更改

== History ==

== History ==

[[File:World Brain HG Wells 1938.jpg|left|thumb|H.G. Wells ''World Brain'' (1936–1938)]]

[[文件:World Brain HG Wells 1938.jpg|centre|thumb|世界脑  H.G. Wells (1936–1938)]]

The concept (although not so named) originated in 1785 with the [[Marquis de Condorcet]], whose "jury theorem" states that if each member of a voting group is more likely than not to make a correct decision, the probability that the highest vote of the group is the correct decision increases with the number of members of the group (see [[Condorcet's jury theorem]]). Many theorists have interpreted [[Aristotle]]'s statement in the [[Politics]] that "a feast to which many contribute is better than a dinner provided out of a single purse" to mean that just as many may bring different dishes to the table, so in a deliberation many may contribute different pieces of information to generate a better decision. Recent scholarship, however, suggests that this was probably not what Aristotle meant but is a modern interpretation based on what we now know about team intelligence.

 

 

The concept (although not so named) originated in 1785 with the [[Marquis de Condorcet]], whose "jury theorem" states that if each member of a voting group is more likely than not to make a correct decision, the probability that the highest vote of the group is the correct decision increases with the number of members of the group (see [[Condorcet's jury theorem]]).<ref>{{cite book|last1=Landemore|first1=Hélène|title=Landemore, Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many|date=2012|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton|url=https://books.google.com/?id=B-6YNnIIlE8C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage|isbn=978-0691155654}}</ref>  Many theorists have interpreted [[Aristotle]]'s statement in the [[Politics]] that "a feast to which many contribute is better than a dinner provided out of a single purse" to mean that just as many may bring different dishes to the table, so in a deliberation many may contribute different pieces of information to generate a better decision.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Waldron|first1=Jeremy|title=The Wisdom of the Multitude: Some Reflections on Book 3, Chapter 11 of Aristotle's Politics|journal=Political Theory|date=1995|volume=23|issue=4|pages=563–584|doi=10.1177/0090591795023004001}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Ober|first1=Josiah|title=Democracy and Knowledge|date=2008|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton, N.J.|pages=110–14}}</ref>  Recent scholarship,<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Cammack|first1=Daniela|title=Aristotle and the Virtue of the Multitude|journal=Political Theory|date=2013|volume=41|issue=2|pages=175–202|doi=10.1177/0090591712470423|url=https://zenodo.org/record/1063691}}</ref> however, suggests that this was probably not what Aristotle meant but is a modern interpretation based on what we now know about team intelligence.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Page|first1=Scott|title=The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies|date=2008|publisher=Princeton University Press|location=Princeton}}</ref>

The concept (although not so named) originated in 1785 with the Marquis de Condorcet, whose "jury theorem" states that if each member of a voting group is more likely than not to make a correct decision, the probability that the highest vote of the group is the correct decision increases with the number of members of the group (see Condorcet's jury theorem).  Many theorists have interpreted Aristotle's statement in the Politics that "a feast to which many contribute is better than a dinner provided out of a single purse" to mean that just as many may bring different dishes to the table, so in a deliberation many may contribute different pieces of information to generate a better decision.  Recent scholarship, however, suggests that this was probably not what Aristotle meant but is a modern interpretation based on what we now know about team intelligence.

The concept (although not so named) originated in 1785 with the Marquis de Condorcet, whose "jury theorem" states that if each member of a voting group is more likely than not to make a correct decision, the probability that the highest vote of the group is the correct decision increases with the number of members of the group (see Condorcet's jury theorem).  Many theorists have interpreted Aristotle's statement in the Politics that "a feast to which many contribute is better than a dinner provided out of a single purse" to mean that just as many may bring different dishes to the table, so in a deliberation many may contribute different pieces of information to generate a better decision.  Recent scholarship, however, suggests that this was probably not what Aristotle meant but is a modern interpretation based on what we now know about team intelligence.

A precursor of the concept is found in entomologist [[William Morton Wheeler]]'s observation that seemingly independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism (1910).<ref>Wheeler, W. M. (1910). Ants: their structure, development and behavior (Vol. 9). Columbia University Press.</ref> Wheeler saw this collaborative process at work in [[ants]] that acted like the cells of a single beast he called a [[superorganism]].

A precursor of the concept is found in entomologist [[William Morton Wheeler]]'s observation that seemingly independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism (1910). Wheeler saw this collaborative process at work in [[ants]] that acted like the cells of a single beast he called a [[superorganism]].

A precursor of the concept is found in entomologist William Morton Wheeler's observation that seemingly independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism (1910). Wheeler saw this collaborative process at work in ants that acted like the cells of a single beast he called a superorganism.

A precursor of the concept is found in entomologist William Morton Wheeler's observation that seemingly independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism (1910). Wheeler saw this collaborative process at work in ants that acted like the cells of a single beast he called a superorganism.

