I felt attracted to this subject on collective intelligence because I think collective intelligence brings well together the various models of learning described in the course up to now. I will use this essay as an attempt to make this point and my references are a way to emphasize the relationships between the models.

DEFINITION

I define collective intelligence as the intelligence which is enabled by the combination of the intelligence of a collaborating group of individuals. In sociological terms, it is the intelligence enabled at a societal level by the members of the society and across the society’s past and future generations.

In my view, there are two aspects to collective intelligence: acquisition and usage. The two are interdependent as they mutually feed one another during the collaboration within the network.

1. Collective acquisition of intelligence is the mechanism, according to which each individual reaches a higher level of intelligence thanks to the collaboration with group. This higher level compares to the level of intelligence the individual would acquire if isolated from the group.
2. Collective usage of intelligence is the pooling mechanism, according to which the group achieves greater results by combining intelligence of its members through collaboration.

TOOLS AND PROCESS

The tools allowing collective intelligence are the following:

• Enactment and story-telling, which humans seem to be the sole species to handle [1];
• A language and its usage, in which words are not only an indexation of object ‘references’, but where a symbolic representation exists and where words point to other words with the notion of ‘sense’. Humans is the only species empowered with such type of language ability [2];
• A network between the individuals to enable the communication between them. Such a network can be a family, a village or any other dynamic configuration (e.g. travel) that allows the individuals to share one with another;
• A brain that allows the recipient of an exchange 1) to assimilate information and 2) to further grow its intelligence. This happens with the neuronal plasticity appearing to happen in the prefrontal cortex [2].

Accelerators of collective intelligence can be the following, as put forward by Donald Merlin [1]:

• External memory (vs. internal brain memory): books (with writing & reading) and, thanks to higher technology: photography, audio recordings, cinematography and now digital data with exponential capacities;
• Improved networking to other individuals and/or knowledge: printing press in 1436, industrial production and dissemination in the 19th century and now data communication networks with exponential ubiquity and speed.

The process of collective acquisition of intelligence is the following. Individuals’ brain development goes hand in hand with its feeding of data, not only from the external world, but more particularly from other individuals of the group. In the exchanges with individuals from the group, the data exchanged will evolve from basic words (recognize objects), to symbolism (give sense to words and objects) and up to complex abstract concepts (e.g., build mathematical theories), depending on the level of maturity of the recipient’s brain, based on the different stages of brain developmentalism [3].

The process of collective usage of intelligence is that multiple intelligence resources are pooled together to solve a problem.

The diagram below summarizes the collective intelligence scheme:

Collective Intelligence diagram

BENEFITS AND RISKS

Benefits of collective intelligence are the following:

• Compared to an isolated learning, the collective intelligence learning is much faster, more efficient and leverages past learnings of previous generations;
• Compared to isolated usage of intelligence, collective usage of intelligence enables higher efficiency by pooling resources and more creativity from higher diversity;
• Allows to leverage the multiple types of intelligences, in particular: linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, spatial, bodily/kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic [4];
• Enables to draw analogies from different perspectives and helps solve problems creatively [5];
• Reduces risks of misjudgments from narrow-minded experts who may miss the overall picture in an increasingly hyper-complex world [6];
• Support peace in society by facilitating common understandings among members of the globalized world, as free trade is supposed to do according to commercial liberalism [7].

Risks of collective intelligence are:

• Extinction by absorption of specific intelligence models part of human society, e.g., lost indigenous civilizations;
• Extreme adoption of a flawed perspective (e.g., Nazism in Germany);
• Hyper-complexity, speed of change and need for adaptability and resilience that may be difficult for some (e.g., older) individuals to follow;
• Inability for an individual to function in case of isolation from the group or from shared eternal memory (e.g., get lost if mobile phone and Google Maps do not work anymore);
• Risks for a greater breakdown in case something goes wrong, e.g., a global cyberattack that takes the Internet down.

EXAMPLE

As an example, I will use the community of practice, as presented by Etienne Wenger [8]. Let’s for example use the one in a large international company related to United Nations Sustainability Development Goals. The concept is a group of employees who join together to exchange on the particular SDG topic in order to know better about SDG and about how they can implement SDG in their day-to-day work, for the good of the company and for their own personal fulfillment.

Without elaborating on the details, I think it is correct to say that the community of practice is consistent with the collective intelligence principles described hereabove: acquisition of knowledge and intelligence, pooling of knowledge and intelligence, use of language, use of IT networks and use of Wikis. In this example there seems to be mainly benefits. The only risk I see is the lockout from the community for employees who are unable to adapt to the new concept, updated working practice and sharing technologies.

REFERENCES

[1] Merlin Donald, 2001. ‘A Mind So Rare: The Evolution of Human Consciousness’

[2] Terrence Deacon, 1997, ‘The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of Language and the Brain’

[3] Jean Piaget, 1971, ‘Psychology and Epistemology: Towards a Theory of Knowledge’

[4] Howard Gardner, 1993, ‘Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice’

[5] David Epstein, 2019, ‘Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World’

[6] James Paul Gee, 2010, ‘New Digital Media and Learning as an Emerging Area and “Worked Examples” as One Way Forward’

[7] Patrick McDonald, 2009, ‘The invisible hand of peace: Capitalism, the war machine, and international relations theory’

[8] Etienne Wenger, 1998, ‘Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity’