Aristocracy Within The Collective

By Phil Robibero on 07/17/2009

If you look at a single ant you would see rather dull characteristics.  The ant crawls around aimlessly reaching for an uncertain goal.  But if you begin to pull back the lens you will see a vast colony of ants building tunnels, carrying food, and guarding passage ways.  It all appears to be so orderly and planned.  As the frame gets larger we begin to find a system within the disorder and that a omnipresent intelligence is at the heart of it all.

The behavior of ants is relevant to the ever emerging thinking within our own species.  With the advent of the internet and public information spaces such as Wikipedia, the idea of collective intelligence is becoming a popular truism of this decade.  But the idea of collective intelligence is still in it's infancy (the idea was first coined in the 19th century) and it's fragility remains an issue.

The fragility of collective intelligence only allows it to work under certain scenarios. It cannot survive under the weight of a suppressive government. Galileo Galilei was forced to recant his controversial heliocentric ideas in front a Roman Inquisition. His work "Dialogue Concerning the Chief World Systems" was banned from printing and it's exposure was thus limited. Collective intelligence also cannot survive within a system where information is dispersed from a singular entity and discussion is strictly prohibited. Nazi Germany is a case where a vulnerable populous was easily swayed by lies coming from a single and manipulative source.

The pattern here is that the the road blocks to an intellectual foundation must be dropped in order for collective intelligence to work.  Additionally, a public space must be created so that ideas can be spread and collected.  Under those conditions, technological improvements have to be made.  Thankfully, the tools are now in place to create a public sphere (Wikipedia being the answer).  The recent close of Encarta (a closed network) shows just how powerful Wikipedia (a public network) has become as a source and procurer of information.  

But things are beginning to change for Wikipedia and a certain aristocracy is being formed.  Recently, Wikipedia has started to consider allowing only trusted users to approve edits in articles.  Now rather than having a communal self-checking community, regular users will be subject to invisible dignitaries.  Such a system does away with collective intelligence and can bring us back to our old ways.

An additional issue that must be considered in order to do away with the emerging aristocracy within our collective intelligence is to give the tools to those who don't have it.  Information now rests in cyberspace and those without access are doomed to be left out.  Information is a right that must be shared and we cannot bar those who cannot afford it.  Also, the permeation of technology in poor nations will allow participation from them.  If our collective intelligence relies heavily on the amount of participation, think of all the additional information we can gain from the billions of people who are still left out.

[Additional Photos: "Wikipedia", Wikipedia.org, 2009]