Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
(This article has been published in a book: Informaatioteknologian filosofia
(Philosophy of Information Technology) ISBN: 978-952-484-384-3 (In Finnish).
Lappland University Press. Finland 2011. The article has gone through the referee
process.)
Sakari Ahvenainen:
“Information Technology and the Mankind –
Evolutionary and Systemic point of View".
Introduction: Popper - evolutionary induction and science
About the theory and the process of this article
This article discusses the mega stages of information technology; the large and
fundamental changes in information technology. The goal for the large time scale
evaluation is to see the current and future states of information technology. The larger
the time scale is, the better are the chances of seeing wider connections and new
development in that field (Buzan & Little 2000, 2).
The history of information technology is a wide question and hence this evaluation
focuses only on basic trends and certain viewpoints. The process of this article is the
evolutionary induction theory presented originally by the Austrian-British philosopher of
science professor Karl R. Popper. This introduction section will focus on this and on
general discussion on the scientific process. The evolutionary induction theory can be
summarized as the following process: a problem, preliminary theories, error elimination
and next generation problems. The main message of the Popper’s book is that this
process is a step towards the scientific, or ultimate, "truth", but which can never be fully
reached (Popper 1979).
The induction model presented by Professor Popper is evolutionary which is reflected
also on the title of the book (“Objective Knowledge – An evolutionary Approach”). In this
book, he sees that he has solved the problem of induction; the only way to have scientific
knowledge that is true1 and verified is to base the theories on earlier commonly accepted
theories while still remaining critical and employing common sense (Popper 1979).
The interesting problem in this article2 is: what is the past, present and possibly future
significance of information and information technology in the evolution of the human
kind.
The preliminary theories to answer this question in this paper are both cybernetics, the
general meaning of information (Wiener 2000) and the systems theory (Bertalanffy 2003)
(Skyttner 2005). The third preliminary theory is the mega stages of the evolution of the
human kind. This will culminate in the growth of the organizational size and the
complexity of the human kind in the following sequence: clan, tribe, nation, culture and
the global humanity. The next three chapters will focus on these preliminary theories.
Here the mega stages of the evolution of the human kind will be discussed by using
applications in four different fields. The first one is a geo-political theory (Taylor 1973). It
is closely connected to a large application on warfare and its evolution (Wright 1942),
which was written decades earlier. The third application that discusses the world history
of international systems (Buzan & Little 2000) is also similar to the geo-political theory.
The fourth application is comprised of two theories that discuss evolution of language
(Logan 2007) (Lieberman 2000). Out of these two the work by Logan is centred on the
core topics of this paper, the growth and emergence of organizational levels and
management of complexity.
The next step in the model presented by Popper after the preliminary theories is the most
demanding step of the model - error elimination. The fifth chapter will comprise of this
step and the assessment of the preliminary theories. The conclusions are presented in the
final chapter. Some of the conclusions are the new problems of the Popper model.
Warfare is particularly highlighted in this paper due to the writer's experience and
expertise in that field. In the recent years the author has switched focus to a more wide
view on information and its significance3.
1 True means here that it is commonly accepted by the scientific community.
2 Karl Popper considers that one should focus on interesting problems that have a larger explanatory
power (Popper 1979, 55). 3 In the context of this paper it could also be said that warfare and the meaning of information in
warfare has been a proto-stage to this article that discusses the enlargement of the meaning of information from warfare to the evolution of human kind.
On making science
The goal for the progress of science is to explain reality through more general theories
that explain the reality (Popper 1979, p. 287) (Bateson 2000, xxvi-xxvii). Fundamental and
interconnected scientific theories are the systems theory (Bertalanffy 2003) (Skyttner
2005), the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin4 and cybernetics (Wiener 2000). The
American physicist, assistant professor at the Rockefeller University and philosopher
Heinz R. Pagels sees the management of complexity as the next fundamental theory. He
views it as the next 300-year phase in science following the enlightenment (Pagels 1989).
During the last centuries science has also helped the human kind to comprehend its
status and place in the universe. The Christianity viewed humans as the masters and lords
of the nature. First Galileo Galilee proved that the so-called masters and lords of universe
were not – at least not in the astronomical sense – in the centre of universe. Later on
Charles Darwin proved that new life could be formed in other ways than by divine
creation. Finally James D. Watson and Francis Crick proved through DNA that humans are
formed from the same building blocks than plants and even lower forms of life such as
bacteria.
The first preliminary theory: conceptual analysis of cybernetics and
technology
On information, knowledge and cybernetics
We approach the solution of our interesting problem first by studying the concepts of
information and technology. This conceptual analysis is the first preliminary theory in the
Popperian interpretation of induction. The goal of this analysis if to define and refine the
multiple and divergent definitions of information.
Information as defined in this text is mostly related to cybernetics, the study of machine-
like and human-like self-organizing automatic systems that handle information and
knowledge (Wiener 2000). In cybernetics information is thus always connected to a
certain system. A direct consequence of this is that the information is only relevant in
relation to the system associated to the information5, i.e. its context (Bateson 2000, 408).
4 The Darwinian evolutionary theory can be viewed as an application of the systems theory and it is
not discussed here in itself due to lack of space. Evolution is application of systems theory in which the species in question is considered as the system and its environment comprises of the Earth and its other species. 5 Every person is a unique physiological, genetic, historical and cultural system; otherwise know as an
individual. As a direct result of this the same information, i.e. a word causes a different response in each individual (Maturana & Varela 1998, p. 22 – 23.
There are four types of information in the cybernetic model (Skyttner 2005, p. 81 – 84,
92):
1. The sensory input to the system: stimulation: e.g. auditory system and speech, for
example a question;
2. The information stored in the system, the interpretation of sensory input in the
decision making unit: the interpretation in the brain6 and memory7;
3. Output information to the decision-making unit, for example a response and
production of speech in the vocal unit that simulates the system: other person’s ears;
4. And feedback information to control the system: negative and positive feedback.
Feedback information is the control and influence channel to the system.
Out of the aforementioned types of information the input and output are transferable
information are the only forms of information that are considered in the Claude E.
Shannon’s mathematical communications theory8 which is used widely in the field of
communications (Shannon & Weaver 1949) (Kåhre 2002, p. 216). In order for the
transferable information to have any meaning or impact, the interpretative information is
required. And the only way to reach the goal of the system (decreasing the current lack of
knowledge) is to get feedback (i.e. was the question answered satisfactorily).
