Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Collective intelligence: Collective intelligence refers to a group's ability to solve problems, make decisions, and generate ideas collaboratively, often resulting in outcomes that surpass individual efforts. See also Intelligence, Artficial Inteligence._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Jaron Lanier on Collective Intelligence - Dictionary of Arguments
I 79 Collective Intelligence/Swarm Intelligence/Lanier: James Surowiecki(1): For example, when it comes to estimating the weight of an ox, the average of many people's estimates is more reliable than the estimate of any one individual. According to popular belief, this works, a) because the errors of the individual estimators cancel each other out b) because many estimates are based on at least a certain degree of correct logic and assumptions as to content, so that they converge to the right answer. According to the latter formulation, individual intelligence remains the core of the collective phenomenon. >J. Surowiecki. I 80 The reason why the collective can be valuable is that the peaks of intelligence and stupidity in the collective are not the same as those of the individual. Collective: can be useful in determining a price. This corresponds to the market. On the other hand, the collective is inferior when it comes to designing a product. I 81 Swarm Intelligence/LanierVsSurowiecki: Swarm Intelligence can compensate for different incompetencies when signal processing is built into the loop. I 82 In this way, a slowdown in a feedback process can prevent chaos. Such a slowdown can be compared to filters in music editing. Frequent corrections to individual Wikipedia entries have been reduced by a setting that corresponds to a low-pass filter. In the meantime, the frequency with which a single person can remove text fragments from another contributor has been limited. >Social networks, >Social media, >Internet, >Wikipedia. I 83 Swarm intelligence/Lanier: we should understand the "wisdom of the many" as a tool, i.e. we should relate it to a specific purpose. I 84 Surowiecki: proposes four principles, one of which is to limit the ability of its members to obtain knowledge of the other members' decisions in order to ensure the independence of decisions. Lanier: in addition, such collectives should be prevented from formulating the questions themselves. The answers should always be a simple yes or no or a multiple choice list. Nassim Nicholas Taleb: has recently suggested that applications based on the wisdom of many be divided into four quadrants. The dangerous "Fourth Quadrant" contains questions with complex answers according to his classification, in which the distribution of the answers is still unknown. In his opinion, this quadrant should be taboo for swarm intelligence. Cf. >Intelligence, >Decisions, >Decision Theory. 1. J. Surowiecki, The Wisdom of Crowds, NY 2005._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Lanier I Jaron Lanier You are not a Gadget. A Manifesto, New York 2010 German Edition: Gadget: Warum die Zukunft uns noch braucht Frankfurt/M. 2012 |
||
> Counter arguments against Lanier
> Counter arguments in relation to Collective Intelligence
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-29