Plan

Introducing the SINTELNET white paperThe background: agent-based models, social

simulations, logical analysis, and mirror-neuron system...

Where do wide cognition explanations excel?

SINTELNET

The aim of the network is to understand the radically new forms of Information Technology-enabled social environmentsby critically examining the basic concepts used to

described them,and to propose new approaches to understand future IT-

enabled social situations.

SINTELNET

The manifesto of the network is Cristiano Castelfranchi’s position paper “Minds as social institutions” (Phenomenology & Cognitive Science 2013)social interactions as requiring mind reading and mental

content ascription“Our social minds for social interactions are coordination

artifacts and social institutions.”I proposed to review what new approaches in

cognitive science have to say about social phenomena such as this.

SINTELNET

Structure of the white paper:Introduce five different approaches, jointly dubbed ‘wide

cognition’:• extended,• embodied,• enacted,• situated,• and distributed cognition.

Describe case studies that give more insight than agent-based modeling into social intelligence • (in particular, but not limited to, in IT-enabled contexts).

The background

Some relevant research for SINTELNET is based on agent-based models, various social simulations, game-theoretic things, and mirror neuron speculations...

But there are interesting wide approaches as well...

Game-theoretic models and mirror-neurons

With mirror-neuron speculations, it’s obvious that they are usually empirically underdeterminedBut neural basis of sociality does not screen off the wide

cognition models.Game-theoretic explanations are usually heavily

idealized but might screen off wide cognition.More details is not always better. If we only understand

why a game-theoretic model applies, it may be treated as an abstract mechanistic model.

Why not agent-based models?

ABMs are ‘computational method that enables a researcher to create, analyze, and experiment with models composed of agents that interact within an environment’The models are not just equation-

based but mimic agentsArtificial societies, non-linear

interactionsNot explanatory in themselves but

help run virtual experiments

Challenge!

Is there anything that these virtual models cannot cover?

If not: Do they omit something essential for social intelligence that wide cognition does account for?

Where, exactly, is wide cognition relevant?

Embodied joint actionMind-readingSocial memory and social knowledgeSocial emotionsSelfEmbodied semantics and distributed language

studiesPretence play, virtual identitiesCollective intentionalityNon-individual aspects of cultural background

Dangers

Duplication of effortSocial intelligence can be explained and modeled

in various approaches. There is a danger of duplicating effort.

IsolationEmpirical evidence in various theories may rather

constrain other theories rather than screen them off. We should strive for integration (via truth-constraints).

What next?

I want to include selected case studies in the white paper. We will discuss this on Friday.

Dangers and challenges are important.Thank you!