Difference between revisions of "Holotopia"

From Knowledge Federation
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 15: Line 15:
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>We need new 'headlights'</h2></div>
+
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>Our proposal</h2></div>
<div class="col-md-7"><h3>The way we see the world</h3>
 
<p>The COVID-19 crisis and its fallout reminds us of the connectedness and vulnerability of human and natural systems. And of the all-important role of the 'headlights'. Soon we may be facing <em>irreversible</em> changes in the climate system causing global warming, extreme weather and sea-level rise. Shall we resort to our usual <em>reactive</em> responses and blame games? Or shall we see our situation in a way that will empower us to comprehend it truly, and handle it effectively?</p>  
 
  
ALTERNATIVE ((subtractions noted as [...], additions/changes as text within square brackets and comments within paranthesis ))
 
 
<p>The COVID-19 crisis and its fallout remind[...] us of the connectedness and vulnerability of the human [and natural] systems ((science shows that both covid and climate change stem from human actions influencing natural systems)). [...]((covid is not over so too early to quantify/compare, and the term 'disturbance' undermines the lives lost)) [Both epidemics and], the irreversible changes expected to result from climate change [are systemic problems that result from human actions].</p>
 
 
<p>[...] Problems, such as the coronavirus epidemic and climate change, [...] ((some people don't think so)) have to be dealt with. But [how? The question of strategy is of vital importance.] [...] ((what do you mean by 'sufficient' in this context?)) Einstein's familiar observation, that we cannot solve our problems by thinking as we did when we created them, is implicit in every step that our initiative has made.</p>
 
 
<p>We need different thinking and ['systemic' instead of 'deeper'?] understanding to [prevent] ((rather than 'avoid')) crisis, injustice, riots and conflicts, scapegoating and blame.
 
((Cut: "In the absence of deeper understanding, the age-old scapegoats will be blamed: "the lazy people on welfare"; the immigrant workers; the 1%; the Jews or the Muslims" – I don't find this list very elegant)).</p>
 
 
END ALTERNATIVE
 
 
 
 
<h3>We have 'candles' as 'headlights'</h3>
 
<p>How we ended up with a dysfunctional and obsolete way of comprehending the world is illuminating, and we must return to it, however briefly.</p>
 
<p>Between the mid-19th century and the first decades of the 20th century, Western societies changed drastically: Our countries became democracies; our worldviews became scientific and secular; our lifestyles became mechanized and modern. The way we looked at the world also changed—and then for about a century <em>remained frozen</em>!</p>
 
 
<p>Meanwhile the human creativity, unleashed from tradition, continued to bear fruits; and we now have:</p>
 
 
<ul>
 
<li>a completely different understanding of language, truth and reality, and of the meaning and purpose of information and its relationship with power</li>
 
<li>a completely new information technology—first the TV and the immersive audio-visual media, and then the Internet and the interactive digital media</li>
 
<li>completely changed societal challenges— ((rewrite)) from increasing productivity, to understanding and controlling our newly acquired powers to change the global systems and bring about our own end</li>
 
<li>the heritage of the world traditions—which for the first time became documented and made available</li>
 
</ul>
 
<p>But these changes remained without impact on our institutionalized ways of working together and achieving socially important goals.</p>
 
 
<p>Academia remained confined to disciplines, which grew and got fragmented into sub-specialties. Massive academic publishing made scientists loose contact not only with one another but with the world at large – entire fields failed to communicate even their most basic insights.</p>
 
<p>Indeed—<em>the most important ideas of our leading thinkers</em>, and <em>the main insights of entire academic disciplines</em>, remained without due influence on public opinion and institutional policy!</p>
 
 
<p>The point of departure of the knowledge federation initiative is an alarming split—between published academic insights, and the way we as society and culture tend to see the world; and try to handle issues.</p>
 
</div> </div>
 
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="col-md-3"><h2>The KF proposal</h2></div>
 
<div class="col-md-7"><h3><em>Knowledge federation</em> means 'connecting the dots'</h3>
 
<blockquote>
 
The purpose of <em>knowledge federation</em> is to restore agency to information, and power to knowledge.
 
</blockquote>
 
 
<p>Knowledge federation can be understood as the principle of operation of an entirely different pair of 'headlights'—by which the above purpose is achieved.</p>
 
 
<p>Political federation combines smaller political units together, to give them visibility and impact. <em>Knowledge federation</em> does that to information. As our logo suggests—<em>knowledge federation</em> means 'connecting the dots'.</p>
 
 
<p>By 'connecting the dots', we can reach a new insight—and see an issue or a situation in a new way, which reveals how it may need to be handled. And by creating prototypes—we can give information a way to impact reality directly.</p>
 
 
 
</div> </div>
 
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="col-md-3"></div>
 
 
<div class="col-md-6"><h3>We are proposing to <em>create</em> new 'headlights'</h3>  
 
<div class="col-md-6"><h3>We are proposing to <em>create</em> new 'headlights'</h3>  
  
