram</em> renders the essence of our contemporary situation.</p>
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="col-md-3">
 +
[[File:Modernity.jpg]]
 +
<small>Modernity <em>ideogram</em></small>  
 +
</div> </div>  
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>Our proposal</h2></div>
 
<div class="col-md-7">
 
<div class="col-md-7">
<blockquote>  
+
<p>
The printing press revolutionized communication, and enabled the Enlightenment. But we too are witnessing a similar revolution—the advent of the Internet, and the interactive digital media. Are we really calling <em>that</em> a pair of candle headlights?
+
<blockquote>The core of our <em>knowledge federation</em> proposal is to change the relationship we have with information. And through information—with the world; and with ourselves.
</blockquote>  
+
</blockquote></p>
  
<p>We look at the way in which this new technology is being used. And at the principle of organization that underlies this use. Without noticing, we have adopted a principle of organization that suited the old technology, the printing press—broadcasting. But the new technology, by linking us together in a similar way as the nervous system links the cells in an organism, enables and even <em>demands</em> completely new modalities of organization. Imagine if your own cells were using your nervous system to merely broadcast data! In a <em>collective mind</em>, broadcasting leads to collective madness—and not to "collective intelligence" as the creators of the new technology intended.</p>
+
<p>What is our relationship with information presently like? Here is how [[Neil Postman]] described it:</p>  
 
</div> </div>  
 
</div> </div>  
 
 
<div class="page-header" ><h2>Stories</h2></div>
 
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>The <em>Wiener's paradox</em></h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"></div>
<div class="col-md-7">We use the <em>Wiener's paradox</em> and the Wiener–Jantsch–Reagan <em>thread</em> (see it outlined [http://kf.wikiwiki.ifi.uio.no/CONVERSATIONS#WienersParadox here] are intended to serve as a parable. They point to a general alarming phenomenon, that academic results—even when they are best and most relevant—tend to remain without any effect whatsoever. </p>
+
<div class="col-md-6">
<p>The root of the paradox is that the system is broken (our 'bus' does not have proper 'headlights' or 'steering'), i.e. structured so that it is incapable of using information to steer (as Wiener pointed out, already in 1948). </p>  
+
<blockquote>  
<p>The resolution to the paradox is <em>bootstrapping</em>—co-creating new systems, with our own minds and bodies.</p>  
+
"The tie between information and action has been severed. Information is now a commodity that can be bought and sold, or used as a form of entertainment, or worn like a garment to enhance one's status. It comes indiscriminately, directed at no one in particular, disconnected from usefulness; we are glutted with information, drowning in information, have no control over it, don't know what to do with it."
</div> </div>
+
</blockquote>
 +
</div><div class="col-md-3">[[File:Postman.jpg]]<br><small>Neil Postman</small></div>
 +
</div>  
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>The academic <em>big</em> question</h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"></div>
 
<div class="col-md-7">
 
<div class="col-md-7">
<blockquote>
+
<p><blockquote>Suppose we handled information as we handle other man-made things—by suiting it to the purposes that need to be served. </blockquote></p>  
<p>Consider the <em>academia</em> as a <em>system</em>: It has a vast heritage to take care of, and make use of. Selected creative people come in. They are given certain tools to work with, certain ways how to work, certain communication tools that will take their results and turn them into socially useful effect. How effective, and efficient, is the whole thing as a system? Is it taking advantage of the invaluable (especially in this time when our urgent need is creative change) resources that have been entrusted to it?</p>  
+
<p>What consequences would this have? How would information be different? How would it be used? By what methods, what social processes, and by whom would it be created? What new information formats would emerge, and supplement or replace the traditional books and articles? How would information technology be adapted? What would public informing be like? <em>And academic communication, and education?</em>
<p>Enter information technology...</p>
+
 
</blockquote>
+
<blockquote>Our <em>knowledge federation</em> proposal is a complete and academically coherent answer to those and other related questions; an answer that is not only described and explained, but also implemented—in a collection of real-life embedded <em>prototypes</em>.
<p>The big point here is that the <em>academia</em>'s <em>primary</em> responsibility or accountability is for the system as a whole, and for each of its components. The <em>academia</em> had an asset, let's call him Pierre Bourdieu. This person was given a format to write in—which happened to be academic books and articles. He was given a certain language to express himself in. <em>How good</em> are those tools? <em>Could there be</em> answers to this question (which the <em>academi</em> has, btw, not yet asked in any real way) that are incomparably, by orders of magnitude, better than what the <em>academia</em> of his time afforded to Bourdieu? And to everyone else, of course.</p>
+
</blockquote></p>
 
  
<h3>Analogy with the history of computer programming</h3>
+
</div> </div>  
<p>We point to the analogy between the situation in computer programming following the advent of the computer, in response to which computer programming methodologies were developed—and the situation in our handling of information following the advent of the Internet. In the first years of computing, ambitious software projects were undertaken, which resulted in "spaghetti code"—a tangled up mess of thousands of lines of code, which nobody could understand, detangle and correct. The programmers were coming in and out of those projects, and those who stepped in later had to wonder whether to throw the whole thing away and begin from scratch—or to continue to try to correct it. </p>
 
<p>A motivating insight that needs to be drawn from this history is that a dramatic increase in size of the thing being handled (computer programs <em>and</em> information) can not be effectively responded to by merely more of the same. A <em>structural</em> change (a different <em>paradigm</em>) is what the situation is calling for. </p>
 
<h3>A new <em>paradigm</em> is needed</h3>
 
<p>Edsger Dijkstra, one of the pioneers of the development of methodologies, argued that programming in the large is a <em>completely</em> different thing than programming in the small (for which textbook examples and the programming tools at large were created at the time):</p>
 
<blockquote>
 
“Any two things that differ in some respect by a factor of already a hundred or more, are utterly incomparable.”
 
</blockquote>
 
<p>Doug Engelbart used to make the same point (that the increase in size requires a different paradigm) by sharing his parable of a man who grew ten times in size (read it [https://holoscope.info/2020/01/01/tesla-and-the-nature-of-creativity/#Tenfold_growth_parable here]). </p>  
 
  
<h3>The key point</h3>
 
<p>The solution was found in developing structuring and abstraction concepts and methodologies (as we summarized [https://holoscope.info/2019/02/07/knowledge-federation-dot-org/#InformationHolon here]). Among them, the Object Oriented Methodology is the best known example.</p>
 
<p>The key insight to be drawn from this analogy: computers can be programmed in <em>any</em> programming language. The creators of the programming methodologies, however, took it as their core challenge, and duty, to give the programmers the conceptual and technical tools that would <em>coerce</em> them to write code that is comprehensible, maintainable and reusable. The Object Oriented Methodology responds to this challenge by conceiving of computer programming as modeling of complex systems—in terms of a hierarchy of "objects". An object is a structuring device whose purpose is to "export function" (make a set of functions available to higher-order objects),  and "hide implementation". </p>
 
<p>Without yet recognizing this, the <em>academia</em> now finds itself in a similar situation as the creators of computer programming methodologies. The importance of finding a suitable response to this challenge cannot be overrated.</p>
 
  
<h3>Implications for cultural revival</h3>
 
<p>There is also an interesting <em>difference</em> between computer programming and handling of information: The fact that a team of programmers can no longer understand the program they are creating is easily detected—the program won't run on the computer; but how does one detect the incomparably larger and more costly problem—that a generation of people can no longer comprehend the information they own? And hence the situation they are in?</p>
 