A continuum that stars with the living cell and continues through different metaphases as
human beings and their organizations can all be seen as cybernetic information
processing systems. In the next phase the process continued with computers and its
enlargements as computer networks. Internet – a global computer network – represents
the latest phase of this process. The basic levels of these systems – cell, human, and
computer – are:
6 Brains are structure and order that interprets the information stored in the system and sensory input
(Maturana & Varela 1998, p. 22, 34 and 126). Other such information processing systems are a cell and a microprocessor (computer). The decision making unit that processes sensory input combines the sensors and effectors and thus increases the behavioral options of the system (Maturana & Varela 1998, p. 163). 7 The short term memory is neuronal chemistry in the brain and the long term memory is the
connections, structure (order) in the brains. Source: Finnish TV documentary “Muistia etsimässä” (Looking for the memory) YLE Teema, April 2
nd, 2010 8:55 AM, duration 1 hour 33 minutes.
8 Shannon’s book discusses communication, transferable knowledge, not information in the broad
sense. The book lacks the interpretative view of information that consists of the structure of the system like is acknowledged in the book (Shannon & Weaver 1949, p. 8).
1. Datum, the smallest9 unit of information that system can recognize, i.e. differentiate:
the main unit of the message10;
2. Information, N times datum, that has a special meaning to its system: a message;
3. Knowledge, the meaning and interpretation of information in the system. At this level
the information has a meaning (ref. semantics). The influence to the system or its
environment is created through this meaning (ref. pragmatics). And only through this
process does the information have any meaning;
4. The larger levels of information, formed by a multiple of the lower level units and
their special meaning, encoding in the system. For us humans these levels could be
knowledge, comprehension, wisdom and enlightenment. And these can culminate as
skills, values and attitudes of life.
In more basic way information – which is used here as a general term to cover all
aforementioned levels – is in essence putting into form11 (Baeyer 2004, p. 20)
transforming of form12 (Baeyer, p. 25) and a relationship13 (Baeyer 2004, p. 22).
Information is also order14, the opposite of lack of order, entropy, by which it can be
called negentropy (Wiener 2000, p. 11 and 36) (Kåhre 2002, p. 178 and 181). In this
formare-sense and atom has information although in a simple form (Stonier 1990). The
information of elementary particles and atoms, the prediction of their behaviour is
encoded in the wave function (Baeyer 2004, p. 38 and 172 – 174). Based on this we get
the hierarchy for cybernetic information shown in Table 1.
When defined as order, information is immaterial, something other than matter and
energy (Wiener 2000, p. 132). In this sense a book and the information of the book are
different concepts. A book is physical matter and a concrete object in itself. The
information of the book is only meaningful in its context, i.e. when a person who is
sufficiently knowledgeable about its topic and speaks the language the book is written in
reads the book.
9 In the words of quantum physicist Anton Zeilinger: the elementary system contains a single bit of
information (Baeyer 2004, p. 227). 10
Gregory Bateson defines the information as a difference that makes a difference at some later stage (Bateson 2000, p. 272, 381 and 458). I.e. the difference between 0 and 1, adenine, thymine, guanine and cytosine and “A” and “Z”. “Creates a difference at some later stage” refers strongly to the impact of information. Even the quantum physicist Erwin Schrödinger sees the difference more important than the quality itself (Baeyer 2004, p. 53). 11
In Latin: informare. The opposite of form is formless which is similar to entropy, lack of order. 12
In speech the vocal pressure is transformed into ideas, in writing the text into ideas, in DNA a codon into amino acid and in a computer a computer-language command to e.g. the summation of two registries. 13
In the relationship sense information is the relationship between input and output. The relationship is formed in and controlled by the decision making unit which works between input and output. 14
The short term memory is neuronal chemistry in the brain and the long term memory is the connections, structure (order) in the brains. Source: Finnish TV documentary “Muistia etsimässä” (“Looking for the memory”) YLE Teema, April 2
nd, 2010 8:55 AM, duration 1 hour 33 minutes.
Human, speech Human, writing Life (DNA) Computer
Level 1: Datum, the smallest distinguishable unit
A sound A letter or a character
ATGS-pair1 A bit
Level 2: Information
A word composed of 1 or more sounds
A word, composed of 1 or more letters
A codon2, three ATGS-pairs
A machine language command (4 to 64 bits)
Level 3 Knowledge, the meaning of information3
The meaning of a word to a human being
The meaning of a word to a human being
The meaning of a codon for a cell (=amino acid)
The meaning of the command for a micro- processor
Level 4 and higher levels:
A sentence, a statement, a conversation, …, wisdom, enlightenment
A sentence, a paragraph, a chapter, a book, a library, …, wisdom, enlightenment
A gene4
(=protein), gene that controls other genes, … (?)5
A function or an algorithm, a program, software
Table 1: Hierarchical level applications of cybernetic knowledge (Baeyer 2004; Bateson
2000, p. 272, 381 and 458; Baeyer 2004, p. 53)
1. ATGS = adenine, thymine, guanine and cytosine
2. Codon, three ATGS-pairs (43=64 possibilities), encodes mainly a single one of the 20 amino acids of life.
3. Information is significant only in the sense that in the right system, information changes from a symbol
(message) to action, to a concrete influence in existence. Knowing is thus acting or influencing
4. A gene (100 – 200 amino acids) encodes one of the 1,000 to 30,000 proteins in a cell.
5. Only a part of the influences between the components of the genome of living entities is understood.
On the other hand, in the mathematical framework information is an application of
probability theory. The main applications of the mathematical information theory are
thermodynamics and telecommunication, Shannon’s communication theory. (Kåhre 2002,
p. 190) From quantum physical perspective information is qubit15, which is not dual-
valued like the bit of a computer, but two-dimensional. A qubit has simultaneously all its
values (Enqvist 2007, p. 227).
15
Qubit = quantum bit.
In the philosophical framework epistemology (study of information) studies human
knowledge and its limits16. The biological information in the DNA, the technical
information of a computer and its bits and the particle information of the qubit are not
included in traditional epistemology. (SEP 2005, Epistemology). The classes of information
related to human knowledge and language are (Niiniluoto 1999, p. 89 – 90):
1. Syntactic (code); information in this article,
2. Semantic (meaning in the context) (See Kåhre 2002, p. 216); in this article the
interpretation of the decision making unit,
3. Pragmatic (influence); in this article the influence of the interpreted information
(knowledge17).
Close to semantics is semiotics, the study of signs, which studies the significations of signs
such as images and symbols. The three-fold structure at the core of semiotics – an object
(pragmatic), the sign itself (syntactic) and the interpretant, meaning (semantic) – is clearly
related to the classification of information of semantics and cybernetics that was given
above.
The general classes of information can be compiled from this conceptual analysis of
information:
1. Epistemology: the traditional philosophical study of human knowledge;
2. The information of life: the DNA and its interpreter: the cell;
3. The physiologically transferrable information, speech and gestures and its interpreter:
the brain and memory18;
4. The recorded information of humans in writing and signs: semiotics and its
interpreter: the brain and memory;
5. The transferrable information of computers: bits and its interpreter: the memory and
main frame of a computer (nowadays mostly a microprocessor);
6. The mathematical communications or information theory (Shannon and Weaver
1949) (Kåhre 2002);
16
The classical definition of information from epistemology can be stated as: information is well justified true belief (Niiniluoto 1999, p. 138). It is hard to consider it referring to information stored in a computer or the DNA. Another classification for the epistemological classes of information is from the 17
th century philosopher Benedictus de Spinoza: 1. Information based on vague experience
(belief), 2. First level information: an opinion, imagination, 3. Second level information: common sense. 4. Third level information: intuition (Spinoza 1994, p. 121). 17
In a seminar related to this book at the University of Lappland during July 5th
-7th
, 2010, the Finnish definitions of information were determined important for further studies. The preliminary common definition for knowledge was: “Knowledge is interpreted information.” The definition highlights the difference between information and knowledge. The former is a message is some medium while the latter is the interpretation of the message by the interpreter, a cybernetic system (see Baeyer 2004, p. 19). This structure fits to humans, cell, and computers; to all the basic cybernetic applications considered in this article. 18
The memory is the data transfer medium between the past and the future (Wiener 2000, p. 121).
7. Information as a property of existence, comparable to matter and energy: order, the
opposite of entropy, negentropy (Stonier 1990);
8. Particle information: the qubit; and
9. The four classes of information of cybernetics.
This fragmentation of the definition of knowledge and information can be seen as one of
the Popperian interesting problems of the second stage in this article. The concept of
energy was fragmented in a similar way at the beginning of the 19th century. The
invention of the steam machine lead to the discovery of the common base of all forms of
energy like the fact that metabolism is a slow burning reaction where matter bonds to
oxygen. Now computers and the DNA are causing a similar need to find the common base
of information and knowledge (Stonier 1990, p. 5 – 6).
On skills, tools, technique and technology
The conceptual analysis of technology is also related to the conceptual analysis on
information technology in addition to the above conceptual analysis on
information/knowledge. It will begin with the concept of technique that is closely related
to technology.
Technique is the skills and the means to reach a goal or accomplish a task, e.g. the
technique of painting or high jumping. In the restricted meaning it is taking advantage of
nonliving nature and its laws for human purposes (CD-Fact 2004, tekniikka (technique)).
Technique is conceptually action, skills, and tools. Technique is thus always connected to
human skills and our tools. Also Robert Logan maintains that that technique developed
from tools that had their basis on the development of precision mechanics and in the
development of the understanding of sequential processes (Logan 2007, p. 6 and 53).
The word technology was first used in 1829 in the USA, and it means technique in a broad
and general sense; the design, building, usage and research of technical objects and
systems (Airaksinen 2003, p. 11 and 17 – 18). Currently the word technology is used to
signify taking advantage of a technique or exploring its usage possibilities, often it
signifies the same as general technique (CD-Facta 2004, technology).
The major changes in information technology related to humans have been the
development of speech, writing, printing and lastly global computer technology and its
most basic application, the Internet. Speech is action-based technique, skills, writing both
action- and tool-based technique and printing mostly tool-based technique. The
technological and broader stages are represented in the aforementioned only by global
computer technology.
According to the definitions and interpretation chosen above information technology is
the processing and transferring of cybernetic knowledge and the research, planning,
building and use of related systems in broader technical systems.
The second preliminary theory: on systems theory
What are systems?
The second preliminary theory explained in this article to understand the position of
information technology is systems theory. In the previous chapter the cybernetic
knowledge, as defined, is always related to a system. For this reason it is important to
take a closer look at the definition of a system and especially that of an open system that
is principal for the systems theory.
A system is an entity formed of specialized components that are interconnected and this
entity is connected to its environment (Bertalanffy 2003, p. 38 and 70) (Skyttner 2005, p.
52 and 63 – 64). The new system is thus always based on previous components; the
system is always a result of its historical continuum19. The ways the components can be
interconnected has a very fundamental effect on the nature of the system: to its size,
behaviour and the relative importance of its components (Buzan 2000, p. 63, 80 – 84 and
91 – 96) (Bertalanffy 2003, p. 48 and 54).
Systems can be divided in three main types: closed, open and complex. A closed system
does not interact with its environment as opposed to an open system that can exchange
energy, matter and information with its environment. A complex system involves a
multitude of components and most importantly connections between the components
and is therefore hard to describe in short, with little information. (Skyttner 2005, p. 7, 62
– 63, and 105 – 106)
The relationship between an open system and its environment is a vital concept in
systems theory20. An open system influences its environment and the environment
influences the system. An open system can survive in its environment by two methods:
either by modifying the environment like a beaver does or by modifying itself (evolving)
like the hospital bacteria do, i.e. by adjusting to its environment (Skyttner 2005, p. 193).
From this follows that the information technology of a specific time is dependent on what
kind of a general environment it is formed in. It also follows that the human kind can only
survive by modifying its environment or modifying itself.
From the relationship of an open system and its environment comes out that the
structures of human communities can have been very different since their environment
were different in terms of e.g. geography, climate and neighbours (Diamond 2005, p. 27).
As the number of varying environments decreases human communities begin to resemble
19
An example: The car parts must exist before a car. Or the chain described earlier in this article: life and its main unit, the living cell human being computer the Internet. 20
Fundamental examples of this are the so-called wolf children that have been raised by animals without human contacts. A child is an opportunity for a human and becomes one only when raised in a human community through language and culture (Maturana & Varela 1998, p. 128—129).
one another. The variety of environments decreases as the number of systems decreases
on Earth. The last human systems are nations (ca. 200), cultures (ca. 10) and global
human kind (1).
An open system is thus an entity formed out of specialized components and it is
connected to its environment; the environment modifies the system and the system
modifies its environment. An open system and its environment cannot be separated.