Line 90: Line 37:
 
<div class="col-md-3"></div>
 
<div class="col-md-3"></div>
 
<div class="col-md-7">
 
<div class="col-md-7">
<p>We are proposing to create new 'headlights'—by federating knowledge instead of trying to make use of whatever happens to be there; instead of blindly adopting what we've inherited from the past.</p>  
+
<p>Knowledge federation can be understood as the principle of operation of an entirely different pair of 'headlights'—by which the above purpose is achieved.</p>
  
<h3><em>Knowledge federation</em> means <em>acting</em> differently</h3>
+
<p>Political federation combines smaller political units together, to give them visibility and impact. <em>Knowledge federation</em> does that to information. As our logo suggests—<em>knowledge federation</em> means 'connecting the dots'.</p>
<p>Having perceived our society as a bus with candle headlights, we recognized ourselves as (part of) those headlights. Naturally, we began to self-organize—to become 'lightbulbs', not 'candles'!</p>  
 
  
<p>We understood that we must use our creativity in a new way; not by merely observing and reporting—but by self-organizing and co-creatively <em>acting</em> in ways that will result in a re-evolution of the system we are part of.</p>
+
<p>By 'connecting the dots', we can reach a new insight—and see an issue or a situation in a new way, which reveals how it may need to be handled. And by creating prototypes—we can give information a way to impact reality directly.</p>
 
 
<h3><em>Knowledge federation</em> concretely</h3>
 
<blockquote>We are proposing to establish <em>knowledge federation</em> as a new transdisciplinary academic field, and a real-life <em>praxis</em>.</blockquote>
 
<p>As  "applied research", <em>knowledge federation</em> is intended to <em>be</em> the 'headlights'—and turn academic and other relevant insights into shared visions.</p>
 
<p>As "basic research", its function is to <em>create</em> the 'headlights'—and to recreate them continuously, to keep them in sync with relevant knowledge, technology, and our society's needs.</p>
 
<p>As a way to operationalize this proposal, we offer to</p>
 
<ul>
 
<li>establish <em>knowledge federation</em> as a <em>transdiscipline</em>—for which the <em>prototype</em> described on these pages is offered as a detailed explanation, and a template ready for implementation</li>
 
<li>develop the <em>holotopia</em> <em>prototype</em> as a real-life initiative to change the way we as society see and handle our larger situation at hand, and information and knowledge in particular</li>
 
</ul>  
 
  
 
<h3>We have created a prototype</h3>
 
<h3>We have created a prototype</h3>
Line 148: Line 84:
  
 
<p>Why did Peccei's call to action remain unanswered? Why wasn't The Club of Rome's purpose—to illuminate the course our civilization has taken—served by our society's institutions, as part of their function? Isn't this already showing that we are 'driving with candle headlights'?</p>
 
<p>Why did Peccei's call to action remain unanswered? Why wasn't The Club of Rome's purpose—to illuminate the course our civilization has taken—served by our society's institutions, as part of their function? Isn't this already showing that we are 'driving with candle headlights'?</p>
 +
</div> </div>
  
<p>Since our proposal is to develop a new <em>paradigm</em> in creation and use of information, the lack of academic and social response to The Club of Rome and Peccei constitutes (in Thopmas Kuhn's usage of this word) an <em>anomaly</em>.</p>
+
<!-- XXX
  
<p>The Holotopia <em>prototype</em> should, in this context, be understood as a model response to The Club of Rome and Peccei. Imagine it as a cardboard model of a large sculpture.</p>
 
<p>The real thing, or 'the sculpture', is a global knowledge work system, or our <em>collective mind</em>, that <em>federates</em> knowledge. One which is capable of taking such an insight as The Club of Rome provided, and doing what needs to be done. In creating this 'cardboard model', we assume that part of the <em>federation</em> has already been done by The Club of Rome—and we <em>federate</em> further. The Club of Rome was indeed a <em>federation</em> effort, both an attempt to create the 'headlights' <em>and</em> to provide the vision. But our <em>collective mind</em> being fragmented and irresponsive, the action of our 'collective organism'  did not follow. </p>
 
 
<blockquote>Can knowledge federation help us "change course"?</blockquote>
 
 
<p>What are the functions that our <em>collective mind</em> and our 'collective organism' are lacking to become viable, or "sustainable"?</p>
 
 
<blockquote>Our response to Peccei is to begin a process.</blockquote>
 
 
<p>Our goal is to initiate and streamline a process through which our <em>collective mind</em> can re-create itself and become capable of evolving further—and guide the evolution of the entire 'organism' to become capable of responding to changes in the 'environment'.</p>
 
<p>
 
[[File:Jantsch-university.jpeg]]
 
</p>
 
<p>Exactly as Erich Jantsch proposed fifty years ago—as a core element of a necessary and meaningful way to continue The Club of Rome's action.</p> 
 
 
<h3>Liberating Galilei</h3>
 
 
<p>There is a second, and entirely different way to read the present description of the Holotopia <em>prototype</em>—the <em>academic</em> way.</p>
 