</div> </div> 
 
  
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>Our <em>collective mind</em> is just plain insane</h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>An application</h2></div>
<div class="col-md-7"><h3>The Incredible History of Doug</h3>  
+
<div class="col-md-6">
<p><em>The</em> most wonderful story, however, is without The Incredible History of Doug (Engelbart), introduced by the story of Vannevar Bush. This story will be <em>federated</em> in the book "Systemic Innovation" (subtitle "The Future of Democracy"), which is the second book we are preparing as part of the tactics for launching the Holotopia project.</p>
+
<p>What difference will this make? The Holotopia <em>prototype</em>, which is under development, is a proof of concept application.</p>
<p>What more to say about the fact that Vannevar Bush, as <em>the</em> academic strategist par excellence, identified the problem we are talking with as <em>the</em> problem the scientists must focus on and resolve—already in 1945? And that Douglas Engelbart understood that (well beyond what Bush anticipated) digital computers, when equipped with interactive terminals and joined into a network, can serve as in effect a collective nervous system—and enable <em>incomparably better</em> ways to respond to the "complexity times urgency" issue, that underlies the humanity's contemporary challenges. See our summary [https://holoscope.info/2019/02/07/knowledge-federation-dot-org/#Bush here]. [https://www.dropbox.com/s/lbnq6wau5at6904/1.%20DE%20Story.m4v?dl=0 This short video] introduces The Incredible History of Doug, [https://www.dropbox.com/s/tyf1705t4hvk05s/2.%20DE%20Vision.m4v?dl=0 this one] explains his vision. </p>  
+
<p>The Club of Rome's assessment of the situation we are in, provided us with a benchmark challenge for putting our ideas to test. A half-century ago—based on a decade of this global think tank's research into the future prospects of mankind, in a book titled "One Hundred Pages for the Future"—[[Aurelio Peccei]] issued the following warning:  
<p>It remains to highlight the main point.
+
<blockquote>
 +
"It is absolutely essential to find a way to change course."
 +
</blockquote>
 
</p>  
 
</p>  
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="col-md-3">
 +
[[File:Peccei.jpg]]
 +
<small>Aurelio Peccei</small>
 +
</div> </div>
 +
 +
<div class="row">
 +
<div class="col-md-3"></div>
 +
<div class="col-md-7">
 +
<p>Already this event constitutes an <em>anomaly</em>, which motivates the <em>paradigm</em> we are proposing (we attribute to these <em>keywords</em> a similar meaning as Thomas Kuhn did).  Why did Peccei's call to action remain unanswered? Why wasn't The Club of Rome's quest—to illuminate the course our civilization has taken—handled by our society's institutions as part of their function? Isn't this <em>already</em> showing that we are 'driving with candle headlights'?</p>
 +
<p>Peccei also specified <em>what</em> would need to be done to "change course":
 
<blockquote>  
 
<blockquote>  
A collective mind, combined with broadcasting (the process we've inherited from the printing press), spells collective madness—and not "collective intelligence" as Engelbart, and also Bush, intended.
+
"The future will either be an inspired product of a great cultural revival, or there will be no future."
 
</blockquote>  
 
</blockquote>  
 +
"Let me recapitulate what seems to me the crucial question at this point of the human venture", Peccei explained in "Human Quality". "Man has acquired such decisive power that his future depends essentially on how he will use it. However, the business of human life has become so complicated that he is culturally unprepared even to understand his new position clearly. As a consequence, his current predicament is not only worsening but, with the accelerated tempo of events, may become decidedly catastrophic in a not too distant future. The downward trend of human fortunes can be countered and reversed only by the advent of a new humanism essentially based on and aiming at man's cultural development, that is, a substantial improvement in human quality throughout the world."
 +
</p>
 +
<p>
 +
The Club of Rome insisted that lasting solutions would not found by focusing on specific problems, but by transforming the condition from which they all stem, which they called "problematique", and "the predicament of mankind".</p>
  
<h3>What if</h3>
+
<blockquote> The Holotopia project is a structured, academic and social-entrepreneurial response to The Club of Rome. </blockquote>  
<p>There are quite a few pieces of anecdotal evidence, and even some theoretical ones, that suggest that real or systemic or outside of the box creativity, as well as our comprehension of complex matters, depend on a slow, annealing-like process, which requires a relaxed and defocused state of mind (some of them were discussed in the blog post [https://holoscope.info/2020/01/01/tesla-and-the-nature-of-creativity/ Tesla and the Nature of Creativity]). </p>
+
<p>Peccei's following observation, with which he concluded his analysis in "One Hundred  Pages for the Future", will also be relevant:
<p>Here is an ad-hoc possibility.</p>
+
<blockquote>
<blockquote>  
+
The arguments posed in the preceding pages (...) point out several things, of which one of the most important is that our generations seem to have lost <em>the sense of the whole</em>.
<p>A frog leaps and catches a passing fly. Had the fly been still, the frog would not have noticed it.</p>
 
<p>Already very primitive organisms have adapted, through the survival of the fittest, to pay attention to movement and to changes of light and shadow—that being an easy way to detect food, and predators. What if the contemporary media keep us captive by taking advantage of some similarly primitive properties of our mechanism of perception?</p>
 
<p>"The average length of a shot on network television is only 3.5 seconds, so that the eye never rests, always has something new to see", Postman observed in "Amusing Ourselves to Death". </p>  
 
 
</blockquote>  
 
</blockquote>  
<p>Have we developed a lifestyle that precludes such creativity, and comprehension?</p>  
+
</p>
<p>Has "a great cultural revival" become a cultural <em>impossibility</em>?</p>
+
 
</div> </div>  
+
</div> </div>  
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>The <em>cultural</em> big question</h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>Seeing things whole</h2></div>
 
<div class="col-md-7">
 
<div class="col-md-7">
<p>Here we may begin from the archetypal image, of a mother by the bedside or a grandfather by a fire place, telling kids the stories of old... In focus here are cultural reproduction... and human quality... in the age of ubiquitous and pervasive digital media.</p>  
+
<p>In the context of Holotopia, we refer to our proposal by its pseudonym [[Holotopia: Holoscope|<em>holoscope</em>]], which highlights its distinguishing characteristic—it helps us see things whole. </p>
 +
<p>
 +
[[File:Perspective-S.jpg]]
 +
<small>Perspective <em>ideogram</em></small>
 +
</p>
 +
<p>The <em>holoscope</em> uses suitable information in a suitable way, to illuminate what remained obscure or hidden, so that we may 'see through' the whole, and correctly assess its shape, dimensions and condition (correct our <em>perspective</em>).</p>
 +
<p>
 +
[[File:Local-Global.jpg]]<br>
 +
<small>BottomUp - TopDown intervention tool for shifting positions, which was part of our pilot project in Kunsthall 3.14, Bergen, suggests how this proposed <em>information</em> is to be used—by transcending fixed relations between top and bottom, and building awareness of the benefits of multiple points of view; and moving in-between.</small>
 +
</p>
 +
<p>The <em>holoscope</em> complements the usual approach in the sciences:
 +
<blockquote>
 +
Science gave us new ways to look at the world: The telescope and the microscope enabled us to see the things that are too distant or too small to be seen by the naked eye, and our vision expanded beyond bounds. But science had the <em>tendency to keep us focused on things that were either too distant or too small to be relevant—compared to all those large things or issues nearby, which now demand our attention</em>. The <em>holoscope</em>  is conceived as a way to look at the world that helps us see <em>any</em> chosen thing or theme as a whole—from all sides; and in correct proportions.
 +
</blockquote>
 +
</p>
 +
</div> </div>  
  