On emergence
The concept of emergence is vital in order to understand the formation of system levels
and their evolving properties. The Finnish physicist and popular science writer Kari
Enqvist claims that only the concept of emergence makes it possible to study complexity
and non-linearities. A certain kind of holy trinity of world explanation is formed by energy,
emergence and entropy. It is about the emergence stemming from making crude
approximations and losing information. (Enqvist 2007, p. 23 and 209)
The loss of information is a similar property to information as entropy is to
thermodynamics according to Jan Kåhre, the Finnish Master of Science (Eng.) and the
creator of a mathematical information theory (Kåhre 2002, p. 22 – 40).
Enqvist discusses the weak emergence of nature where the upper level properties are
formed firstly and finally by the lower level properties. In contrast to this, he considers
the strong emergence to be something genuinely and inexplicably new. He does not
consider the emergence to be inexplicable, but be caused by the combined influences of
the lower level systems.
In systems theory it is important to be able to form a theoretical qualitative explanation
(Bertalanffy 2003, p. 36). The emergence is a qualitative explanation of life and
consciousness (Skyttner 2005, p. 173; originally Norman Cook). Life is an entity formed by
chemical reactions that have reached a certain complexity level and the new properties of
that entity. Consciousness is similarly an electro-chemical entity formed by neurons and
their upper levels that have reached certain complexity level and the new properties of
that entity. Enqvist considers the weak emergence of nature to be mainly about
explaining in principle as opposed to a philosophical statement.
Some large applications of these levels are for example quantum mechanics, particle
physics, atom physics, molecular chemistry, molecular biology and biology (Pagels 1989,
p. 223) (Skyttner 2005, p. 65) (Enqvist 2007, p. 296 – 298). Even though their components
are the lower level components the new higher-level structure has level-defining
properties that the lower level components lack. These new properties of the higher-level
structure can be explained by new laws of nature that only involve this level of complexity
(Pagels 1989, p. 222 – 223). These laws are, however, always simplifications (Enqvist
2007, p. 323 and 325) and therefore incomplete.
When matters are considered in more detail it will be noted that the new emergent
properties are always based on basic particle properties (Enqvist 2007, p. 303 and 313).
This does not mean that new properties would not exist, but their analytical explanation
from the components is still challenging. For now one has to be satisfied with simplified
models instead. They do not explain the reality as it is, in full detail, but rather offer crude
simplifications when detailed information is lost. This fact is related to the notion that a
model is never the reality nor is a map the terrain. If the map would describe the terrain
perfectly in full detail it would not be a map, it would be the terrain in question. In the
sense that Enqvist implied consciousness and life could be solved via complex
neuroscience and complex chemistry. This is the way that emergence and holism and on
the other hand reductionism are combined in theory when studied precisely (Enqvist
2007, p. 171, 280, 285, 302 – 306). In the material sense the new entity is fully described
by its parts. But essential additions in the entity are the new structure with a degree of
permanency21 and the new properties of the entity.
So far the emergence has been considered to be more a part of the philosophical realm of
deduction. Stuart Kauffman – a researcher of complexity and theoretical biologist – has
transformed it to a scientific theory. He raised the self-organization based on complexity
beside Charles Darwin’s natural selection (Kauffman 1995).
In the sense that Enqvist proposed the system and its configuration possibilities can be
solved analytically. One is required to create and solve the Hamiltonian of the system
(Enqvist 2007, p. 8 and 138). He claims that all of nature is based on nonlinearity and the
feedback essentially associated with it. This can be seen as reference to the cybernetic
model presented earlier in this article. All sub-atomic particle interactions are nonlinear
and in this sense all natural phenomena are complex (Enqvist 2007, p. 21 – 22 and 254 –
258).
In conclusion, emergence is the creation of new properties of the high level entity
resulting from the combined influence of lower level properties. As of now these new
properties cannot be explained well starting from the lower level phenomena. The
essential properties of this problem are in fact complexity and also the extreme need for
calculation capacity.
21
Only the properties that are permanent in the human view are important for humans. Examples of structures with permanency in this scale are life and consciousness. Life is not any combination of chemical reaction nor is consciousness any combination of neurons. They are structures with a degree of permanency, entities.
On complex systems
The complex model is becoming more and more important as a system model. One finds
oneself using it every time entities need to be understood instead of a part. And, as it was
defined earlier, a system is an entity formed out of specialized parts.
It should be emphasized yet again that a complex system comprises of many components
and moreover a great deal of connections between them. And as noted earlier, it is
difficult to describe in short with little information (Skyttner 2005, p. 106). The action of
the entity in complex (and regular) systems is based on the interaction and
communication between its components.
Systems evolve from more simple to more complex (Wiener 2000, p. 36). When viewed
from the system viewpoint, complexity increases as the system levels grow since the
previous level and its specialized components are part of the new, larger level. The global
human kind is hence the most complex human organization on Earth.
American physicist and philosopher Heinz R. Pagels suggests that computers are the most
significant tools for studying complexity management. This is analogous to how
telescopes were the tool to study of large scale such as the solar system and the universe
and how the microscope was the tool to study small scale such as cells and bacteria.
(Pagels 1999)
The first indications of this came from the use of the very first pre-computer, ENIAC, to
solve the theoretical structure of the hydrogen bomb back in 1945. The solution required
approximately a million punch cards delivered in multiple phases. Afterwards it was said
that “The problems in question were so complex that it would have been impossible to
find a solution without the use of ENIAC. Both physics and other forms of science will
benefit greatly from machines like this.” (Pulkkinen 2004, 292 – 293)
Common sense is problematic for systems theory and complexity management in the way
that the analysis of complex and nonlinear systems is difficult to understand for humans
(Pagels 1989, p. 41; originally George Miller, related to short term memory22). This is
caused by the fact that the human brain cannot comprehend the combined influence of
more than 5 to 9 components and also by the fact that the multiple connections of
complex systems, their nonlinearity and in particular the combined influence goes beyond
the traditional cause-consequence thinking. That is, due to the structural limitations of
the human brain, we are bad at understanding complex and nonlinear systems.
In the conscious level the human brain can only handle causalities. The creation of tools
and the development of speech represent evolutionary problems concerned with
22
The work load of short-term memory can be seen in the way subordinate clauses are understood. A subordinate clause in the middle of the clause is harder to understand since it must be connected to the text before and after it (Lieberman 2000, p. 172).
causality management that have transformed our brains in their current structure (Logan
2007, p. 48 – 49).
