Tuesday, July 04, 2006
The metaphor between gene, cell and social
expression à [217]
On Formal verses Natural systems à [206]
Link to education commons à [***]
Generative Methodology Glass Bead Games
post script...to [240]
I felt the need to make this complement, and to extend the complement to all others in this eforum. In these discussions, of the type that is centered around Minciu Sodas' excellent work, we see a struggle to understand the core essence of cause. What causes the dysfunction (and function) of the global economic system, the failures and successes of political processes?
"Simultaneous Policy"
is an conceptual framework designed, being designed, to shift the control between a feedback loop involving politics and economic power.
And this is promising, as are many other frameworks.
But in essence the economic system might only be fixable by a discovery of a by-pass where Nash (John Nash was the mathematician inspiring the movie "The Beautiful Mind") separation of local utility and global utility are required to work together.
This separation and acknowledgement of non-locality is the basis for the conceptual framework that would use voting action around the world to suddenly create a new economic reality - (my interpretation of simultaneous policy).
I sense that there are other "by-pass" mechanisms. One of them coming from the development of no-cost wireless communication systems in the third world. As Benoit Couture is pointing out, it may be that there is an illusion that money, having it or not, is the illusion that keeps predatory economics in power. Intellectual property may be used to make things like no-cost wireless installations inaccessible to the third world.
A by-pass might be found if there was a profound sharing of knowledge that set aside many or all of the computer science based intellectual property (following the court ruling in Microsoft verses Apple) where the concept of a desktop was declared by the courts to be invalid "property". This court ruling is based on the assertion by the courts that the concept was optimal and therefore no additional innovation could be made. (Pointing out that the patent laws are not there to protect individuals (local value) but rather to protect society by rewarding innovation. If no innovation can be made, then the intellectual property is voided.)
Medical informatics, a movement in India, might make on line knowledge of indigenous knowledge of medicine freely available in developing countries where access to medicines is non-existent. The issues here are about the force of intellectual property regarding the properties of (well known) herbal healing. However, a greater issue is in having the knowledge envisioned by myself and others encoded into an web ontology with medical science examination of healing claims. This "knowledge base" is "putative" in that it merely describes (in an optimal fashion) the human knowledge about the healing properties of plants. Court action will show, based on reasoning such as shown in the Microsoft verses Apple ruling, that this type of knowledge cannot be owned simply because someone states the knowledge clearly.
Benoit Couture's note mentioned Bill gates new role.
His funding could have a greater impact on world health and well being if (locality/non-locality) by-passes were sought and found.
I am mentioning two types of by-passes and a generalized principle:
1) no-cost
wireless communication systems where an increasing emphasis is on knowledge
sharing and information interoperability (as in the concept - not fully
realized - of the W3C's semantic web).
2) Medical
science reified medical informatics freely available encoded as a open and
transparent web-ontology (topic map) and linked to indigenous languages and
indigenous folk lore (ie also providing cultural histories)
3) A clear separation between localization and non-local fields in social theory. Nash's insight was that in reality the optimal solution to value assessment was not captured in classical economic (game) theory because the value to the whole was hidden in a confused fashion. Explicit acknowledgement of global, and non-local, value assessment are activity in everyday behaviors, but are not explicitly recognized in classical theories.
Benoit Couture's note, please correct me if I am in error, is musing about the power of this non-locality if coherently expressed by many individual people (without any explicit economic considerations).
I restate as: "not everything is a business process."
I conjecture that the "complex" economic outcomes of creating and supporting "appreciative social fields"
is to provide (non-local) causality as future events form.
Paul Prueitt
Postscript to à [240]