Virtually all talk of cognitive enhancement focuses exclusively on the enhancement of individual intelligence. But what about enhancing group intelligence?
...
Complete entry
Posted by
Gynn on 01/19 at 12:06 PM
I have been pondering a general problem with group intelligence, and cognitive enhancement for a little while and I am confronted with a problem which I normally brush off as a “gut” reaction to futurism.
I think there is a great deal of evidence that at the very least collaborative work, and consumption, as powered by telecom and the internet is the main reason behind the exponential increase of our knowledge over the last hundred years. Certainly much of that had at the very least with the ability to share knowledge in much shorter periods of time, if not by actual collaboration between parties who would have never had the ability to meet 100 years ago, much less work together.
So for continuing our advancement, and the well being of our species, cognitive enhancement, is a natural and likely inevitable end. In a great many ways, cognitive enhancement would be the single greatest achievement in human history.
My concern is as I wonder how it would develop, while certainly it would be most helpful to have the ability to communicate with one and other faster and further without the help of external electronic devices, and instead have a mind more capable of calculation, cognition and communication, eventually we will want to share experiences. While reading a report does allow one to get all the “science” of an experiment, it does prevent them from experiencing it. As we continue to unlock the mind, and the way we can interface with it, I believe it will eventually get to the point where we are able to single out specific memories, and access them with 100% reliability. This could be cool, but here are the two things that have been concerning me about the issue of being able to access ones memories at will.
1: Our minds are made in such a way that trauma, and negative experience is slowly buried up, or forgotten. Our minds do seem designed with self preservation measures to try and protect our psyche. Now with a memory that is always accurate, and that is always accessible, what will that do to our minds? My concern is what our limitations add to our selves. I am unsure of what the world would be like if I didn’t forget things. There are somethings we choose to forget, or ignore, or believe despite the evidence. Our emotions do seem somewhat disconnected from our experiences, especially as time goes on. Stockholm Syndrome is a wonderful example, despite the worst possible conditions a loyalty and an affection grows between a captor and their captive. Are these mechanisms of neural chemistry, or are these not caused by our physical neural infrastructure? While I don’t think anyone is a supporter of Stockholm Syndrome, on subjects like parental affection, this may be problematic. This bothers me, And I would ask for help, and thoughts about what that would mean for our enhanced existence.
The second issue that has been haunting me, is one of privacy. In a world where I can transmit my memories into others, certainly there would be a vast array of benefits. Imprisoning the innocent would be almost unheard of, scientific advancement would advance at an unprecedented rate, collaborative culture and consumption would increase, and I believe violence as a species would fall. This all comes though at the expense of privacy, and I mean total and complete privacy. What if anything could be called more private than ones memories or experiences? Your first kiss? Your first love? Your first heartbreak? Secrets, shames and prides? Much of our world is based on our private secrets, from the mundane (excuses about tardiness, or polite lies to appease our peers) to the extreme (People who change their life, their name, try to escape their past, or anyone who’s work or life depends on information remaining secret). With the ability to share memories, or worse, to forcibly access others memories, this wonderful world enhancement will help us build, may be utterly devoid of privacy. A world where nothing is sacred, except knowledge, and that you may no longer own your own life. Simply, everyone’s life, everyone’s knowledge and everyone’s experiences, may simply become public domain. This may not be a bad thing, for mankind to become some kind of pseudo-hive mind, or at least a pluralistic neural network, but are we capable and daring enough to forgo one of our most revered rights?
I would really appreciate peoples feed back on this, I am trying very hard to reconcile this with my strong desire to never die and live in a computer.
Thanks
Gynn (NYC)
Posted by
CMStewart on 01/23 at 08:45 PM
Great article and comment points to ponder.
Perhaps the exacting recollection of negative experiences and the elimination of mind privacy would be the least of our worries in a future collective existence. Will the human mind (albeit vastly enhanced in the future) have the emotional and intellectual stability to thrive outside a biological template?
Posted by
David Stodolsky on 01/24 at 02:02 PM
Turn-taking within the group is not an individual feature.
I proved the increase in group intelligence long ago, but it appears that social factors - e.g., bosses not being willing to give up their power to dominate the group - prevented widespread acceptance:
Stodolsky, D. (1987). Dialogue management program for the Apple II computer. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 19, 483-484.
http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$21
Posted by
Paul on 01/28 at 05:14 AM
For me it’s not absolutely certain that a hive mind would necessarily always act as just the melting pot of all the individual minds within it. If an ultraintelligent mind found that there were advantages to not completely coalescing all minds with in it we might find that individuality - at least to some extent - might actully survive in some form within an intelligence that we would otherwise consider a hive mind.
Posted by
Ria Baeck on 02/02 at 10:42 AM
atoms don’t seem to loose their ‘individuality’ when forming molecules… might it not work the same for individual people and the shared intelligence(s) they might choose?
IEET Blog