Comments on: where is collective intelligence going? http://thepoliticsofsystems.net/2008/05/01/where-is-collective-intelligence-going/ Thoughts on Power and Software Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:48:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: bernhard http://thepoliticsofsystems.net/2008/05/01/where-is-collective-intelligence-going/comment-page-1/#comment-149 bernhard Fri, 02 May 2008 06:44:16 +0000 http://thepoliticsofsystems.net/2008/05/01/where-is-collective-intelligence-going/#comment-149 Hi Bill, That's very much true - I think that there is a common idea behind IEML and Esperanto but there are also some pronounced differences: IEML is computer processable, meaning that the language is schematic enough to allow reasoning by algorithm. This is especially interesting for searching and other automated forms of semantic processing (clustering, filtering, etc.). In a sense, IEML is seated in the middle of a triangle formed by symbolic logic, a generalistic philosophical ontology and Esperanto... Hi Bill,

That’s very much true – I think that there is a common idea behind IEML and Esperanto but there are also some pronounced differences: IEML is computer processable, meaning that the language is schematic enough to allow reasoning by algorithm. This is especially interesting for searching and other automated forms of semantic processing (clustering, filtering, etc.). In a sense, IEML is seated in the middle of a triangle formed by symbolic logic, a generalistic philosophical ontology and Esperanto…

]]> By: Bill Chapman http://thepoliticsofsystems.net/2008/05/01/where-is-collective-intelligence-going/comment-page-1/#comment-148 Bill Chapman Thu, 01 May 2008 18:41:49 +0000 http://thepoliticsofsystems.net/2008/05/01/where-is-collective-intelligence-going/#comment-148 I agree with you that "if collective forms of “problem solving” are to go beyond what they currently do, they will have to find modes of organization that are more sophisticated than the platforms we currently have. These modes will also have to negociate a balance between “equal opportunity” and “equal representation” and make its peace with instituionalization. But what is wrong with Esperanto? Esperanto was a 'bottom-up creation', ordinary people getting together to form international democratic institutions such as Universala Esperanto-Asocio. You might be surprised to learn that Esperanto has an extensive, lively indigenous culture and an original literature to rival that of many ethnic tongues. Naturally it didn't start out that way, but when you have such a large community speaking a common language for such a long time, it's probably inevitable that culture will emerge. People around the world use Esperanto every day for everything from childrearing to religious worship to technical manuals to science (I am a subscriber to Scirenca Revuo) to erotica. Take a look at www.esperanto.net I agree with you that “if collective forms of “problem solving” are to go beyond what they currently do, they will have to find modes of organization that are more sophisticated than the platforms we currently have. These modes will also have to negociate a balance between “equal opportunity” and “equal representation” and make its peace with instituionalization. But what is wrong with Esperanto? Esperanto was a ‘bottom-up creation’, ordinary people getting together to form international democratic institutions such as Universala Esperanto-Asocio.

You might be surprised to learn that Esperanto has an extensive, lively indigenous culture and an original literature to rival that of many ethnic tongues. Naturally it didn’t start out that way, but when you have such a large community speaking a common language for such a long time, it’s probably inevitable that culture will emerge. People around the world use Esperanto every day for everything from childrearing to religious worship to technical manuals to science (I am a subscriber to Scirenca Revuo) to erotica.

Take a look at http://www.esperanto.net

]]>