Collective intelligence enables the accumulation of knowledge, culture, science and technology and, in stable political physical and economic environments, improves economic well-being. So is collective intelligence all good? Science magazine this week reviewed Steven Pinker’s new book, Enlightenment Now, which might relate to these issues. On the other hand, suppose the collective capacity of society to reduce the predilection of some individuals for vanity, deceit, power, self-aggrandizement, and violence, even if this is a shrinking minority suppose, is not as effective or great as society’s ability to improve stuff and economic well-being. Then the dangers that advanced technologies pose to human beings and other species might not be as controllable as we suppose. It would take fewer and fewer of the violent minority to cause more and more damage. So it may be that while collective intelligence creates enormous benefits, it multiplies dangers. What do you think?
what is perhaps possible is meta-intelligence - looking at what shapes or drives intelligence at societal or collective level. how did your society become advanced in the first place, and why can it no longer find its way?
There are many definitions of "collective intelligence" (as distinct from individual or artificial intelligence). Some have been "proposed" by psychologists, others have been "approved" by bodies such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, The American Heritage Dictionary, etc. Any attempt at answering this query would seem to be contingent on knowing what definition is proposed in this instance (which does not mean the question can necessarily be answered).
I agree with Serrat and Panda submission on this question. Intelligence can be unsuitable if it is not applied in its rightful manner.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Books