IdeaFestival

I want to be foolish like this

Writing about the death of MIT computer science professor, Joseph Weizenbaum, Harvard crank Nicholas Carr and Discover columnist Jaron Lanier use Eliza's tale to assay against errors of the computational kind.

Let me explain.

In the 1960's Weizenbaum created a program called Eliza that would rephrase statements as questions and pose them to test subjects in what became an infamous test of computer-human interaction. Some individuals came to believe that the computer program was a human and lessons drawn from the episodes found their way into Weizenbaum's Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgment to Calculation, which Carr references in his post, Eliza's World:

Perhaps we are beginning to understand that the abstract systems — the games computer people can generate in their infinite freedom from the constraints that delimit the dreams of workers in the real world — may fail catastrophically when their rules are applied in earnest. We must also learn that the same danger is inherent in other magical systems that are equally detached from authentic human experience, and particularly in those sciences that insist they can capture the whole man in their abstract skeletal frameworks [emphasis supplied].

It's easy now to poke fun at the subjects who came to believe that Eliza was human. But the larger lesson that I take - and the one suggested by Carr - is that reason and logic are only part of the human experience.

That is particularly true when it comes to thinking because it is belief - and theatrically, the suspension of disbelief - that makes us human. Belief combined with experience holds out possible worlds for our examination; it is on the superstructure of belief that we can absorb wisdom, practice empathy, strive for justice and extend mercy where none may be merited.

As cheaply amusing as it might be in hindsight, what Eliza demonstrated was not that we can foolishly ascribe feelings to objects, but that it is the suspension of the facts that makes foolishness - as well as soul-stirring grace - possible. The rules be damned.

An interactive Web-based version of Eliza is here.

Wayne

Insight: no exclusives

Citing examples from a new book, Group Genius, Johnnie Moore suggests that we're all too often willing to claim the exclusive to an insight. Creative problem solving isn't about eliminating constraints, it's about collaboratively working with existing knowledge.

Wayne

Poisonwood Language

Dr. Robert St. Clair is a good friend and mentor of mine whose work I have followed since he taught me in graduate school. A linguist, philosopher and teacher he has written tons of stuff on language, society, metaphor, communications and countless other topics. Most of the time I agree with him, but while perusing some of his essays on metaphor and culture I came across one that, alas, I must admit perplexed me.

In his article, “Cultural Wisdom, Communication Theory and the Metaphor of Resonance”, St. Clair attempts to discuss the disadvantages of language, by asserting that authors are limited in their ability to connect with readers on a deeper level because language is limited. He says that “any theory of literary analysis which is based on linguistic structuralism has definite limitations”. Well, yes maybe. I mean who can say how many times we’ve said, “there just aren’t enough words”. Or “I can’t find the words.” I agree that sometimes it might be a hit or miss for an author. It’s one of the reasons some people loved Bridges of Madison County and why some of us said, “ehhh.” It’s why there are classics of literature that have survived centuries and why other works fade into oblivion.

But there are those moments in literature where somewhere, someone resonates with what the speaker says.

The first time I read The Poisonwood Bible, by Barbara Kingsolver, my daughter was just a year old and I had decided she was the last. So when I got to the paragraph that describes that experience, I sobbed and told my husband (who really thought I had lost it for a moment) “You’ve got to read this paragraph!”

But the last one; the baby who trails her scent like a flag of surrender through your life when there will be no more coming after- oh, that’s love by a different name. She is the babe you hold in your arms for an hour after she’s gone to sleep. If you put her down in the crib, she might wake up changed and fly away. So instead you rock by the window, drinking the light from her skin, breathing her exhaled dreams. Your heart bays to the double crescent moons of closed lashes on her cheeks. She’s the one you can’t put down.

St. Clair uses the tuning fork to describe the metaphor of resonance and how some things just can’t be related through words, and I am drawn back to this moment in my literature experience that has stayed with me now for five years. My daughter is six now and I still read that paragraph with a catch in my throat. I resonate that experience; those words are like a tuning fork to my heart because my heart has been there, and I KNOW that feeling. It’s why we continue to read; it’s why we continue to write, to create, to blog…. Because sometimes there really are enough words.

Tina

Wild Cards and Black Swans: How to get the future right and the past wrong

The Long Now Foundation held a couple of public lectures recently on how we get the future right and the past wrong.

LIFT blogger and digital archaeologist Nicolas Nova points out Paul Saffo's January Long Now presentation on being a better futurist.

What makes forecasting hard, according to Saffo, isn't predicting the outcome, but accurately mapping the edges of what might happen. Since change is linear - we can't take one event and extrapolate into the future - what might happen must sometimes be imagined. Saffo:

Science fiction is brilliant at this, and often predictive, because it plants idea bombs in teenagers which they make real 15 years later.