In 1912 [[Émile Durkheim]] identified society as the sole source of human logical thought. He argued in "[[The Elementary Forms of Religious Life]]" that society constitutes a higher intelligence because it transcends the individual over space and time.<ref>Émile Durkheim, ''The Elementary Forms of Religious Life'', 1912.</ref> Other antecedents are [[Vladimir Vernadsky]] and [[Pierre Teilhard de Chardin]]'s concept of "[[noosphere]]" and [[H.G. Wells]]'s concept of "[[world brain]]" (see also the term "[[global brain]]"). Peter Russell, [[Elisabet Sahtouris]], and [[Barbara Marx Hubbard]] (originator of the term "conscious evolution")<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://barbaramarxhubbard.com/book/|title=About the Book – Foundation for Conscious Evolution|newspaper=Foundation for Conscious Evolution|access-date=2016-12-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170218124636/http://barbaramarxhubbard.com/book/|archive-date=18 February 2017|url-status=dead}}</ref> are inspired by the visions of a noosphere&nbsp;– a transcendent, rapidly evolving collective intelligence&nbsp;– an informational cortex of the planet. The notion has more recently been examined by the philosopher Pierre Lévy. In a 1962 research report, [[Douglas Engelbart]] linked collective intelligence to organizational effectiveness, and predicted that pro-actively 'augmenting human intellect' would yield a multiplier effect in group problem solving: "Three people working together in this augmented mode [would] seem to be more than three times as effective in solving a complex problem as is one augmented person working alone".<ref>Engelbart, Douglas (1962) [http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-3906.html#3b9 Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110504035147/http://www.dougengelbart.org/pubs/augment-3906.html#3b9 |date=4 May 2011 }} – section on Team Cooperation</ref> In 1994, he coined the term 'collective IQ' as a measure of collective intelligence, to focus attention on the opportunity to significantly raise collective IQ in business and society.<ref>Engelbart, Douglas (1994)[https://archive.org/stream/boostingcollecti00drdo#page/n9/mode/2up Boosting Collective IQ] (Slide Handouts)&nbsp;– 'Collective IQ' defined on Slide 4; also (1994) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdIWQZtEq04&t=1016 BBN Distinguished Guest Lecture] (Video)&nbsp;– 'Collective IQ' defined @16:56 "CoDIAK"</ref>

In 1912 [[Émile Durkheim]] identified society as the sole source of human logical thought. He argued in "[[The Elementary Forms of Religious Life]]" that society constitutes a higher intelligence because it transcends the individual over space and time. Other antecedents are [[Vladimir Vernadsky]] and [[Pierre Teilhard de Chardin]]'s concept of "[[noosphere]]" and [[H.G. Wells]]'s concept of "[[world brain]]" (see also the term "[[global brain]]"). Peter Russell, [[Elisabet Sahtouris]], and [[Barbara Marx Hubbard]] (originator of the term "conscious evolution") are inspired by the visions of a noosphere&nbsp;– a transcendent, rapidly evolving collective intelligence&nbsp;– an informational cortex of the planet. The notion has more recently been examined by the philosopher Pierre Lévy. In a 1962 research report, [[Douglas Engelbart]] linked collective intelligence to organizational effectiveness, and predicted that pro-actively 'augmenting human intellect' would yield a multiplier effect in group problem solving: "Three people working together in this augmented mode [would] seem to be more than three times as effective in solving a complex problem as is one augmented person working alone". In 1994, he coined the term 'collective IQ' as a measure of collective intelligence, to focus attention on the opportunity to significantly raise collective IQ in business and society.

In 1912 Émile Durkheim identified society as the sole source of human logical thought. He argued in "The Elementary Forms of Religious Life" that society constitutes a higher intelligence because it transcends the individual over space and time. Other antecedents are Vladimir Vernadsky and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's concept of "noosphere" and H.G. Wells's concept of "world brain" (see also the term "global brain"). Peter Russell, Elisabet Sahtouris, and Barbara Marx Hubbard (originator of the term "conscious evolution") are inspired by the visions of a noosphere&nbsp;– a transcendent, rapidly evolving collective intelligence&nbsp;– an informational cortex of the planet. The notion has more recently been examined by the philosopher Pierre Lévy. In a 1962 research report, Douglas Engelbart linked collective intelligence to organizational effectiveness, and predicted that pro-actively 'augmenting human intellect' would yield a multiplier effect in group problem solving: "Three people working together in this augmented mode [would] seem to be more than three times as effective in solving a complex problem as is one augmented person working alone". In 1994, he coined the term 'collective IQ' as a measure of collective intelligence, to focus attention on the opportunity to significantly raise collective IQ in business and society.