<h3>Nietzsche already warned us</h3>  
+
<div class="row">
<p>Already Nietzsche warned us that the overabundance of impressions that modernity has give us keeps us dazzled, unable to digest and to act, but merely reacting... See [[Intuitive introduction to systemic thinking]].</p>  
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>A vision</h2></div>
 
+
<div class="col-md-7">
<h3>Neil Postman studied this issue academically, and thoroughly.</h3>  
+
<p>What possible destinations would we see, if proper 'headlights' were used to 'illuminate the way'?</p>
<p>At NYU, where he chaired the Department of Culture and Communication, he created a graduate program in "media ecology"—and by naming it thus put his finger exactly at the sore spot. </p>
+
<p>The <em>holotopia</em> is an astonishingly positive future scenario.</p>  
<p>Postman's best known work, his 1985 book "Amusing Ourselves to Death", is a careful argument showing... well, here is a summary by his son, Andrew Postman, in the introduction he wrote for the 20th anniversary edition:</p>  
+
<p>This future vision is indeed <em>more</em> positive than what the familiar utopias offered—whose authors lacked the information to see what was possible; or lived in the times when the resources we have did not yet exist. </p>  
 +
<p>But unlike the utopias, the <em>holotopia</em> is readily realizable—because we already have the information that is needed for its fulfillment.</p>
 
<blockquote>  
 
<blockquote>  
Is it really plausible that this book about how TV is turning all public life (education, religion, politics, journalism) into entertainment; how the image is undermining other forms of communication, particularly the written word; and how our bottomless appetite for TV will make content so abundantly available, context be damned, that we'll be overwhelmed by "information glut" until what is truly meanmingful is lost and we no longer care what we've lost as long as we're being amused. ... Can such a book possibly have relevance to you and The World of 2006 and beyond?
+
<p>When the details offered on these pages have been considered, it will be clear why white (which, as the all-inclusive color, might symbolize the <em>holotopia</em>) is not only "the new black", but also the new red, and the new green!</p>
 
</blockquote>  
 
</blockquote>  
 +
</div> </div>
  
<h3>Guy Debord saw that this issue was political</h3>  
+
<div class="row">
<p>The technical keyword here is "alienation" (Debord operated within the ideological framwork of neo-Marxism), but Debord's insights are invaluable, and need to be <em>federated</em>. Seen within the <em>power structure</em> and <em>symbolic reality</em> framework, they will be (we anticipate) be a lot more easy to digest for a contemporary reader.</p>  
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>Making things whole</h2></div>
<p>But yes, his point–it is that the addictive effect the new media have on us must be seen, and handled, as a key means of disempowerment. His "Society of the Spectacle" has lately been drawing increased attention—see [https://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/nov/14/guy-debord-society-spectacle-will-self this commentary in the Guardian], and [https://youtu.be/_wl3HCKQ6WI?t=133 this video] where Debord's work is introduced as a "critique of a society which he saw as  being ever more obsessed with images and appearances, over reality, truth and experience".</p>
+
<div class="col-md-7">
<p>Is "human quality" eroded by the new media. </p>  
+
<p>What exactly do we need to <em>do</em>, to "change course", and pursue and fulfill the <em>holotopia</em> vision?</p>
<p>And what is to be done about that?</p>  
+
<p>The evidence that the <em>holotopia</em> brought together, allowed us to distill a simple principle or rule of thumb:
 
+
<blockquote>
<h3>We need to look at ourselves in the <em>mirror</em></h3>  
+
We need to <em>see ourselves and what we do as parts in a larger whole</em> or wholes; and act in ways that make those larger wholes more [[Wholeness|<em>whole</em>]].
<p>The deeper underlying question is the one of academic self-identity.</p>  
+
</blockquote></p>  
<blockquote>Wll the <em>academia</em> remain "an objective observer" of all the structural changes in our cultural reproduction that are going on? Or will it take a proactive stance?</blockquote>  
+
<p>This is, of course, a radical departure from our current course—which <em>emerges</em> as a result of us pursuing what we perceive as "our own" interests; and trusting that "the invisible hand" of the market, or the academic "publish and perish", will turn our self-serving acts into the greatest common good.</p>  
 +
<p>It is also the course that the Modernity <em>ideogram</em> is pointing to.</p>
 +
<p>All of <em>holotopia</em> follows from an obvious rational principle, which we have somehow ignored—that the <em>wholeness</em> of the whole thing must be secured; that our beautiful home will not last—in an apartment building that is falling apart.</p>  
 +
</div> </div>  
  
 +
<div class="row">
 +
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>A project</h2></div>
 +
<div class="col-md-6">
 +
<p>As a project, Holotopia <em>federates</em>, and fulfills, the <em>holotopia</em> vision.</p>
 +
<p>[[Margaret Mead]]'s familiar dictum points to this project's core mission:
 +
<blockquote>
 +
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
 +
</blockquote></p>
 +
<p>It is, however, the 'small print' that we found most useful—Mead's insights, based on her research, into what exactly <em>distinguishes</em> "a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens" that is capable of making a large difference.</p>
 +
</div>
 +
<div class="col-md-3 round-images">
 +
[[File:Mead.jpg]]
 +
<small><center>Margaret Mead</center></small>
 
</div> </div>  
 
</div> </div>  
 
 
<div class="page-header" ><h2>Ideogram</h2></div>
 
 
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="col-md-3"></div>
 
<div class="col-md-3"></div>
 
<div class="col-md-7">
 
<div class="col-md-7">
<p>  
+
<p>The Holotopia project undertakes to make a difference by organizing us differently. And by putting a (snow-) ball in play.</p>  
[[File:KFvision.jpeg]]
+
<p>The following Mead's observation, made more than fifty years ago, points to an <em>immediate</em> effect of the Holotopia project:
</p>
+
<blockquote>
<p>Our civilization is like an organism that has recently grown beyond bounds ("exponentially")—and now represents a threat to its environment, and to itself. By a most fortunate mutation, this creature has recently developed a nervous system, which could allow it to comprehend the world and coordinate its actions. But the creature is using it only to amplify its most primitive, limbic impulses.</p>  
+
"One necessary condition of successfully continuing our existence is the creation of an atmosphere of hope that the huge problems now confronting us can, in fact, be solved—and can be solved in time."
 +
</blockquote></p>
 
</div> </div>  
 
</div> </div>  
  
  
<div class="page-header" ><h2>Keywords</h2></div>
+
<div class="page-header" ><h2>Federation</h2></div>
  
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2><em>Ideogram</em></h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>[[Holotopia:Five insights|Five insights]]</h2></div>
<div class="col-md-7"><p>Placeholder—for a variety of techniques that can be developed by using contemporary media technology. The point here is to condense lots and lots of insights into <em>something</em> that communicates them most effectively—which can be a poem, a picture, a video, a movie....</p>  
+
<div class="col-md-7">
<p>Instead of using media tools addictively, and commercially, we use them to <em>rebuild</em> the <em>culture</em>—as people have done through ages. The difference is made by the <em>knowledge federation</em> infrastructure—which secures that what needs to be <em>federated</em> gets <em>federated</em>. </p>  
+
<p>  
 +
[[File:FiveInsights.JPG]]
 +
<center><small>The <em>holotopia</em> vision is made concrete in terms of <em>five insights</em>.</small></center>
 +
</p>
 +
<p>The [[Holotopia:Five insights|<em>five insights</em>]] constitute the 'engine' that drives the Holotopia project to its destination—the <em>holotopia</em>.</p>
 +
<p>At the same time, the <em>five insights</em> provide us a concrete way to <em>federate</em> the The Club of Rome's work.
 +
</p>
 +
<p>
 +
Strategically located in five pivotal domains of interest:  innovation (the way we use our majestically grown capability to create and induce change), communication (the way information technology is used and information is handled), foundations (what the creation of truth and meaning is based on), method (the ways in which we look at the world and try to comprehend it) and values (the "pursuit of happiness"), the <em>five insights</em> disclose large anomalies that obstruct progress in those domains, and demand structural or <em>paradigmatic</em> changes. Together, they show what, metaphorically speaking, is keeping Galilei is house arrest, once again in <em>our</em> era.</p>  
 +
<p>Each of the <em>five insights</em> points to an overarching opportunity for creative change:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>a radical improvement of effectiveness and efficiently of human work, and the liberation from stress and strife that the Industrial Revolution promised, but did not deliver</li>
 +
<li>a revolution in communication analogous to what the printing press made possible)</li>
 +
<li>a revolutionary empowerment of human reason to explore and understand the world, analogous to the Enlightenment</li>
 +
<li>a revolution in conceptual tools and methods for understanding our social and cultural world, and hence improving the human condition, similar to what science brought to our understanding of natural phenomena</li>
 +
<li>a revolution in culture analogous to the Renaissance, leading to a dramatic improvement of "human quality"</li>  
 +
</ul>
 +
</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>Each of the <em>five insights</em> is reached by using the <em>holoscope</em> to <em>federate</em> information from disparate sources, that is, by seeing things whole. Each of the <em>anomalies</em> is resolved by using the proposed rule of thumb—by making things whole.
 +
</p>
 
</div> </div>  
 
</div> </div>  
 
 
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2><em>Knowledge federation</em></h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>Sixth insight</h2></div>
 
<div class="col-md-7">
 
<div class="col-md-7">
<p>We use this keyword, <em>knowledge federation</em>, in a similar way as "design" and "architecture" are commonly used—to signify both a set of activities, and an academic field that develops them.</p>
+
<p>The five anomalies, and their resolutions, are so interdependent, that to realistically resolve any of them—we need to resolve them all. Another, more general <em>sixth insight</em> follows:
<p>As a set of activities, <em>knowledge federation</em> can now be understood as the workings of a well-functioning <em>collective mind</em>. Instead of broadcasting, the cells and organs (researchers, disciplines, communities...) process the information they are handling and dispatch suitably prepared pieces to suitable other cells and organs. The prefrontal lobe receives what it needs. And so do the muscles. In the development of a <em>collective mind</em> that <em>federates</em> knowledge, the cells self-organize, specialize, develop completely <em>new</em> goals, processes, ways of working...</p>
+
<blockquote> Comprehensive change can be easy, even when smaller and obviously necessary changes have proven to be impossible.</blockquote>  
<p>How does it all work? 'Programming' our <em>collective mind</em> is what <em>knowledge federation</em> as <em>transdiscipline</em> is all about. It draws insights from all relevant fields—and weaves them into the very <em>functioning</em> of our <em>collective mind</em>. Yes, this is roughly what philosophy was or appeared to be all about, in the old <em>paradigm</em>. </p>
+
In this way the recommendation of The Club of Rome is <em>federated</em>, and the strategy that distinguishes <em>holotopia</em> (to focus on changing the whole <em>order of things</em>) is confirmed.  
<p>As an academic field, <em>knowledge federation</em> develops the <em>praxis</em> of <em>knowledge federation</em>. There is phenomenally much to be done—since everything that the <em>tradition</em> has given us and we customarily take for granted (all those 'candles'...) now need to be reassessed and reconfigured. </p>
 
<p> 
 
[[File:Dahl-structure.jpeg]]
 
 
</p>  
 
</p>  
<p>In the analogy with computer programming, <em>knowledge federation</em> roughly corresponds to <em>object orientation</em>. Here is how Old-Johan Dahl, one of the creators of the Object Oriented Methodology, described the underlying idea.</p>
 
 
 
</div> </div>  
 
</div> </div>  
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2><em>Transdiscipline</em></h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>[[Holotopia:Ten conversations|Ten conversations]]</h2></div>
<div class="col-md-7"><p>Roughly corresponds to the discipline.</p>  
+
<div class="col-md-7">
 +
<p>Perhaps the most immediately interesting, however, are the <em>relationships</em> between the <em>five insights</em>—which provide us a context for perceiving and handling, in informed and completely new ways, some of the age-old challenges such as:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>How to put an end to war</li>
 +
<li>Where the largest possible contribution to human knowledge might reside, and how to achieve it</li>
 +
<li>How to overcome the present dichotomy between science and religion, and use a further evolved approach to knowledge to <em>revolutionize</em> religion</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
</p>
 +
<p>In all, we have <em>fifteen</em> themes to develop in <em>dialogs</em>: Five corresponding to the <em>five insights</em>, and ten corresponding to their relationships. This provides us a wealth of strategic and tactical possibilities, to power the <em>holotopia</em>.</p>
 +
 
 
</div> </div>  
 
</div> </div>  
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2><em>Prototype</em></h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>A space</h2></div>
<div class="col-md-7"><p>Enable <em>knowledge federation</em> and give agency—by forming a <em>transdiscipline</em> around a <em>prototype</em>. </p>  
+
<div class="col-md-7">
</div> </div>  
+
<p>
 +
[[File:KunsthallDialog01.jpg]]
 +
<br>
 +
<small>A snapshot of Holotopia's pilot project in Kunsthall 3.14, Bergen.</small>
 +
</p>
 +
<p>Holotopia undertakes to develop whatever is needed for "changing course". Imagine it as a space, akin to a new continent or a "new world" that's just been discovered—which combines physical and virtual spaces, suitably interconnected. </p>
 +
<p>In a symbolic sense, we are developing the following five sub-spaces.</p>
 +
 
 +
<h3><em>Fireplace</em></h3>
 +
<p>The <em>fireplace</em> is where our varius <em>dialogs</em> take place, through which our insights are deepen by combining our collective intelligence with suitable insights from the past</p>
 +
 
 +
<h3><em>Library</em></h3>
 +
<p>The <em>library</em> is where the necessary information is organized and provided, in a suitable form.</p>  
 +
 
 +
<h3><em>Workshop</em></h3>
 +
<p>The <em>workshop</em> is where a new order of things emerges, through co-creation of <em>prototypes</em>.</p>
  
<div class="row">
+
<h3><em>Gallery</em></h3>
<div class="col-md-3"><h2><em>Bootstrapping</em></h2></div>
+
<p>The <em>gallery</em> is where the resulting <em>prototypes</em> are displayed</p>
<div class="col-md-7"><p>Enables <em>knowledge federation</em> to overcome its basic obstacle, the [[Wiener's paradox|<em>Wiener's paradox</em>]]—instead of merely writing and observing, we co-create systems by using our own bodies and minds as material.</p>
 
<p>As Engelbart rightly observed, <em>bootstrapping</em> is the key next step in the <em>collective mind</em> re-evolution. </p>
 
</div> </div>  
 
  
<div class="page-header" ><h2>Prototypes</h2></div>
+
<h3><em>Stage</em></h3>
 +
<p>The <em>stage</em> is where our events take place.</p>
  
 +
<p>This idea of "space" brings up certain most interesting connotations and possibilities—which Lefebre and Debord pointed to.</p>
  
<div class="row">
 
<div class="col-md-3"><h2><em>Information holon</em></h2></div>
 
<div class="col-md-7"><p>Roughly corresponds to "object". </p>
 
 
</div> </div>  
 
</div> </div>  
 +
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2><em>Knowledge Federation</em></h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>The Box</h2></div>
<div class="col-md-7"><p><em>prototype</em> of "the <em>transdiscipline</em> for <em>knowledge federation</em>. Modeled by analogy with an academic discipline—to contain everything from epistemological underpinnings and methodology, to social processes and institutional organization. All very different, of course, adapted to the needs of <em>transdisciplinary</em> work, and <em>knowledge federation</em>. </p>  
+
<div class="col-md-7">
 +
[[File:Box1.jpg]]
 +
<small>A model of The Box.</small>
 +
<p>So many people now talk about"thinking outside the box"; but what does this really mean? Has anyone even <em>seen</em> the box?</p>
 +
<p>Of course, "thinking outside the box" is what the development of a new paradigm is really all about. So to facilitate this most timely process, we decided to <em>create</em> the box. And to choreograph the process of unboxing our thinking, and handling.</p>
 +
<p> Holotopia's [[Holotopia:The Box|Box]] is an object designed for 'initiation' to <em>holotopia</em>, a way to help us 'unbox' our conception of the world and see, think and behave differently; change course inwardly, by embracing a new value.</p>
 +
<p>We approach The Box from a specific interest, an issue we may care about—such as communication, or IT innovation, or the pursuit of happiness and the ways to improve the human experience, and the human condition. But when we follow our interest a bit deeper, by (physically) opening the box or (symbolically) considering the relevant insights that have been made—we find that there is a large obstacle, preventing our issue to be resolved. </p>
 +
<p>We also see  that by resolving this whole <em>new</em> issue, a much larger gains can be reached than what we originally anticipated and intended. And that there are <em>other</em> similar insights; and that they are all closely related.</p>
 
</div> </div>  
 
</div> </div>  
  
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>TNC2015</h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>A vocabulary</h2></div>
<div class="col-md-7"><p>Tesla and the Nature of Creativity (TNC2015) is a complete example of <em>knowledge federation</em> in academic communication—shows how a research result is <em>federated</em>. See the [https://holoscope.info/2020/01/01/tesla-and-the-nature-of-creativity Tesla and the Nature of Creativity] and [https://holoscope.info/2015/06/28/a-collective-mind-part-one/ A Collective Mind – Part One] blog posts.</p>  
+
<div class="col-md-7">
</div> </div>  
+
<p>Science was not an exception; <em>every</em> new paradigm brings with it a new way of speaking; and a new way of looking at the world.</p>
 +
<p>The following collection of <em>keywords</em> will provide an alternative, and a bit more academic and precise entry point to <em>holoscope</em> and <em>holotopia</em>.</p>
 +
 
 +
<h3><em>Wholeness</em></h3>
 +
<p>We define <em>wholeness</em> as the quality that distinguishes a healthy organism, or a well-configured and well-functioning machine. <em>Wholeness</em> is, more simply, the condition or the order of things which is, from an <em>informed</em> perspective, worthy of being aimed for and worked for.</p>
 +
<p>The idea of <em>wholeness</em> is illustrated by the bus with candle headlights. The bus is not <em>whole</em>. Even a tiny piece can mean a world of difference. </p>
 +
<p>While the <em>wholeness</em> of a mechanism is secured by just all its parts being in place, cultural and human <em>wholeness</em> are <em>never</em> completed; there is always more that can be discovered, and aimed for. This makes the notion of <em>wholeness</em> especially suitable for motivating <em>cultural revival</em> and <em>human development</em>, which is our stated goal.</p>
 +
 
 +
<h3><em>Tradition</em> and <em>design</em></h3>
 +
<p><em>Tradition</em> and <em>design</em> are two alternative ways to <em>wholeness</em>. <em>Tradition</em> relies on Darwinian-style evolution; <em>design</em> on awareness and deliberate action. When <em>tradition</em> can no longer be relied on, <em>design</em> must be used.</p>
 +
<p>As the Modernity <em>ideogram</em> might suggest, our contemporary situation may be understood as a precarious transition from one way of evolving to the next. We are no longer <em>traditional</em>; and we are not yet <em>designing</em>. Our situation can naturally be reversed by understanding our situation in a new way; by responding to its demands, and developing its opportunities. </p>  
  
  
<div class="row">
+
<h3><em>Keyword</em> and <em>Prototype</em></h3>
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>BCN2011</h2></div>
 
<div class="col-md-7"><p>The Barcelona Innovation Ecosystem for Good Journalism (BCN2011) is a complete <em>prototype</em> showing how public informing can be reconstructed, to <em>federate</em> the most relevant information, according to the needs of people and society. A description with links is provided [http://kf.wikiwiki.ifi.uio.no/APPLICATIONS#SystemicPrototypes here].</p>  
 
  
<!--
+
<p>The <em>keywords</em> are concepts created by <em>design</em>. We shall see exactly how. For now, it is sufficient to keep in mind that we need to interpret them not as they what they "are", according to <em>tradition</em>, but as used and defined in this text. Until we find a better solution, we distinguish the <em>keywords</em> by writing them in italics.</p>
 +
<p>The core of our proposal is to "restore agency to information, and power to knowledge". When <em>Information</em> is conceived of an instrument to interact with the world around us—then <em>information</em> cannot be only results of observing the world; it cannot be confined to  academic books and articles. The <em>prototypes</em> serve as models, as experiments, and as interventions.</p>
  
 +
<h3><em>Human development</em> and <em>cultural revival</em> as ways to <em>change course</em></h3>
 +
<p>We adopt these <em>keywords</em> from Aurelio Peccei, and use them exactly as he did. </p> 
 +
</div> </div>
 +
 +
<div class="row">
 +
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>A prototype</h2></div>
 +
<div class="col-md-7">
 +
<p>We develop <em>holotopia</em> as a <em>prototype</em>. And the <em>holoscope</em> as a <em>prototype</em> 'headlights'—the leverage point, the natural way to <em>change course</em>. </p>
 +
<p>The Holotopia <em>prototype</em> is not only a description, but also and most importantly it already <em>is</em> "a way to change course". </p>
  
 +
<h3>A strategy</h3>
  
 +
<p>The strategy that defines the Holotopia project—to focus on the natural and easy way, on changing the whole thing—has  its own inherent logic and "leverage points": Instead of occupying Wall Street, changing the relationship we have with information emerges as an easier, more natural and far more effective strategy. Just as it was in Galilei's time. </p>
  