The Long Now Foundation links to a helpful Harvard Business Review piece authored by Saffo that describes "six rules for effective forecasting." An executive summary of that article is here.

Financial analyst Nassim Taleb, who will be at the IdeaFestival in September, followed Saffo in February and discussed "retrocasting" - essentially, how we get the future wrong by misjudging the past. "Black Swans", those history making events that sail into the present, Taleb explained, are often "wrongly retro-predicted. We pretend we know why the big event happened, and so entrench our inability to deal with the next world-changing improbable event." I liked this thought:

We compute probability from the success of the survivors instead of paying attention to what didn't happen, but might have.

There are two places whence random things occur, according to Taleb. They are "Mediocristan," which is a realm of random events dominated by the average, and "Extremistan," where spectacular successes and the long tail dominate. Taleb:

You can say there will be a few monsters and lots of midgets and the world will be changed by the monsters, and that’s all you can say.

According to the blog entry for the event, Benoit Mandelbrot convinced Taleb that energy powers Mediocristan, while the main dynamic of Extremistan involves the uncertainty of information. Anything social, anything that involves the brilliance and bane of language, anything you might read on IFblog, hails from Extremistan.

Audio, video and blog entries from the Saffo and Taleb Long Now seminars may be found here.

Thanks Nicolas for the pointer!

Wayne

Nassim Taleb, Paul Saffo

An American Generational Biography

[Update: Delano's slides are available.]

Richard K. Delano, who is the Co-founder LifeCourse Associates, a generational analysis consulting and publishing firm, is presenting this morning in an IdeaFestival event in Louisville.

It's titled "Millennials Rising: Recruiting, Retaining & Marketing to 'Today's' Generation."

IF plans to do more than of these events going forward. I blogged yesterday about another such event. So stay tuned.

Richard says he's at the tail end of three straight weeks on the road. He explains that he got involved in 1992 with Scholastic Inc., to manage its custom publication operation. By way of doing some research, he read the book Generations (1991), which was a big hit with the heavyweight political set in the White House and Congress. The book is about 500 pages, but the last chapter discussed the millennial generation, something he remembered. He has continued his generational study.

All generational change is nonlinear. Stepping WAY back, he says there have been 14 generations from 1584 to 2069, grouped in fours. We're on the cusp of a "fourth turn" now.

He believes that four generational archetypes are repeated every four years - Hero, Artist, Prophet, and Nomad. The corresponding periods are High, Awakening, Unraveling and Crisis.

Boomers are born in a High period and came of age in the Awakening period, for example. Returning to the grouping of four theme, he believes that Boomers correspond to the "Civil War missionary generation." I'd love to hear more about that.

He believes that there is a very good story to tell about the Millennial generation now.

As a way of making a point on perspectives, the generations are like trains going through stations. The view is changing along the way but the perspectives might not.

More quickly now. I'll apologize in advance for not capturing everything:

G.I. generation participated in improving youth trends, particularly when it comes to education. It's a perspective that they've carried forward.

The Silent Generation ages 62 - 80 now were told to keep their heads low and were largely rewarded. One typical big concern for this group in the workplace might be about work pensions, something most people now don't even count on. They stayed in the background and remained socially conformed.

The Boomer population is actually a smaller percentage of the population than X-ers and Gen-Y. In a funny line, he says Boomers "took drugs to think outside the box, and give their kids drugs to think inside the box."

They were a generation of one worsening youth trend - SAT scores declined. Boomers famously resisted authority.

Since 1967 a poll of incoming freshmen has shown a decline in people who say developing a meaningful philosophy of life is their most important goal.

X-ers - 25 - 46 in age, take a more jaded view, in contrast. They want to get to the point. That realism is also combined with a certain pessimism toward the job they have. They are much more quick to job hop.

Gen-X parents focus on cost when it comes to what they want out of a college.

Millennials, who were born in 1982, are community focused. It sounds like the G.I. Generation of four generations ago. They are also the most diverse generation; it will be known for the assimilation of those immigrants.

The biggest divides between Boomers, Gen-Xers and Millennials are gender, race and money, respectively.

Millennial personality traits are special, sheltered, confident and team-oriented, among others traits he lists. But ironically, this generation, which will be so accomplished, may be less socially adept - something pointed out to the business owners and managers in the audience.

There is more trust in institutions and the fairness of rules. They accept peer pressure more readily.

There is a ton of data on screen that I'm not capturing as he scrolls through the Millennial data, sorry.

It's a "Harry Potter" generation - smart and educated and more oriented toward institutions than the recent past. Walt Disney, Google, Department of State, FBI and CIA are top job choices for this group. They have a very different sensitivity toward life and community. For companies, making social commitments are important to Millennials. Google exploits this by not limiting social networking on the job.

