US intelligence agencies "discover" blogs and wikis

[Phil Henshaw-2]

But sadly, isn't the basic problem not so much translating from other
languages but just communicating with our own!?!   So long as people
are primarily looking for the fault in other people's points of view
instead of the insight in other people's points of view we'll get the
mayhem we now have and justly deserve.   Nature must have some good a
reason for having all minds make up their own worlds, meanings and
points of view.  Maybe it would be good to build the worlds in our
minds the same way... ?   :)

> Phil Henshaw wrote:
> > Blogs are just gossip unless the contributors are observant and
> > self-critical, wiki's likewise.  
> But a great excuse to do some old-school artificial intelligence
research!
>
>
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/11/07/business/NA_FIN_US_Pentagon_T
ranslation_Challenge.php
>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
>
>

--
Phil Henshaw                       ????.?? ? `?.????
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~        
tel: [phone]                
e-mail: sy at synapse9.com          
explorations: www.synapse9.com

[Marcus G. Daniels-3]

Phil Henshaw wrote:

> So long as people
> are primarily looking for the fault in other people's points of view
> instead of the insight in other people's points of view we'll get the
> mayhem we now have and justly deserve.
> Nature must have some good a
> reason for having all minds make up their own worlds, meanings and
> points of view.
Evolutionary advantage is one guess.  Many individualized languages,
i.e. models of the world, having many individualized responses may
enable at least some people in a community to make it through severe
adversity intact.   Similarly, the community can evolve language to fit
the needs of its environment.   For example, in this way democracies
beat theocracies when their leaders, who would very much like to define
language and shape ideas for their own purposes, start pushing too many
ideas that are dangerous to everyone in the group..

[Phil Henshaw-2]

perfectly correct!   That's the evolutionary view on how the diversity
of perspectives is supposed to work, but it doesn't.  The ideal product
of democracy is decision making that reflects a whole understanding of
things by integrating all points of view.  Trouble develops when the
points of view that believe in suppressing all others take over.  

Take the case of when we, in our wisdom, determine that we need to
interfere in another culture..., in Iraq, for example.   The
conversation about Iraq has been completely dominated by the 'do evil to
evil' point of view, and the 'doctor with real sick patient' view just
gets punched in the face over and over.   The fact that there isn't
anyone fighting in Iraq not defending their sacred honor should be the
tip off, but isn't.


Phil Henshaw                       ????.?? ? `?.????
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
680 Ft. Washington Ave
NY NY 10040                      
tel: [phone]                
e-mail: pfh at synapse9.com          
explorations: www.synapse9.com    

> -----Original Message-----
> From: friam-bounces at redfish.com
> [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 5:54 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] US intelligence agencies "discover"
> blogs and wikis
>
>
> Phil Henshaw wrote:
>
> > So long as people
> > are primarily looking for the fault in other people's
> points of view
> > instead of the insight in other people's points of view
> we'll get the
> > mayhem we now have and justly deserve.
> > Nature must have some good a
> > reason for having all minds make up their own worlds, meanings and
> > points of view.
> Evolutionary advantage is one guess.  Many individualized languages,
> i.e. models of the world, having many individualized responses may
> enable at least some people in a community to make it through severe
> adversity intact.   Similarly, the community can evolve
> language to fit
> the needs of its environment.   For example, in this way democracies
> beat theocracies when their leaders, who would very much like
> to define
> language and shape ideas for their own purposes, start
> pushing too many
> ideas that are dangerous to everyone in the group..
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
>
>

[Marcus G. Daniels-3]

Phil Henshaw wrote:
> The ideal product of democracy is decision making that reflects a whole understanding of things by integrating all points of view.   Trouble develops when the points of view that believe in suppressing all others take over.  
>  
I have my doubts about the evolutionary value of democracy in the modern
world.   For example, in the corporate world the motivation is supplied
by stockholders and the points of view are supplied by employees.  
Worse, the corporate leaders, workers, and stockholders are all
different people, disinterested in the welfare of one another.  
Complicating matters is that the corporations have the ear of
government.  Democracy in these kinds of conditions requires individual
courage and idealism.