The development of speech that is important in this discussion can be seen as the
solution for the challenge of increasing complexity for the early human societies. Some
factors contributing to the increase of complexity before the development of speech
were tool making, the use of fire, living in larger social groups and the coordinated large
game hunt. (Logan 2007, p.5)
Third preliminary theory: on the mega stages of human evolution
On theories
The third preliminary theory related to the interesting problem of this article that
discussed in this chapter are the mega phases of human history. According to the
previously presented systems theory and the idea of evolution the history of the human
kind should be a process in which the next stage is built upon the previous one.
Simultaneously it creates something new on the new level by emergence. This kind of a
geopolitical theory has been presented in 1973 by the Canadian Queen's University
professor of history, geography and politics Alastair M. Taylor (Skyttner 2005, p. 156-161)
(Taylor 1973, p. 29-68). Taylor is also one of the first people to apply systems theory on
the history of the human kind.
A similar model was presented back in 1942 by the professor of law Quincy Wright from
the University of Chicago when he was in charge of the largest research project ever
conducted about warfare. The studies were conducted between 1926 and 1942 (Wright
1942). A total of 66 research studies belonged to the research project of which 45 were
accepted as higher level university thesis or doctoral thesis, 10 published as books and 6
as scientific research articles (Wright, 1942, p. vii).
During more recent years the development of international systems and history has been
studied very similarly by the research professor Barry Buzan from the international
relations department of the Westminster University democracy research centre and the
international politics professor Richard Little from the University of Bristol (Buzan & Little
2000).
In his research project Quincy Wright argues that according to the history of warfare he
presents warfare — and similarly the mega stages of human evolution — can be divided
historically in four phases. These phases are the animal phase before language, the
primitive phase after the development of language, the historical phase after writing and
the modern phase after printing press. The corresponding organizational sizes are
enlarged family (clan), tribe, nation and culture. (Wright 1942, p. 29-33)
In the Wright model trade and technology seem to predict the political and organizational
development (Wright 1983, p. 351-352). Trade is a vital element both in the works of
Buzan and Little and Logan as well (Buzan & Little 2000, p. 93-94, 154-156, 177, 234)
(Logan 2007, p. 58-60).
Taylor on the other hand comes up with a geopolitical model based on human evolution.
Its core is the political system that takes input from the biosphere and the socio-cultural
system. The output is products from the material and social system. The system is
controlled by two feedbacks, a negative, limiting and stabilizing one and a positive
expanding one. The positive one is more significant and it increases the information,
negentropy of the political system and strengthens the information. These factors bring
about more opportunities for controlling the environment. This system operates on
multiple levels and is centrally connected to its environment. The system is also
cumulative; the new broader higher level is based on earlier lower and simpler levels.
(Taylor 1973, 56-64)
Next I will shortly discuss the evolutionary phases of the Taylor, Wright and Buzan & Little
models in more detail. These phases are also the organization levels of the history of the
human kind. The most important properties of these phases are summarized in Table 2.
The thing that should be noted in particular in the summarization in Table 2 is the size of
the fifth phase organization. It is global and consequently the human kind can no longer
expand in the natural boundaries of Earth. We have reached the limits of growth also in
the system interpretation. The earlier human societies could move first in to uninhabited
territories and then to territories inhabited by other similar species at the cost of the
other species. There are very few usable uninhabited territories anymore and there is no
other global human kind at the cost of which the expansion could continue.
The first phase: protolanguage and clan
Language should be predated by a pre-phase in the systems interpretation, the
protolanguage. This idea is presented by Philip Lieberman, professor of cognition and
linguistics at the Brown University (Lieberman 2000, p. 103 and 125). Robert K. Logan —
Canadian physicist, media-ecologist and language evolution professor — sees tool
making23, social intelligence, mimic communication and protolanguage as the pre-phase
of language. The communication, vocabulary and syntax are limited in the protolanguage
and sign language, gestures, body language and making of simple voices are part of the
mimic communication. (Logan 2007, p. 6 and 51-57)
23
In lingual problems involving the Brocca region in brain also the hand motoric functions are defective (Lieberman 2000, p. 147 and 206).
At this stage the human communities were small, scattered, and mobile and had very
little possessions. The connections between the groups were also very limited. Due to the
small size of the human population the resource were available in relative abundance,
especially in new uninhabited areas. At this stage technology or tools were represented
by simple and non-integrated tools made one material only. Examples of these are a
wooden spear sharpened in fire, a stone hand axe and a wooden or bone club. All the
early tools were used just by hand (Diamond 2007, p. 46).
The beginning of the phase
The organizational size
The type of the society
Explaining factor
Significant new objects
Protolanguage Before ca. 50,000 B.C.
Enlarged family
Animalistic Instincts Fire and tools
Language Ca. 50,000 B.C.
Tribe Primitive Sociology Large game hunt and trade
Writing Ca. 3,500 B.C.
Nation Historical Politics (law) Farming, war
Printing Ca. 1,500 A.D.
Culture Modern Science, technology
Modern states, industry
Global electronic and integrated knowledge
Ca. 2,000 A.D.
Global Postmodern Information, complexity
Computer and computer networks, the Internet
Table 2. The evolutionary and systems phases of warfare and the evolution of human
kind.
On the development of speech
The spoken version of language, the speech, is fundamentally intended for problem
solving and thinking. One phase in the human development is the idea that thinking
doesn't require speaking aloud. (Logan 2007, p. 29-30) Language is also the first
technology that allowed humans to break free from its environment to see it from a new
perspective (Logan 2007, p. 41; originally from the media researcher Marshall McLuhan).
The step was from being into becoming, from concrete to abstract.
The development of speech was connected to three major changes. Firstly there was a
transition from concrete perceptions to abstract concepts. Secondly the brains
transformed into mind24 — the combination of brains, language and culture. Thirdly, the
undeveloped early Homo sapiens predecessors transformed into fully developed people,
Homo sapiens. (Logan 2007, p. 64 and 250)
The language is only a single part of the evolutionary chain. Logan considers the
evolutionary chain to consist of the following phases: spoken language, written language,
mathematics, science, automated computing and the Internet (Logan 2007, p. 8 and 28-
40). The phases predating language have most likely been tool making and walking
upright which was a necessary phase for tool making.
The phases after language fit mostly with the general model presented in this text. Logan
presents also the printing press as a part of the chain in a wider catalogue (Logan 2007, p.
25). Each phase was formed to solve the new needs of information processing in a
systems theoretical sense basing on earlier phases and taking characteristics from them.
Logan considers the development of language to have been formed to solve the problems
created by the increasing complexity of the human societies. Language was the emergent
answer to solve these problems (Logan 2007, p. 9 and 199). A new communications
method was required to make the co-operation in the new larger level possible.
The communications methods for the early hunter-gatherers to other groups — i.e. larger
systems — were marriage, exchange of objects and gatherings (Buzan & Little 2000, p.
123-130). These methods and the language expanded the size of the organization for the
first time and made it possible to increase the level of specialization circa 50,000 years
ago. The new fully-grown and abstraction-based25 language helped form technique, arts
and trade and later on mathematics, science, automated computing and the Internet
(Logan 2007, p. 6 and 58-61).
The next phases and information
In the next phase new application were created by information technology that along
with other factors were necessary to have co-operation on a larger scale and to further
increase specialization. In each phase a significant problem related to information
remained to be solved by the new information technology of the next phase. These are
presented in Table 3.
24
Matura & Varela agree on the significance of language on the mind (Maturana & Varela 1998, p. 231 and 233–234). 25
In language an abstract combination of voices was combined to a concrete object or action. Writing was in a way a second level abstraction: an abstract voice was connected to an abstract visual symbol. The increasing abstraction level is the hallmark of increasing maturity (Baeyer 2004, p. 36).
The beginning of the phase
The new advantage related to information
The remaining problem related to information
Protolanguage Before ca. 50,000 B.C.
The increased efficiency in co-operation
Only concrete concepts possible
Language Ca. 50,000 B.C.
Abstract thinking via symbols Information could not be stored outside an individual
Writing Ca. 3,500 B.C.
The permanent and unchanging storage of information
Replication of information expensive and information controlled by the elite
Printing Ca. 1,500 B.C.
Replication of information is cheap and information could be “democratized”
The production of replicated information is time consuming and its transfer is slow
Global electronic and integrated knowledge
Ca. 2,000 B.C.
Transfer of information is fast (speed of light) and also its creation (computers and the Internet)
The explosion of the quantity of information, complexity, reliability of information, etc.
Table 3. The advantages of information and the remaining significant problems of the
different phases of the evolution of information technology.
Ocean going sailing ships changed the oceans from isolating obstacles to high ways in the
16th century in the same manner that trains and airplanes later transformed continents
(Buzan & Little 2000, p. 296). An even more important factor was the increasing
information transfer speed through the telegraph. The maximum speed of some tens of
kilometres per hour that a letter could be delivered on horseback or by sailing ship
changed to approximately ten billion kilometres per hour through the electromagnetic
waves that carried the telegram. For (electronic) information, the Earth became a village.
The systems logic behind the levels
In each of the three transitions of the Wright and Taylor theories the following has
happened:
1. The transformation to the next level was achieved through a change in the
information technology: The development of speech, writing and printing (Also in
McNeill & McNeill 2006, p. 20 and 24). The change was part of a larger entity and
other changes were also often required, for example farming.
2. The new and larger organizational level made it possible with other factors that a
new, wider and more efficient specialization26 was possible (division of labour27).
This specialization and meant wider and more versatile technique. As principal
phases technique developed from tools to machines, systems and systems of
systems.
3. The new organizational level has also marked the continuously growing population
density and increasing number of contacts; wandering clan, village, town, big city
and megapolis.
4. Because the new organizational level is formed out of the old ones and is larger than
them new emergent properties were formed as proposed by the systems theory and
these properties did not exist at the lower level. A part of this phenomenon is the
change in the main explaining factor for the level: from psychology to sociology,
politics, technology and finally information.
5. Because the old specialized components are part of this new level, nothing old
disappears.
6. Based on the previous point the complexity in the human organization and
functionality increased at each level. This growth can be explained the specialization
of the lower level and the increase of system size, that creates completely new
emergent concepts and also with the new factors and functionalities of the
technique and the wider specialization, among other things.
7. Because the new complexity represents difficulty to describe the system in short
with little information the previous point also signified an increase on the
information content of the society as a system and in other ways as well. In order to
control the new, wider complexity more information was required which lead to the
need for a new communications method that made it possible to control the new
level of complexity and information transfer.
8. The new and ever larger integrated systems levels also meant the units in the highest
level decreased in number on the Earth scale28.
9. The new efficiency, technique and denser and wider contacts and the possibility to
create new information ever faster have also signified the significant decrease on
the duration of the mega stages.
10. When the new level matures into a system it dominates, controls29 the lower levels.
The highest level is also the most significant. Its influence is spread on lower levels
such as the industrialized and mechanized farming in the industrial phase and the
26
In the famous work of Adam Smith the division of pin point needles into ten phases created hundreds and even thousands of times more efficiency compared to one person completing all the work phases (Smith 1776, I.1.3). 27
Larger specialization signifies directly a larger system: A system is formed out of specialized components… 28
There are approximately 200 countries, ten cultures and only one global human kind. 29
The control over the components is explicitly a requirement for a system, a synergic entity. For example the brain, the nervous system and hormones. Or police. Also the problem of the EU or the UN is their “low system levelness”, small control over its components.
informationalised farming in the information phase. The higher organizational level
also sets limitations to the lower levels. Because the global level is only forming its
methods of control are not yet fully developed.
The points made above are almost in perfect harmony with evolution of life. Nine jumps
in the fields of chemistry and biology have happened in the evolution of life and they
have all been characterized by three changes: (i) the increase in the systems size, (ii) the
increase in specialization and (iii) the change in how information is processed (Smith &
Szathmáry 1995, p. 12-14). Also in the book "Megaevoluutio" (Megaevolution) Eero
Paloheimo discusses this matter as discussed here earlier, although he uses the language
of phases instead of levels. This is a fundamental phenomenon of the systems theory; the
formation of new systems levels.
The levels of systems and warfare: the global strategy of survival for the
human kind
According to the systems theory warfare is a function of its environment (society). The
traditional levels of warfare in general and according to systems theory are combat
technique, tactics, operational skills and (military) strategy. They can also be expanded to
include the national strategy, alliance (military) strategy and the alliance strategy.
(Ahvenainen 2008, p. 155-156)
If the previously presented warfare level structure is expanded from culture, alliances, to
the global stage, the global strategy of survival for the human kind ensues. Based on
previous levels it is the utilization of the resources of the specialized cultures to guarantee
the survival of human kind and for its benefits. Because there is no competition on the
global level, the war in this level is civil war within the global level. In practice this means
the fight within the most important aspect of this level: information. This logic creates a
global information warfare that can be exemplified by the global information battle raised
from the drawings of Mohammed in Denmark during 2006.
Assessment and error elimination
In the Popperian induction method used in this article the most important and difficult
phase is the error elimination that is discussed in this chapter. It is probable that in order
to reach a good conclusion one needs more time, space and a more wide discussion of
the topic than can be taken here. What will be discussed is also the error elimination of
error elimination, i.e. critique of the critique.
The models of Wright, Taylor and Buzan & Little represent general theories that do not
include short term or local fluctuations or detail. The real history has always included set-
backs, fluctuations (Wright 1942, p. 375) and local adjustments. This must be taken into
account also when the theory is used to create predictions. On the other hand, losing
information, forgetting about the details is a vital point of view in data processing and
physics (Kåhre 2002, p. 71) (Enqvist 2007, p. 209). Losing information about the details of
the smaller lower level systems is a method to reach a new, higher and more general level
in the systems theory perspective.
Conflicting time estimations about the development of language — which is vital for this
article — has been given in the literature. Time quoted earlier in this article, 50,000 B.C,
represents time when many significant changes in human behaviour took place. These
include technology, trade and arts (Logan 2007, p. 6). This time estimation is also in line
with the times given by Buzan & Little (Buzan & Little, 2000, p.4 and p. 405–406). Logan,
on the other hand, gives a time frame of 50,000 to 100,000 years ago (Logan 2007, p. 62).
The times frames for writing and printing on the other hand have been defined more
accurately. The division into these time steps is a hypothesis of the writer. In other used
references the time frames of the revolutions of information technology presented here
had not been connected in the aforementioned method. The hypothesis from writing and
printing is that each time period lasts a tenth of the previous one. This means that the
protolanguage time would have lasted circa 500,000 years and the global information
technology time approximately 50 years. In a similar manner, the time before
protolanguage would have been 5 million years30 and the phase following information
technology would last approximately 5 years. The latter time would actually require
cosmic, larger-than-Earth systems.
The Wright model is over 60 years old, so it is apparent that the latest research has
something to say about e.g. language development and its timing. This can be seen for
example in the fact that sometimes the facts presented by Wright have been further
specified. It is difficult to gain knowledge from the oldest times, prehistory, with accuracy
and sufficiently. The longer one goes into past history, the less there is knowledge about
that time. The smaller the society, the less marks it has left. And at begging the group size
has been very small. It is estimated that the modern man descends from a community of
10,000 people from Africa ca. 200,000 years ago (Smith & Szathmáry 1995, p. 278). The
evidence for the mega model of the history of the human kind is very scarce when it
comes to the earliest evolutionary phases of the human kind. Regardless, the model
utilized here forms a sound base for the explanation of the matters in that era.
Both the Taylor and the Wright models lack certain key premises of the systems theory.
Whereas in the past decade's books of Logan and Buzan & Little the key premises of the
systems theory are more visible. For Wright this is understandable since the systems
theory itself was not developed in the 20's and 30's when the Wright research project
30 This is the time when humans specialized from the chimpanzee (Lieberman 2000, p. 37) and hands
were freed to other types of action (Lieberman 2000, p. 125).
was in full swing. The most vital concept from systems theory that is missing in the
aforementioned texts is the relation between the system size and the communication
method required for the control of that level. This connection is vital in Logan's work
(Logan 2007, p.3). The system size can, if other components thus allow, grow when the
communications method required for the information and knowledge of that systems
level is employed.
The professor of history, Alex Roland, has used Wright's theory as a central premise is his
four-part literary series. Roland applies the theory created before and during World War
II to explain events taking place after WW II. He considers Wright's theory to be mostly
valid. (Roland 1997)
%%
Roland shows that technology has caused a significant change after WW II in that the
number of casualties has suddenly decreased. The reason for this is the destructive power
modern technological warfare between the most developed nations and in particular,
nuclear weapons. Furthermore Roland claims that WW II signified the beginning in the
development where quality dominates quantity (Roland 1997 part 2/4; 2/15).
Roland considers that the starting point for Wright's theory, the changes in the
information technology are more conceptual purity than hard evidence, namely the
transformation from animalistic phase to the primitive phase through language phase in
warfare phases (Roland 1997 part 1/4; 5/11). Roland does not however discuss systems
theory in his article. In systems theory the relation between the communications system
and system size is relevant. Wright came to this conclusion in 1942 without being able to
reference the systems theory developed in the 1960's. In systems theory Bertalanffy
speaks in this context long even about theoretical history (Bertalanffy 2003, p. 109-119).
The Wright theory is even theoretical history, although from observated and researched
reality, not from a theory that has been chosen as a foundation.
Roland sees many flaws or mistakes in the treatment of Wright's theory. Despite these he
considers the work by Wright to be an impressive accomplishment and he values it as the
most thorough and educated analysis ever conducted about warfare (Roland 1997 part
1/4, p. 9/11). Roland critiques the superiority of technology in the Wright model by
pointing out the success of the guerrilla warfare of Mao (Roland 1997 part 2/4, p. 5/15 -
6/15). This should not be considered sufficient to rule out Wright's assessment of the
technology being the most explanatory factor in that era, but it highlights that other
strong explanations exist as well (Ahvenainen 2004, p. 39-46).
In conclusion, generally technology is the most basic explaining factor in modern warfare
but not the only one and not even the most important one in all cases. Warfare, like
finance and societies, is too complex to be explained by simple theories that work
without exceptions. The theories related to warfare, like those related to finance and
societies, are just helping tools for thinking, not mathematical models that always and in
general give precise and accurate results.
The new emergent explanatory models for the global level have been suggested to be
complexity management and information in this article. Both are included in the main
idea of the new level but require further research. The national level is rather well
defined in the studied model, although the influence of the nation varies globally
between collapsed nations to the Nordic welfare state. On the other hand, the
significance of the cultural level requires further clarification. The global level is just
forming and is thus a very interesting topic for further studies. It is evident that many of
the main problems of our time can only be solved in the global level. These include
among others the Internet and its information security, over-population, poverty and
refugees, global warming and over-fishing. An example of the type of action required by
the global level is the victory over the SARS-epidemic achieved only with international
collaboration.
CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions to the interesting problem of the article
The interesting problem of the article was: what is the past, present and possibly future
significance of information and information technology in the evolution of the human
kind.
Based on systems theory the significance has been remarkable. The new systems level
requires the interaction possibilities and connections of its specialized parts. These
include the quantity of information corresponding to the new level and its complexity and
the corresponding communications system for the communication between the
components of the enlarged system. Information and information technology are tools
for complexity management. The former is the message and the latter is its medium.