The number of passing AP exams also continues to rise among all racial groups in this generation.

But don't think that the group will think outside the box - he emphasizes that each generation has its strengths and weaknesses. It's a steady refrain.

There is, however, a huge shift from "I" to "we," something that should be applauded.

In conclusion, the generations are now spinning into the "fourth turning," where the Millennials take the country can't be predicted with accuracy. It's simply not a linear process, he cautions.

He also touches on similarities the between the generations in the U.S. and China, something I'd like to hear more about.

And with that, we're done.

Wayne

Dith Pran

Dith Pran the Cambodian-born journalist whose life under the Khmer Rouge-led Cambodian revolution in the 1970's became the subject of the award-winning film "The Killing Fields," has died in New Jersey.

I had the honor to meet and talk with Dith when he was a presenter at the 2004 IdeaFestival. He was an amazing individual. His inspiring story of survival and courage was clearly one of the most moving and meaningful talks in the history of the Festival. His relentless search for the truth under the most horrendous circumstances was - and I don't use this word often anymore - heroic. My life is richer for having briefly known him.

Kris

"Here comes everybody"

What happens to culture when everything that can be known is known?

The experience design blog Putting People First has posted news about one of my favorite social technologists, Clay Shirky, who was one of the earliest people to seriously study ubiquitous information, and who is out with a new book, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing without Organizations.

A Guardian blogger has this to say about the Shirky.

And a quick look around turned up a video of him speaking to the New American Foundation. In the clip, Shirky uses three real life examples to go inside the dynamics of groupless group activity. I particularly like his suggestion that "the Internet is not an improvement to society, but a challenge to it."

You'll need to go elsewhere for easy and comforting rhetoric. Shirky is no cyber-utopian.

In an earlier treatment of the issues involved, Robert Frenay has called this state of affairs "feedback culture." And what makes it so interesting is that far from simply a study of technology, useful concepts have and will continue to be borrowed from the arts, anthropology, economics, biology, and physics.

When everything that can be known, is known, a description of what that means must come from everyone.

Wayne

Clay Shirky

Breaking: Freakonomics book cover confirms book cover theory

Here is a a gallery of Freakonomic book covers from elsewhere in the world. So what do these publishers think should be on the cover of a first rate book about everyday economics? See for yourself. Not content to let the book sell itself, the Turkish version makes a desperate case for the subject matter. Hat tip: Jason Kottke

Wayne

Polish priest, cosmologist wins Templeton Prize

The Templeton Prize has been awarded to Michael Heller, a Polish priest and cosmologist. Having fled with his family from the Nazis only to be exiled by Stalin, he has spent his adult life exploring some of humanity's biggest questions, such as "Does the universe require a cause?" and "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

My favorite answer to the latter might be that oblivion is unstable. I suspect that Heller's answers are better.

Wayne

Wikipedia: noncommutative geometry

The story of intelligence is the story of compassion

Could the secret to human intelligence be our willingness to cooperate, to restrain the competitive instinct, to set aside societal inequality? Primatologist Brian Hare, recently named by Smithsonian Magazine as one of America's top young innovators, believes the answer may be yes. 

Unlike Chimpanzees, dogs are able to infer human intentions. A dog can, for example, understanding what its owner means when she points to food or to a favorite chew toy hidden from view across the room. And as the result of some really fascinating tests he's developed, Hare believes that dogs - and bonobos, another of his subjects - have developed this ability to read intentions through cooperative strategies that minimize - or at least temporarily set aside - social hierarchies in favor of a mutual goals. Chimpanzees, which are live in strict social orders, often fail, surprisingly, to cooperate to problem solve even when there is a clear benefit for all that can be obtained by working together.

That willingness - or unwillingness - to set aside differences may have enormous consequences.

Smithsonian:

Hare and others have speculated that social and emotional skills led to the evolution of intelligence in the great apes and humans. Since the 1970's, some scientists have claimed that animals are more likely to survive and reproduce if they are able to read social cues - to keep track of what other group members are up to and to deceive them if necessary. But Hare focuses on a slightly different type of social intelligence, the ability to work with others, regardless of whether they are strangers or rank lower in the social hierarchy.

There's a lesson here for us Hare says: 'It's true humans have bigger brains and language, and so forth. But we would not have evolved the kind of intelligence we have - the kind that allows us to use our brains together, to build things, to be mentally flexible - if we hadn't had a shift in temperament....' Controlling one's fears, paying attention to others, finding joy in working with others - that's the path to intelligence, he says, whether for dogs, apes or humans.

Bringing the story forward, Yale psychologist Daniel Goleman has pioneered this understanding of emotional intelligence in his work and publications, and discusses the idea in a popular TED video that may interest you. Have a great weekend,

Wayne