How to create a social mechanism of intelligence ?

How to create a social mechanism of intelligence ?

Context

We have seen that:

Question

How can we create a system of collective intelligence capable of improving its representations and making decisions for the long-term common good ?

Study

Models

We will first quickly model collective processes of representation and decision-making:

The Scientific Community

Key points:

Communication Filtering
Scientists filter their communication through a system of challenges (diplomas) and notoriety. This allows them to focus on important ideas.
Use of Standards
The production of scientific representations is subject to numerous standards (for example, reasoning must adhere to logic), all aimed at improving the accuracy of representations. The scientific community is aware of the importance of these standards because it places high value on the notion of truth and the structures that underpin it.
Motivation by the Aesthetics of Reality
One of the great motivations of scientists is that of explorers: to discover new realms of knowledge and admire their beauty. This is a motivation that encourages cooperation and staying connected to reality.
Overall Decisions
Regarding overall organization, the scientific community is directed by governments and businesses and has very few global organizational decisions to make on its own.
Unsuitability to Time Constraints
Science progresses at a steady pace. If we wanted to use the scientific method to make a decision in a field where there is a lack of knowledge or within a time frame too short for the normal process, it would produce nothing.

Governance of Western States

We focus on this type of state because they are relatively sophisticated, and variations in governance of other types (oligarchy, etc.) would not add anything more. Key points:

Decision-Centered
The governance of states has major consequences on the lives of citizens, and it is necessary to arbitrate between decisions that favor different groups.
Need for Coherence
Different countries are highly interdependent, and inconsistencies in various policies are sources of problems. For example: if a country is protectionist, it destabilizes the international market, or if a country had an effective social policy and reduced inequalities, it would set an example for other countries, creating political pressure (there are many examples of the spread of changes between countries).
Unmanageable Complexity
The complexity of interdependencies and the abandonment of complexity management lead to minimal interventions where a good proportion of the consequences are unforeseen.
Emotional Disconnection
Human beings are fundamentally sensitive and connected to those close to them, it is impossible to maintain such a connection on the scale of states, which forces leaders to disconnect in order to face the consequences of their decisions. For example, the continued authorization of toxic products in food (such as nitrites) causes a large number of deaths.
Hierarchical System
The constraints and difficulties mentioned above lead to a very simple decision-making system: hierarchy. At the top are the leaders of large financial masses. These, assisted by think tanks, establish a global orientation. Media control by these financial masses ensures the dissemination of these representations to the population. Politicians, in tune with these major trends, implement this policy and disseminate ideas and language elements prepared by these think tanks. Reformist politicians are countered by the media and have little room to maneuver due to the power of financial masses and the interdependence of countries.

A Small Group Operating in Sociocracy

We assume the group is small enough that the people know each other. The main characteristics are:

Culture of Communication
In general, members of these groups are willing to communicate well with respect for others and are ready to invest in using new techniques.
Desire for Deep Agreement
Decisions are made after everyone agrees. This works because each person is willing to understand others and is capable of agreeing. Instead of the usual situations of clashes and interpersonal conflicts common in society, people seek to defuse problems through various communication techniques.
Desire for Non-Domination
For example, different roles are rotated.

Note: A person too far removed from the non-violent communication culture necessary for sociocracy may interpret it with their own vision and see it as a hell of false pretenses. This is especially true as many companies use double language to impose a false image of cooperation and well-being. This problem arises in any cultural confrontation where levels of violence differ: it is difficult to believe that a lower level of violence is not just a ruse (which is sometimes the case).

A Group of Friends

We consider here a group of very close friends. The main elements are:

Need for Agreement
A primary function of a group of friends is deep support for each other. This need is so strong that it often overrides logic unconsciously. For example, to "There's a jerk who honked at me again," the friend will reply, "Yeah, there are some idiots on the road," even though they don't know the context and therefore can't judge the situation; the response's only purpose is to provide moral support to the person expressing their annoyance.
Informal and Emotional Communication
The friendship relationship is a space of freedom where people can pay minimal attention to the usual social constraints (for example, at work). So, you can have all kinds of relationships (experienced as emotional bonds) ranging from respect (for example, not interrupting each other) and listening to domination (teasing, shoving, etc.).
Decision-Making and Representation Construction
In a group of friends, the decision-making process varies greatly depending on how the group operates, it can range from a system with a leader to respectful cooperative exchange to find a fair compromise. The same goes for the construction of representations. Since the relationships are primarily emotional, the most important representations will be the mental state of each person (even if this is often conveyed through implicit language), then personal relationships, and finally, depending on the interests of each person.

Need for a Precise Framework

The models show us that depending on the context, decision-making and representation construction are carried out in completely different ways. We adapt to the context with great flexibility. So, to achieve the desired goal, it is necessary to have a good understanding of the effect of the context on people. By context, we mean everything that affects the participants, for example, the motivations provided or the forms of communication.

Expanding the Scientific System

It is well known that science is a great success for humanity, and many elements of the system are good. But to make decisions quickly, it is necessary to extend it. This does not imply distorting it, just as good software can be extended to other functions without distorting it. For this, we must keep the various elements (notoriety, adherence to standards, etc.) and extend it by adding functionalities to manage more hypothetical elements.

Democratizing Important Processes

In a small group of people, a member destined not to participate in discussions on important matters and decisions would be considered secondary and not truly part of the group. The same is true for our society: certain elements are part of the core of society, and not participating in them means that one is not a real member. That is why a democratic society must allow everyone to participate in the construction of representations and decisions. This is also necessary to improve its representations of society and stay connected to important realities.
Without this, we obtain a class of disconnected members at risk of drifting (feeling relegated, having far-fetched representations, ineffective or dangerous decision-making wills, etc.)

A classic cognitive bias is to confuse habit with knowledge. Thus, we are used to ourselves, and we feel that we know ourselves. However, we generally know very little about our biology or human psychological functioning.
This bias also applies to our knowledge of our society, after every war, we say "never again," yet due to a lack of understanding of social functioning, we repeat the same mistakes leading to the same dramatic consequences.

One might think that these two constraints (democratization and an unconsciousness of one's ignorance) are insoluble. The solution lies in the context of participation (we will solve this problem in sub-studies). For example, imagine that humanity did not know money and practiced bartering in marketplaces with endless negotiations. The population would then have great difficulty believing that markets and negotiations could be replaced by a much more practical and rapid solution. It's the same problem here: we are used to a practice, we feel that we know society, and this leads us to believe that a much more aesthetic alternative does not exist.

Answer

It is necessary to define a very precise functioning, based on an extension of the scientific system to represent reality, which must provide the foundations for action even when knowledge is lacking.

Emotions serve to direct psychic and physical energy in a certain direction (for example, fear directs toward self-preservation). A collective also needs to direct its energy, which is why it needs an equivalent system to emotions.

All these functions require that, for participants to stay connected to reality, people must receive motivations corresponding to the consequences of their choices on the collective.