IMAGES
Contents
Federation through Ideograms
(Neil Postman in a televised interview to Open Mind, 1990)
"[...] of people not having any basis for knowing what is relevant, what is irrelevant, what is useful, what is not useful, where they live in a culture that is simply committed, through all of its media, to generate tons of information every hour, without categorizing it in any way for you", Postman continued.
The function of knowledge federation is to connect the dots.
And add meaning to overloads of data; and provide the sort of knowledge Postman was asking for; or in knowledge federation's own jargon—to add to it a correct gestalt; of which "Our house is on fire" is the canonical example: You may know all the room temperatures and even the CO2 levels; but it is only when you know that your house is on fire that you also know what to do. A gestalt can ignite an emotional response; it can even change the level of adrenaline in your bloodstream.
Our traditions have instructed us how to handle situations and contingencies by providing us a repertoire of gestalt-action pairs. But what about those situations that have not happened before?
We use the word gestalt to define the word informed.
And we use ideograms to communicate gestalts. An ideogram can condense one thousand words into an image; and make the point of it all recognizable at a glance; and turn overloads of information into shared meaning; and communicate the know-what in a way that incites us to act.
The existing knowledge federation ideograms are only a placeholder—for a variety of techniques that will be developed by judiciously combining the arts with new media technology.
Modernity ideogram
By depicting our society as a bus and our information as its candle headlights, the Modernity ideogram renders the gestalt of our contemporary situation in a nutshell.
Imagine us as passengers in a bus—which rushes at accelerating speed through dark and uncharted terrain; toward a destination that's cannot be anything but a disaster; because the headlights of our bus are too dim to illuminate even the very road it is following.
Information must now stand between ourselves and the world; and between ourselves and our choices.
Not any sort of information—but information deliberately designed for that purpose. What we have will not do the job.
In Guided Evolution of Society, in 2001, systems scientist Béla H. Bánáthy surveyed a broad range of sources and reached this conclusion:
“We are the first generation of our species that has the privilege, the opportunity, and the burden of responsibility to engage in the process of our own evolution. We are indeed chosen people. We now have the knowledge available to us and we have the power of human and social potential that is required to initiate a new and historical social function: conscious evolution. But we can fulfill this function only if we develop evolutionary competence by evolutionary learning and acquire the will and determination to engage in conscious evolution. These are core requirements, because what evolution did for us up to now we have to learn to do for ourselves by guiding our own evolution.”
To foster the awareness of this new opportunity and responsibility, and develop the information that can provide us “evolutionary guidance”—is the challenge the Modernity ideogram is pointing to.
This challenge is academic; it is the academic challenge!
In Chapter Two of the Liberation book I introduce this new accountability through the analogy with computer programming: When in the early days of computing ambitious software projects resulted in chaos—composed of thousands of tangled up lines of code, which nobody could comprehend or correct—the solution was found in the creation of "software design methodologies"; whose creators considered themselves accountable for the (conceptual and technical) tools they gave to programmers.
We academic people too must become accountable.
For the (conceptual and technical) information tools we give to researchers and to society; because it is those tools that now determine whether information will result in chaos—or in a new order.
Information ideogram
You may already be sensing some of the effortless enthusiasm that distinguishes the knowledge federation proposal: We can solve "the huge problems now confronting us"; and we do not need to wrestle with "the 1%" or the politicians; the key to solutions is in our hands—in the hands of publicly sponsored intellectuals! The people out there look up to us to tell them what information needs to be like!
The Information ideogram is an “i” (for "information"), composed as a circle or dot or point on top of a rectangle; inscribed in a triangle representing the metaphorical mountain. You may interpret the rectangle as representing a myriad of documents; and the point as the point of it all; and this ideogram as a way to say what's obvious—that without a point, thousands and thousands of printed pages are just point-less! The triangle or the mountain symbolizes the purpose of it all—to, metaphorically, come out of "information jungle" by collectively climbing to a mountain top; and see (no longer only the trees, but) the forest too; and see where the roads are leading, and which one we need to follow.
