Collective intelligence

[mia]

Atheists and theists: Is it possible for us to reach beyond currently debated belief systems? What do we share that transcends traditional religious/non-religious concepts? Is collective intelligence an aspect of spirituality?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_intelligence

[Mariana]

1. Can you define those terms, please?

What do you mean when you say, "collective intelligence" and "spirituality"? I ask because different people often mean very different things when they use terms like those, so it's probably a good idea to define them first thing.

[mia]

3. Collective intelligence is a new term for me.

I was thinking of an idea and found the wikipedia page that was included in the OP. I don't know much more beyond the article, except that I didn't find any research about how collective intelligence could be linked to any religion.

For me, especially here, spirituality invokes a concept of minds communicating throughout time, and now, across the internet. For better or for worse.

[MineralMan]

2. Progressive politics and information sharing

Are the examples I'd use. Spirituality, for me, is meaningless. Social cooperation is an effective example of collective intelligence at work, I think. It transcends things like religious belief to benefit society.

[mia]

5. Spirituality in terms of the human spirit rather than in terms of the soul.

Can collective intelligence transcend progressive politics and arrive at something better?

[Paleologue]

4. Atheists already have

Theists refuse to. Hence the terms.

[guillaumeb]

7. Simplisitic framing.

At best.

[Paleologue]

13. Nice try

I notice you like to use the word "framing" at every opportunity, as a substitute for a substantive and nuanced discussion. Surely you can do better.

[guillaumeb]

20. After reading your initial post, I decided to meet you on your own level.

Interesting how after 11 posts you feel qualified to judge another.

[Paleologue]

21. Judgement is based on

how much you listen, not how much you talk.

Do you agree or disagree?

[guillaumeb]

22. I also read your response #18.

And judging by those 2 responses, I read a quickness to judge and possibly more. But 2 responses are not an adequate sample size.

[Paleologue]

25. Not an answer

Try again. Do you agree or disagree with what I stated?

[guillaumeb]

26. Is that your philosophy?

If so, explain how your initial responses fit with what you claim to be correct. I am seeing a contradiction between what you expressed and what you previously responded.

[Paleologue]

30. Is it your philosophy

to avoid answering simple and direct questions, while asking questions of your own and expecting them to be answered? Have you decided on that as your preferred way to conduct a civil and nuanced discussion?

Because it's my philosophy not to waste my time going back and forth with posters like that. I've seen the type on all sorts of discussion boards for many years, and you fit the model perfectly.

[guillaumeb]

32. Harmony.

It can be a beautiful thing.

[mia]

14. Not quite.

What beliefs do atheists and theists share that contribute to the betterment of mankind, especially on DU?

[Pope George Ringo II]

16. Given that atheism is a negative statement rather than a positive one

We're left running the gamut from secular humanists to Stalinists. And considering that theists in turn run the gamut from Wiccans and Buddhists (sort of) to christians and Thuggee, I'd suggest that it's not the most fertile ground to look for common factors since you've got one group that's like herding cats, while the other group is actively trying to kill or convert the unbelievers--which is basically all of one group and most of the other. And then there are the theists so foolish and dishonest that they insist even the unbelievers are just a different kind of believers, so now you've included people suffering from the delusion that you don't even have two groups in the first place.

Put more succinctly and less politely, what do you mean, "groups"? Neither one is really any such thing, except arguably to the other, at times.

[Paleologue]

18. If you're trying to equate "beliefs"

with "intelligence", you're already off the track.

[Pope George Ringo II]

15. On a practical level, we're all but finished with the Schrodinger's God phase

We've opened all the boxes we can find, and all those gods were dead. There's really not much of an "indeterminate" category at this point.

[Voltaire2]

6. How about Collective Idiocy?

I think we’ve seen the emergence of the opposite of Collective Intelligence, most notably via the rise of radical right wing authoritarian political movements fueled by networked automated disinformation campaigns. The lofty aspirations described in your wiki article seem to not appreciate just how depraved things could get.

[mia]

11. That too,

but not due to lofty aspirations.

[guillaumeb]

8. How is collective intelligence different from mob psychology?

Or is it a subset?

[mia]

9. Mobs are driven by emotion

rather than intellect

[guillaumeb]

10. As to group intelligence,

participating in a discussion could be one manifestation. A pool of minds.

[mia]

12. Yes. n/t

[vicman]

17. You might want to ask

the ants and the bees.

[edhopper]

19. I think it really depends on the group

we see the great strides from collective intelligence at NASA and CERN.

On the other hand the efforts of the GOP lead to the detriment of all.

[guillaumeb]

23. So motivation is also a component? eom

[edhopper]

27. I suppose

I would say goal, but perhaps that is just splitting hairs.

Also the quality of the people involved.

[guillaumeb]

29. True.

Speaking of the second line.

[edhopper]

31. The collective mind at CPAC

was frightening.

[guillaumeb]

33. A small collective.

The collective could meet in a small room and still have room.

[Paleologue]

35. Yes

All 60 million of them.

[Paleologue]

34. They have those "other ways of knowing"

that some people think are so wonderful. Ways of "knowing" that do not require, reason, logic or evidence, but which, some claim, are every bit as valid. Scary and disgusting, yes?

[guillaumeb]

24. How about a shared hope and belief that we can evolve beyond

the violence based group behavior that has been a feature of human history?

Or is that even possible? Is violence an ineradicable part of the human experience?

[nil desperandum]

28. Yes

violence is inherent in our nature.

We are far more red in tooth and claw than our animal brethren.

We talk a good game about how we moral beings, but the world is hardly a moral place and humans act without any concern for morality on a regular basis.

We might aspire to some higher level of morality and consciousness, as a whole we seldom fulfill those aspirations.

Our good is almost entirely situational.

I found it quite interesting in re-screening Charlie Wilson's war a week ago that the footage of the helicopters killing "freedom fighters" is not so very different from the footage of our troops killing "terrorists".

The same people running for office to help their fellow man regularly cheat on their spouses, lie on their taxes and ignore the suffering of their fellow man in their own communities..."leaders" kill their own people, the people of neighboring nations. Some folks kill for god, some folks kill for country, and some folks kill because they just enjoy the experience.

Evolve beyond violence? Not a chance, we are constantly evolving to better forms of violence to obtain the resources of others that we covet and exercise our domination to prove our genetic superiority.

It's nice to hope we get better, but there is almost zero evidence to support the theory that we will ever, actually get better.