<!-- OLD
+
<p>As an academic initiative, to give our society a new capability, to 'connect the dots' and see things whole, <em>knowledge federation</em> brings to this strategy a collection of technical assets. Their potential to make a difference may be understood with the help of the <em>elephant</em> metaphor.</p>
  
<blockquote>  
+
<p>
The printing press revolutionized communication, and enabled the Enlightenment. Without doubt, the Internet and the interactive digital media constitute a similar revolution, which is well under way. Are we really calling <em>that</em> a 'candle'?
+
[[File:Elephant.jpg]]<br>
</blockquote>  
+
<small>Elephant <em>ideogram</em></small>
 +
</p>  
  
<h3>Scope</h3>  
+
<p>Imagine visionary thinkers as those proverbial blind-folded men touching an elephant. We hear them talk about "a fan", and "a water hose" and and "a tree trunk". They don't make sense, and we ignore them.</p>
<p>In the manner that we just outlined, we consider the people connected by technology as a gigantic system, a <em>collective mind</em>. And we look at the 'program' or process, which constitutes our <em>collective mind</em>'s very principle of operation. </p>  
+
<p>Everything changes when we understand that what they are really talking about are the ear, the trunk and the leg of an exotic animal—which is enormously large! And of the kind that nobody has seen! </p>
 +
<p>The <em>elephant</em> symbolizes the <em>paradigm</em> that is now ready to emerge among us, as soon as we begin to 'connect the dots'. Unlike the sensations we are accustomed to see on TV, the <em>elephant</em> is not only more spectacular, but also incomparably more relevant. <em>And</em> as we shall see in quite a bit of detail, it gives relevance, meaning and agency to academic insights and contributions. </p>  
  
<h3>View</h3>  
+
<h3>A <em>dialog</em></h3>  
<p>Once again we've adopted something from the past, without considering the options.  By using the principle that the printing press made possible—broadcasting—we've failed to take advantage of their <em>main</em> distinguishing trait.</p>  
+
<p>This point cannot be overemphasized: The immediate goal of the Holotopia <em>prototype</em> is <em>not</em> to get  the proposed ideas accepted. Rather, it is to develop a <em>dialog</em> around them. Our strategy is to put forth a handful of insights that are <em>in the real sense</em> sensational—and to organize a structured conversation around them. </p>
<p>Far from giving us the awareness we need, the new technology is keeping us dazzled. Instead of empowering us to see and change our world, it keeps us overwhelmed, and passive.</p>  
+
<p>That structured conversation, that public <em>dialog</em>, constitutes the 'construction project' by which 'the headlights' are rebuilt!</p>  
<p>A <em>radically</em> better way to use the information technology is now possible, and also necessary. To make it a reality, our relationship with information, <em>and</em> with technology, need an update.</p>
 
  
<h3>Action</h3>
+
<h3>A tactical detail</h3>  
<p>Just as the human mind does, our <em>collective mind</em> must <em>federate</em> knowledge; not merely broadcast information.</p>
+
<p>To deflect the ongoing <em>power structure</em> devolution, we provide an arsenal of tactical tools, one of which is important to mention early: Our invitation to a <em>dialog</em> is the invitation to abandon the usual fighting stance, and speak and collaborate in an <em>authentic</em> way. The <em>dialog</em> will evolve together with a corresponding technical instruments, such as suitable use of video and other forms of recording, to serve as corrective feedback.</p>
 +
<p><em>Attrape-nigaud</em> is a French phrase for tactical instruments of this kind.</p>  
  
<h3>Federation</h3>
+
<h3>A step toward <em>academic</em> revival</h3>
<p>The new media were <em>created</em> to enable the change we are proposing—a half-century ago, by Douglas Engelbart and his SRI-based team. And Engelbart too was following the lead suggested by Vannevar Bush, already in 1945. </p>  
+
<p>A <em>cultural revival</em> requires an <em>academic</em> revival—where a 'change of course' perceived as purpose, serves to give new notions of impact and agency to academic work. </p>
<p>The non-technical, humanities side of this coin is no less interesting. Already Friedrich Nietzsche warned us that the overabundance of impressions is leaving us dumbfounded, unable to "digest" the overload of impressions and to act. Guy Debord, more recently, contributed far-reaching insights, which now need to be carefully digested. </p>  
+
<p>Here is how this may fit into the existing streams of thought. </p>  
<p>The <em>prototypes</em> here include the <em>knowledge federation</em> as a <em>transdiscipline</em>—which is offered to serve as an evolutionary organ, and supplement the function our society, and <em>academia</em> are lacking.</p>  
+
<p> The structuralists attempted to give rigor to the study of cultural artifacts. The post-structuralists "deconstructed" this attempt—by showing that writings of historical thinkers, and indeed <em>all</em> cultural artifacts, <em>have no</em> "real" interpretation. And that they are, therefore, subject to <em>free</em> interpretation.</p>
 +
<p>The new relationship with information, which we are proposing, sets the stage for a <em>new</em> development (shall we call it "post-post-structuralism"...?): Instead of asking what, for instance, Pierre Bourdieu "really" saw and wanted to say, we acknowledge that he probably saw something that was <em>not</em> as we tend to believe; and that he struggled to understand and communicate what he saw in the manner of speaking of our traditional <em>order of things</em>; where what he saw could no longer fit in. </p>  
 +
<p>So we can now consider Bourdieu's work as a piece in a completely <em>new</em> puzzle—a <em>new</em> societal <em>order of things</em>. To which we have given the pseudonym <em>holotopia</em>.  </p>
 +
<p>By placing the work of social scientists into that new context, we give their insights a completely <em>new</em> life; and a completely <em>new</em> degree of relevance. We show how this can be done without a single bit sacrificing rigor, but indeed—with a new degree of rigor and a new <em>kind of</em> rigor.</p>  
 
</div> </div>
 
</div> </div>
 +
 +
Leftovers are in [[Clippings]].

Revision as of 11:51, 30 May 2020

Imagine...

You are about to board a bus for a long night ride, when you notice two flickering streaks of light emanating from two wax candles, placed in the circular holes where the headlights of the bus are expected to be. Candles? As headlights?

Of course, the idea of candles as headlights is absurd. So why propose it? Because on a much larger scale this absurdity has become reality.

By depicting our society as a bus without a steering wheel, and the way we look at the world and try to comprehend it and handle it as a pair of candle headlights, the Modernity ideogram renders the essence of our contemporary situation.

Modernity.jpg Modernity ideogram

Our proposal

The core of our knowledge federation proposal is to change the relationship we have with information. And through information—with the world; and with ourselves.

What is our relationship with information presently like? Here is how Neil Postman described it:

"The tie between information and action has been severed. Information is now a commodity that can be bought and sold, or used as a form of entertainment, or worn like a garment to enhance one's status. It comes indiscriminately, directed at no one in particular, disconnected from usefulness; we are glutted with information, drowning in information, have no control over it, don't know what to do with it."

Postman.jpg
Neil Postman

Suppose we handled information as we handle other man-made things—by suiting it to the purposes that need to be served.

What consequences would this have? How would information be different? How would it be used? By what methods, what social processes, and by whom would it be created? What new information formats would emerge, and supplement or replace the traditional books and articles? How would information technology be adapted? What would public informing be like? And academic communication, and education?

Our knowledge federation proposal is a complete and academically coherent answer to those and other related questions; an answer that is not only described and explained, but also implemented—in a collection of real-life embedded prototypes.



An application

What difference will this make? The Holotopia prototype, which is under development, is a proof of concept application.

The Club of Rome's assessment of the situation we are in, provided us with a benchmark challenge for putting our ideas to test. A half-century ago—based on a decade of this global think tank's research into the future prospects of mankind, in a book titled "One Hundred Pages for the Future"—Aurelio Peccei issued the following warning:

"It is absolutely essential to find a way to change course."

Peccei.jpg Aurelio Peccei

Already this event constitutes an anomaly, which motivates the paradigm we are proposing (we attribute to these keywords a similar meaning as Thomas Kuhn did). Why did Peccei's call to action remain unanswered? Why wasn't The Club of Rome's quest—to illuminate the course our civilization has taken—handled by our society's institutions as part of their function? Isn't this already showing that we are 'driving with candle headlights'?

Peccei also specified what would need to be done to "change course":

"The future will either be an inspired product of a great cultural revival, or there will be no future."

"Let me recapitulate what seems to me the crucial question at this point of the human venture", Peccei explained in "Human Quality". "Man has acquired such decisive power that his future depends essentially on how he will use it. However, the business of human life has become so complicated that he is culturally unprepared even to understand his new position clearly. As a consequence, his current predicament is not only worsening but, with the accelerated tempo of events, may become decidedly catastrophic in a not too distant future. The downward trend of human fortunes can be countered and reversed only by the advent of a new humanism essentially based on and aiming at man's cultural development, that is, a substantial improvement in human quality throughout the world."

The Club of Rome insisted that lasting solutions would not found by focusing on specific problems, but by transforming the condition from which they all stem, which they called "problematique", and "the predicament of mankind".

The Holotopia project is a structured, academic and social-entrepreneurial response to The Club of Rome.

Peccei's following observation, with which he concluded his analysis in "One Hundred Pages for the Future", will also be relevant:

The arguments posed in the preceding pages (...) point out several things, of which one of the most important is that our generations seem to have lost the sense of the whole.

Seeing things whole

In the context of Holotopia, we refer to our proposal by its pseudonym holoscope, which highlights its distinguishing characteristic—it helps us see things whole.

Perspective-S.jpg Perspective ideogram

The holoscope uses suitable information in a suitable way, to illuminate what remained obscure or hidden, so that we may 'see through' the whole, and correctly assess its shape, dimensions and condition (correct our perspective).

Local-Global.jpg
BottomUp - TopDown intervention tool for shifting positions, which was part of our pilot project in Kunsthall 3.14, Bergen, suggests how this proposed information is to be used—by transcending fixed relations between top and bottom, and building awareness of the benefits of multiple points of view; and moving in-between.

The holoscope complements the usual approach in the sciences:

Science gave us new ways to look at the world: The telescope and the microscope enabled us to see the things that are too distant or too small to be seen by the naked eye, and our vision expanded beyond bounds. But science had the tendency to keep us focused on things that were either too distant or too small to be relevant—compared to all those large things or issues nearby, which now demand our attention. The holoscope is conceived as a way to look at the world that helps us see any chosen thing or theme as a whole—from all sides; and in correct proportions.

A vision

What possible destinations would we see, if proper 'headlights' were used to 'illuminate the way'?

The holotopia is an astonishingly positive future scenario.

This future vision is indeed more positive than what the familiar utopias offered—whose authors lacked the information to see what was possible; or lived in the times when the resources we have did not yet exist.

But unlike the utopias, the holotopia is readily realizable—because we already have the information that is needed for its fulfillment.

When the details offered on these pages have been considered, it will be clear why white (which, as the all-inclusive color, might symbolize the holotopia) is not only "the new black", but also the new red, and the new green!

Making things whole

What exactly do we need to do, to "change course", and pursue and fulfill the holotopia vision?

The evidence that the holotopia brought together, allowed us to distill a simple principle or rule of thumb:

We need to see ourselves and what we do as parts in a larger whole or wholes; and act in ways that make those larger wholes more whole.

This is, of course, a radical departure from our current course—which emerges as a result of us pursuing what we perceive as "our own" interests; and trusting that "the invisible hand" of the market, or the academic "publish and perish", will turn our self-serving acts into the greatest common good.

It is also the course that the Modernity ideogram is pointing to.

All of holotopia follows from an obvious rational principle, which we have somehow ignored—that the wholeness of the whole thing must be secured; that our beautiful home will not last—in an apartment building that is falling apart.

A project

As a project, Holotopia federates, and fulfills, the holotopia vision.

Margaret Mead's familiar dictum points to this project's core mission:

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

It is, however, the 'small print' that we found most useful—Mead's insights, based on her research, into what exactly distinguishes "a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens" that is capable of making a large difference.

Mead.jpg

Margaret Mead

The Holotopia project undertakes to make a difference by organizing us differently. And by putting a (snow-) ball in play.

The following Mead's observation, made more than fifty years ago, points to an immediate effect of the Holotopia project:

"One necessary condition of successfully continuing our existence is the creation of an atmosphere of hope that the huge problems now confronting us can, in fact, be solved—and can be solved in time."



FiveInsights.JPG

The holotopia vision is made concrete in terms of five insights.

The five insights constitute the 'engine' that drives the Holotopia project to its destination—the holotopia.

At the same time, the five insights provide us a concrete way to federate the The Club of Rome's work.

Strategically located in five pivotal domains of interest: innovation (the way we use our majestically grown capability to create and induce change), communication (the way information technology is used and information is handled), foundations (what the creation of truth and meaning is based on), method (the ways in which we look at the world and try to comprehend it) and values (the "pursuit of happiness"), the five insights disclose large anomalies that obstruct progress in those domains, and demand structural or paradigmatic changes. Together, they show what, metaphorically speaking, is keeping Galilei is house arrest, once again in our era.

Each of the five insights points to an overarching opportunity for creative change:

  • a radical improvement of effectiveness and efficiently of human work, and the liberation from stress and strife that the Industrial Revolution promised, but did not deliver
  • a revolution in communication analogous to what the printing press made possible)
  • a revolutionary empowerment of human reason to explore and understand the world, analogous to the Enlightenment
  • a revolution in conceptual tools and methods for understanding our social and cultural world, and hence improving the human condition, similar to what science brought to our understanding of natural phenomena
  • a revolution in culture analogous to the Renaissance, leading to a dramatic improvement of "human quality"

Each of the five insights is reached by using the holoscope to federate information from disparate sources, that is, by seeing things whole. Each of the anomalies is resolved by using the proposed rule of thumb—by making things whole.

Sixth insight

The five anomalies, and their resolutions, are so interdependent, that to realistically resolve any of them—we need to resolve them all. Another, more general sixth insight follows:

Comprehensive change can be easy, even when smaller and obviously necessary changes have proven to be impossible.

In this way the recommendation of The Club of Rome is federated, and the strategy that distinguishes holotopia (to focus on changing the whole order of things) is confirmed.