<p>Here we are talking about a core <em>academic</em> anomaly—that our knowledge work is not evolving in sync with the <em>knowledge of knowledge</em> that has become available. Because the <em>academia</em> is lacking an evolutionary organ, and an awareness of its social roles—so that it may adapt its behavior, and its evolution, to those roles.</p>
 
 
<p>We show that <em>when this evolution is allowed to continue</em> (and keeping the evolution of knowledge in sync with the <em>knowledge of knowledge</em> is the <em>academia</em>'s primary role)—then the <em>paradigm shift</em> we are proposing follows as the next step. Just as it did in Galilei's time.</p>
 
 
<p>We have created—and are now exhibiting—a <em>prototype</em> of an academic 'reality beyond', made according to the best standards of the academic tradition—which means rigorous, non-trivial, parsimonious or elegant... Our proposal is not to <em>adopt</em> the <em>prototype</em> we've proposed (which too is a 'paper model), but to continue the evolution in the direction our <em>prototype</em> is pointing.</p>
 
<p>To ignite action, which is long overdue, we submit what might be seen as an unexpected answer to the key question:
 
<blockquote>Who holds Galilei in house arrest?</blockquote>
 
 
The answer is surprising considering that the contemporary <em>academia</em> has been developed on the legacy of Galilei and his colleagues. As a way to <em>continue</em> the tradition they represented.</p>
 
<p>The answer will, however, be natural, if we see that the contemporary <em>academia</em> has the <em>social role</em> that the Church held in Galilei's time. And that  liberating the evolution of knowledge from the <em>power structure</em> is <em>the</em> key task today, just as it was then. And in so many other situations in the past.</p>
 
 
<h3><em>Mirror</em>, <em>holoscope</em> and <em>holotopia</em></h3>
 
 
<p>Our proposal is "to develop <em>knowledge federation</em> as an academic field, and as a real-life <em>praxis</em>.</p>
 
<p>The key to the change we are proposing is to change the relationship we have with knowledge. The "leverage point" (place to intervene) is the university (or <em>academia</em>), which holds this key.</p>
 
<blockquote>The task is nothing less than to build a new society and new institutions for it.</blockquote>
 
<p>This Erich Jantsch's call to action has "the university" as <em>natural</em> implementation.</p>
 
 
<p>Our proposal can now be summarized by three <em>keywords</em>, and corresponding images.</p>
 
<p>The evolution of <em>academia</em> has brought it to the metaphorical <em>mirror</em>—a situation that demands self-reflection, leading to a change of self-perception and self-identity (from "objective observer of reality", to "piece in a larger whole"). </p>
 
<p>The <em>holotopia</em> can then be understood as the vision of a resulting social reality; the <em>holoscope</em> alias <em>knowledge federation</em> can be understood as a resulting academic reality.</p> 
 
</div> </div>
 
  
 
<div class="row">
 
<div class="row">

Revision as of 09:30, 12 July 2020

Imagine...

You are about to board a bus for a long night ride, when you notice the flickering streaks of light emanating from two wax candles, placed 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.

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

Modernity.jpg Modernity ideogram


Our proposal

We are proposing to create new 'headlights'

The core of our knowledge federation proposal is to change the relationship we have with information.

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


Knowledge federation can be understood as the principle of operation of an entirely different pair of 'headlights'—by which the above purpose is achieved.

Political federation combines smaller political units together, to give them visibility and impact. Knowledge federation does that to information. As our logo suggests—knowledge federation means 'connecting the dots'.

By 'connecting the dots', we can reach a new insight—and see an issue or a situation in a new way, which reveals how it may need to be handled. And by creating prototypes—we can give information a way to impact reality directly.

We have created a prototype

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

The substance of our proposal is the Knowledge Federation prototype—a complete and academically coherent answer to those and other related questions. An answer that is not only described, and explained, but also and implemented—in a collection of real-life embedded prototypes.

An application

The Club of Rome's assessment of the situation we are in, provided us with a benchmark challenge for developing the Holotopia prototype. Four decades 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 also specified what needed 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."

Peccei.jpg
Aurelio Peccei

This conclusion, that our present crisis has cultural roots and must be handled accordingly, Peccei shared with a number of twentieth century's thinkers. Arne Næss, Norway's esteemed philosopher, reached it on different grounds, and called it "deep ecology".

In "Human Quality", Peccei assessed our contemporary situation as follows:

"Let me recapitulate what seems to me the crucial question at this point of the human venture. 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 be found by focusing on specific problems, but by transforming the condition from which they all stem, which they called "problematique".

Federating Peccei

We conceive the Holotopia prototype as a way to federate The Club of Rome's vision and mission.

Why did Peccei's call to action remain unanswered? Why wasn't The Club of Rome's purpose—to illuminate the course our civilization has taken—served by our society's institutions, as part of their function? Isn't this already showing that we are 'driving with candle headlights'?