In 1912 Émile Durkheim identified society as the sole source of human logical thought. He argued in "The Elementary Forms of Religious Life" that society constitutes a higher intelligence because it transcends the individual over space and time. Other antecedents are Vladimir Vernadsky and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's concept of "noosphere" and H.G. Wells's concept of "world brain" (see also the term "global brain"). Peter Russell, Elisabet Sahtouris, and Barbara Marx Hubbard (originator of the term "conscious evolution") are inspired by the visions of a noosphere&nbsp;– a transcendent, rapidly evolving collective intelligence&nbsp;– an informational cortex of the planet. The notion has more recently been examined by the philosopher Pierre Lévy. In a 1962 research report, Douglas Engelbart linked collective intelligence to organizational effectiveness, and predicted that pro-actively 'augmenting human intellect' would yield a multiplier effect in group problem solving: "Three people working together in this augmented mode [would] seem to be more than three times as effective in solving a complex problem as is one augmented person working alone". In 1994, he coined the term 'collective IQ' as a measure of collective intelligence, to focus attention on the opportunity to significantly raise collective IQ in business and society.

1912年，涂尔干认为社会是人类逻辑思维的唯一来源。他在《宗教生活的基本形式》一书中认为，社会构成了一种更高级的智慧，因为它超越了个人的空间和时间。其他先行词还有复杂系统和德日进的“人圈”概念和 h.g。威尔斯的“世界大脑”的概念(也见术语“全球大脑”)。彼得•罗素(Peter Russell)、伊丽莎白•萨图里斯(Elisabet Sahtouris)和芭芭拉•马克思•哈伯德(Barbara Marx Hubbard)(“有意识进化”(conscious evolution)一词的创始人)的灵感来自人类圈——一种超验的、快速进化的集体智慧——地球的信息皮层。最近，哲学家皮埃尔 · l · 维对这一概念进行了检验。在1962年的一份研究报告中，道格拉斯·恩格尔巴特将集体智慧与组织效能联系起来，并预测积极主动的‘增强人类智力’将在解决团队问题中产生乘数效应: “在这种增强模式下，三个人一起工作，解决复杂问题的效率似乎是一个增强人单独工作的效率的三倍多。”。1994年，他创造了集体智商这一术语作为集体智商的衡量标准，将注意力集中在显著提高商业和社会集体智商的机会上。

1912年，埃米尔·杜尔克海姆Émile Durkheim将社会定义为人类逻辑思维的唯一来源。他在《宗教生活的基本形式》一书中指出，社会构成了一种更高的智慧，因为它在时空上超越了个人。其他先例还有弗拉基米尔·韦尔纳斯基Vladimir Vernadsky和皮埃尔·泰尔哈德·德·夏尔丁Pierre Teilhard de Chardin的“noosphere”概念以及H.G. Wells的“世界脑”概念（另请参见“全球大脑”一词）。彼得·罗素Peter Russell，伊丽莎白·萨赫图里斯Elisabet Sahtouris和芭芭拉·马克思·哈伯德Barbara Marx Hubbard（“有意识演化”一词的发起者）受到了“noosphere”的启发，即超自然的，迅速发展的集体智能，相当于地球的大脑信息皮质层。哲学家皮埃尔·列维最近对该概念进行了研究。在1962年的一份研究报告中，道格拉斯·恩格尔巴特将集体智能与组织有效性联系起来，并预测说，积极地“增强人类智慧”将在解决群体问题方面产生事半功倍的效果：“以这种增强模式工作的三个人在解决复杂问题上的效率似乎是一个单独工作的人（同等增强幅度）的三倍以上”。1994年，他创造了“群体智商”一词来衡量集体智能，以集中精力于在商业和社会中寻找显著提高群体智商的机会。

The idea of collective intelligence also forms the framework for contemporary democratic theories often referred to as [[epistemic democracy]]. Epistemic democratic theories refer to the capacity of the populace, either through deliberation or aggregation of knowledge, to track the truth and relies on mechanisms to synthesize and apply collective intelligence.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Landemore|first1=Helene|title=Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many|date=2013|publisher=Princeton University Press|url=https://books.google.com/?id=B-6YNnIIlE8C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage|isbn=978-0691155654}}</ref>

The idea of collective intelligence also forms the framework for contemporary democratic theories often referred to as [[epistemic democracy]]. Epistemic democratic theories refer to the capacity of the populace, either through deliberation or aggregation of knowledge, to track the truth and relies on mechanisms to synthesize and apply collective intelligence.

The idea of collective intelligence also forms the framework for contemporary democratic theories often referred to as epistemic democracy. Epistemic democratic theories refer to the capacity of the populace, either through deliberation or aggregation of knowledge, to track the truth and relies on mechanisms to synthesize and apply collective intelligence.

The idea of collective intelligence also forms the framework for contemporary democratic theories often referred to as epistemic democracy. Epistemic democratic theories refer to the capacity of the populace, either through deliberation or aggregation of knowledge, to track the truth and relies on mechanisms to synthesize and apply collective intelligence.

 

 

 

 

 

== Dimensions ==

== Dimensions ==