Perhaps the most immediately interesting, however, are the relationships between the five insights—which provide us a context for perceiving and handling, in informed and completely new ways, some of the age-old challenges such as:

  • How to put an end to war
  • Where the largest possible contribution to human knowledge might reside, and how to achieve it
  • How to overcome the present dichotomy between science and religion, and use a further evolved approach to knowledge to revolutionize religion

In all, we have fifteen themes to develop in dialogs: Five corresponding to the five insights, and ten corresponding to their relationships. This provides us a wealth of strategic and tactical possibilities, to power the holotopia.

A space

KunsthallDialog01.jpg
A snapshot of Holotopia's pilot project in Kunsthall 3.14, Bergen.

Holotopia undertakes to develop whatever is needed for "changing course". Imagine it as a space, akin to a new continent or a "new world" that's just been discovered—which combines physical and virtual spaces, suitably interconnected.

In a symbolic sense, we are developing the following five sub-spaces.

Fireplace

The fireplace is where our varius dialogs take place, through which our insights are deepen by combining our collective intelligence with suitable insights from the past

Library

The library is where the necessary information is organized and provided, in a suitable form.

Workshop

The workshop is where a new order of things emerges, through co-creation of prototypes.

Gallery

The gallery is where the resulting prototypes are displayed

Stage

The stage is where our events take place.

This idea of "space" brings up certain most interesting connotations and possibilities—which Lefebre and Debord pointed to.


The Box

Box1.jpg A model of The Box.

So many people now talk about"thinking outside the box"; but what does this really mean? Has anyone even seen the box?

Of course, "thinking outside the box" is what the development of a new paradigm is really all about. So to facilitate this most timely process, we decided to create the box. And to choreograph the process of unboxing our thinking, and handling.

Holotopia's Box is an object designed for 'initiation' to holotopia, a way to help us 'unbox' our conception of the world and see, think and behave differently; change course inwardly, by embracing a new value.

We approach The Box from a specific interest, an issue we may care about—such as communication, or IT innovation, or the pursuit of happiness and the ways to improve the human experience, and the human condition. But when we follow our interest a bit deeper, by (physically) opening the box or (symbolically) considering the relevant insights that have been made—we find that there is a large obstacle, preventing our issue to be resolved.

We also see that by resolving this whole new issue, a much larger gains can be reached than what we originally anticipated and intended. And that there are other similar insights; and that they are all closely related.


A vocabulary

Science was not an exception; every new paradigm brings with it a new way of speaking; and a new way of looking at the world.

The following collection of keywords will provide an alternative, and a bit more academic and precise entry point to holoscope and holotopia.

Wholeness

We define wholeness as the quality that distinguishes a healthy organism, or a well-configured and well-functioning machine. Wholeness is, more simply, the condition or the order of things which is, from an informed perspective, worthy of being aimed for and worked for.

The idea of wholeness is illustrated by the bus with candle headlights. The bus is not whole. Even a tiny piece can mean a world of difference.

While the wholeness of a mechanism is secured by just all its parts being in place, cultural and human wholeness are never completed; there is always more that can be discovered, and aimed for. This makes the notion of wholeness especially suitable for motivating cultural revival and human development, which is our stated goal.

Tradition and design

Tradition and design are two alternative ways to wholeness. Tradition relies on Darwinian-style evolution; design on awareness and deliberate action. When tradition can no longer be relied on, design must be used.

As the Modernity ideogram might suggest, our contemporary situation may be understood as a precarious transition from one way of evolving to the next. We are no longer traditional; and we are not yet designing. Our situation can naturally be reversed by understanding our situation in a new way; by responding to its demands, and developing its opportunities.


Keyword and Prototype

The keywords are concepts created by design. We shall see exactly how. For now, it is sufficient to keep in mind that we need to interpret them not as they what they "are", according to tradition, but as used and defined in this text. Until we find a better solution, we distinguish the keywords by writing them in italics.

The core of our proposal is to "restore agency to information, and power to knowledge". When Information is conceived of an instrument to interact with the world around us—then information cannot be only results of observing the world; it cannot be confined to academic books and articles. The prototypes serve as models, as experiments, and as interventions.

Human development and cultural revival as ways to change course

We adopt these keywords from Aurelio Peccei, and use them exactly as he did.

A prototype

We develop holotopia as a prototype. And the holoscope as a prototype 'headlights'—the leverage point, the natural way to change course.

The Holotopia prototype is not only a description, but also and most importantly it already is "a way to change course".

A strategy

The strategy that defines the Holotopia project—to focus on the natural and easy way, on changing the whole thing—has its own inherent logic and "leverage points": Instead of occupying Wall Street, changing the relationship we have with information emerges as an easier, more natural and far more effective strategy. Just as it was in Galilei's time.

As an academic initiative, to give our society a new capability, to 'connect the dots' and see things whole, knowledge federation brings to this strategy a collection of technical assets. Their potential to make a difference may be understood with the help of the elephant metaphor.

Elephant.jpg
Elephant ideogram

Imagine visionary thinkers as those proverbial blind-folded men touching an elephant. We hear them talk about "a fan", and "a water hose" and and "a tree trunk". They don't make sense, and we ignore them.

Everything changes when we understand that what they are really talking about are the ear, the trunk and the leg of an exotic animal—which is enormously large! And of the kind that nobody has seen!

The elephant symbolizes the paradigm that is now ready to emerge among us, as soon as we begin to 'connect the dots'. Unlike the sensations we are accustomed to see on TV, the elephant is not only more spectacular, but also incomparably more relevant. And as we shall see in quite a bit of detail, it gives relevance, meaning and agency to academic insights and contributions.

A dialog

This point cannot be overemphasized: The immediate goal of the Holotopia prototype is not to get the proposed ideas accepted. Rather, it is to develop a dialog around them. Our strategy is to put forth a handful of insights that are in the real sense sensational—and to organize a structured conversation around them.

That structured conversation, that public dialog, constitutes the 'construction project' by which 'the headlights' are rebuilt!

A tactical detail

To deflect the ongoing power structure devolution, we provide an arsenal of tactical tools, one of which is important to mention early: Our invitation to a dialog is the invitation to abandon the usual fighting stance, and speak and collaborate in an authentic way. The dialog will evolve together with a corresponding technical instruments, such as suitable use of video and other forms of recording, to serve as corrective feedback.

Attrape-nigaud is a French phrase for tactical instruments of this kind.

A step toward academic revival

A cultural revival requires an academic revival—where a 'change of course' perceived as purpose, serves to give new notions of impact and agency to academic work.

Here is how this may fit into the existing streams of thought.

The structuralists attempted to give rigor to the study of cultural artifacts. The post-structuralists "deconstructed" this attempt—by showing that writings of historical thinkers, and indeed all cultural artifacts, have no "real" interpretation. And that they are, therefore, subject to free interpretation.

The new relationship with information, which we are proposing, sets the stage for a new development (shall we call it "post-post-structuralism"...?): Instead of asking what, for instance, Pierre Bourdieu "really" saw and wanted to say, we acknowledge that he probably saw something that was not as we tend to believe; and that he struggled to understand and communicate what he saw in the manner of speaking of our traditional order of things; where what he saw could no longer fit in.

So we can now consider Bourdieu's work as a piece in a completely new puzzle—a new societal order of things. To which we have given the pseudonym holotopia.

By placing the work of social scientists into that new context, we give their insights a completely new life; and a completely new degree of relevance. We show how this can be done without a single bit sacrificing rigor, but indeed—with a new degree of rigor and a new kind of rigor.

Leftovers are in Clippings.