How should information be structured? Ole-Johan Dahl and C.A.R. Hoare wrote in Structured Programming in 1972, in a chapter called “Hierarchical Program Structures”:
“As the result of the large capacity of computing instruments, we have to deal with computing processes of such complexity that they can hardly be understood in terms of basic general purpose concepts. The limit is set by the nature of our intellect: precise thinking is possible only in terms of a small number of elements at a time. The only efficient way to deal with complicated systems is in a hierarchical fashion. The dynamic system is constructed and understood in terms of high level concepts, which are in turn constructed and understood in terms of lower level concepts, and so forth.”
Dahl received the Turing Award (the computer science equivalent for the Nobel Prize) for co-authoring the Object Oriented Methodology; which empowers the programmers to deliver comprehensible, reusable, verifiable and modifiable code by structuring it in terms of "objects". The answer we offered, which the Information ideogram illustrates, is a remake of the same idea we call information holon; which is designed to serve as a document template; as a new basic unit or "piece" of information. A holon is both a whole in itself and a piece in a larger whole. When a myriad of documents are federated to produce the point—this point can be used to compose a higher-order holon; so that holons can be combined into a holarchy—which is what the mountain stands for.
Another word for "creation of meaning" is "abstraction". The Information ideogram points to three kinds of abstraction:
- The horizontal abstraction is represented by the rectangle; you may understand it if you think of projective geometry—as depicting a complex object in terms of a collection of suitably chosen projection planes; each of which presents a simple image; so that together they show us the object from all sides.
- The vertical abstraction is represented by the point; you'll comprehend it if you think of going up a mountain and to the mountain top—from where the picture of the whole terrain is visible.
- The structural abstraction is represented by the mountain; you'll understand it if you think of the mountain as consisting of viewpoints; and of inspecting a hand-held object to see if it's broken or whole — by choosing several distinct ways to look.
Another keyword we use is "categorization"; structural abstraction allows us to identify a handful of categories in terms of which a complex theme can and needs to be comprehended.
Holotopia ideogram
The holotopia initiative is knowledge federation's proof of concept application. It is also the vision that resulted when we applied knowledge federation to five pivotal categories (I qualify something as pivotal if it decisively influences our society's evolutionary course): In each case—when we federated what's been academically published or otherwise reported—the "conventional wisdom" had to be reversed.
“A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move toward higher levels", Albert Einstein warned in 1946, an interview to The New York Times. The Holotopia ideogram comprises five pillars, each of which has a pivotal category at its base and an insight at its capital; which resulted by elevating us, as it were, above "the world" that has been pulled over our eyes, by applying knowledge federation to that category. The ten themes—represented by the edges joining the five insights—point to the fact that when other similarly important themes such as creativity, religion and education are considered in the context of five insights—their comprehension and handling too is revised and reversed.
An overarching insight resulted from this experiment; which I propose for consideration in our dialog:
We are not informed.
Our comprehension and handling of the core themes that determine our know-what, and set our society's evolutionary course—are at the level where our comprehension of natural phenomena was in pre-scientific times; we do not have any knowledge; all we really have to work with is belief.
The stars on Holotopia ideogram represent prototypes; and point to the informed course of action the holotopia initiative will enable and begin.
My appeal
(Albert Einstein, New York Times, 1946)
In the movie The Matrix, "the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth" epitomized a situation where people live in a devastated and dying world ruled by machines—and in a falsified "reality" that makes the world appear to them as normal; in the Liberation book it epitomizes the situation where people live without guiding insights or principles—which compels them to adapt to the world, instead of comprehending it critically.
My appeal is to institute a new science.
Which will liberate us from "the world" by providing us insights and principles.
And importantly—which will empower our next generation to create a different world.
My point is that this course of action is not only our human obligation—but also the necessary next step in academic evolution.
The knowledge federation prototype constitutes a case for this appeal—and at the same time makes it actionable.