The significant changes in the information technology for the evolution of human kind
have been the emergence of speech, the invention of writing, the invention of printing
and lastly the global integrated31 electronic information technology culminating in the
Internet. The growth of the system size has made possible a continually expanding
specialization and division of labour. Specialization itself has made possible a better and
broader technology and that itself a better well-being, at least more material goods,
31
Integrated signifies here the information saving, handling and transferring in computer networks.
including artefacts. The development of information technology is part of this broader
development.
The next mega phase after the printing era is most evidently the global integrated
electronic information technology that culminates in the global computer network, the
Internet. It central task in the context of this article is complexity management at the
global level. At the same time complexity management changes every aspect of our life
such as science. Next to the theoretical and experimental science comes computational
science that can only be created with computers. Complexity management and
information rise up to new emergent explanatory models for the new global level — at
least at the hypothetical level. These come after the technology and science of the
cultural level.
In the Wright model trade and technology seem to anticipate political and organizational
development.
Other conclusions
Apart from what was presented in previous section, the following more general
conclusions can be drawn from the earlier chapters:
1. The systems theory has been applied in the main sources of this article in a wide
cross-section of scientific fields. In the applications new viewpoints have been formed
related to the history, present and future of the particular field. The models of Wright,
Taylor and Buzan & Little are also the reduction of information as presented by Kåhre,
removing details and processing information to a higher level, to a more general
model.
2. One sector of the systems theory, cybernetics gives the interpretation message (input
and output), decision making unit and influence of information to all types of
information based on language32. This implies that cybernetics has potential to be the
basis of further research.
3. In whole systems theory should be acknowledged wider in philosophy and it bring
new view points to earlier philosophical constructs. These are the origin of
emergence, the connection of holism and reductionism, the need for a general
epistemology, the limits of human knowledge and the relation of humans and nature.
It is likely that the scientific nature of the emergence that creates new levels in
systems theory can only be acquired through a wider and improved complexity
management. Furthermore one needs more accurate lower level models and
especially growth of computing capacity.
4. The model presented in this article gives basis to the assessment of the future of
human kind and leads logically - based on the earlier phases - to the importance of
32
Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic.
global ecology, global survival strategy for the human kind. In systems theory this
phase can be discussed as theoretical history (Bertalanffy 2003, p. 197-204).
5. The important relationship of the system and its environment in systems theory gives
clear argument for the global survival strategy for the human kind. The system here is
the human kind and the Earth is its environment. Many natural and other
catastrophes have wiped out entire cultures in the past (Diamond 2007). The
environment for the global human kind is the entire Earth and all of its biosphere and
the human kind cannot afford to have it destroyed. One must use knowledge
particularly to solve global, complex problems. For that one needs global resources
and the latest computer technology. At the same time the science paradigm
transforms to complexity management. Furthermore the humbleness of men gets a
new source after astronomy, evolution theory and DNA. The new source for
humbleness is the systems theory. We are only a part of the Earth, not the Earth. The
Earth is still necessary for us for a long time, but we are not necessary to Earth in any
way.
6. Broadly speaking the human kind has survived so far mostly by changing its
environment through intelligence and knowledge and also by using tools, technique
and technology. In some cases humans have also adapted to its environment
(Diamond 2007, p. 296-328). At the global level the survival of the human kind that
would be equal or larger in size than the current one is probably not possible by
changing the environment by the current method, exploitation. The humans are too
significant as species for this to be possible33. We must thus adapt and change our
relationship with our environment, the Earth.
7. When the human kind moves on to the global systems level many aspects change
significantly in the used context. Firstly the human kind reaches the maximum unit
size on Earth. Secondly there are no rival units at this size level on Earth. Thirdly the
new main explanatory models replace the old ones. The hypothesis is that the new
explanatory models will become information and complexity that replace technology
and science.
8. Science has a lot to say about the central topic of epistemology, the limits of human
knowledge, through among others by Gödel, Heisenberg, quantum mechanics,
mathematical information theory, study of the elementary particles34 and systems
theory. The message is clear and consistent: ultimate knowledge cannot be reached
with finite resources.
33
If one person uses 50 acres to produce groceries, feed its domestic animal and for the land area of buildings, roads, harbors, and such, the current human kind requires some 3.5 billion hectares, I.e. 35 millions square kilometers of land space. That is approximately a quarter of all land area on Earth. In Finland some 230 million acres of arable land is been used for five million people. See http://www.matilda.fi/ for example the used agriculture area for the fall of 2009 (December 28, 2009). 34
The study of ever smaller particles requires paradoxically ever larger machines, e.g. LHC and the Higgs-particle (http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/LHC/LHC-en.html, July 11, 2010).
9. With respect to information technology the following structural levels and its
applications have been found: information technology is represented by the global
information technique, information technique by printing, pre-stage of the
information technology by writing and proto-information technique, skills, by
language. It is noteworthy that the tools predate the speech. The classification given
earlier is based on the hierarchal structure of systems theory. In this structure
technology is broader use of technique related to science and research and systems of
systems, whereas technique is simpler tool making, tool usage and upkeep of
machinery and tools.
10. In the future we need to have a new kind of a comprehensive view on information.
The traditional epistemology is not sufficient but is part of this new entity. Here we
can yet again see the aim of entity, complexity management as presented by Pagels.
11. In the cybernetic model both the transmittable information of Shannon, e.g. DNA, and
the information connected to the interpreting system structure, e.g. cell is
information. The computer is a new interpretative machine for humans, parallel to
the brain, especially for complexity management. In this sense computer technology
— technology that handles information — is a vital addition to human evolution.
Instead of information transmission abilities it expands for the first time significantly
human information processing ability. In addition this ability has grown and keeps on
growing at never before seen pace35.
12. Technique and technology have opened previously deeper understanding of certain
issues and even new dimensions36 for humans. Now computer as the new application
of information technology is beginning to open up for humanity a new understanding
of information and complexity.
13. The central idea of the Popperian evolutionary induction was that scientific truth can
be approached but never fully reached. This was further confirmed in this article. The
most significant notification involves complexity management. In principle, for
example, the consciousness can be solved through neurons and their upper level
phenomena, but the complexity of this problem will overwhelm for a long time the
available performance of the equipment available. We are thus still forced to use less
complex, simplified theories.
35
The combined computational capacity of all computers has increased by a factor of 700-million from 1960 to 2000. The number of computers has increased 70,000 fold and the performance of the average computer by a factor of roughly 10,000. 36
For example the third lateral dimension (airplanes) and the electro-magnetic spectrum (radio, radar, laser,) and of course the cyber space, the virtual and artificial dimension of computers and their information that culminates in the Internet.
Conclusions from the conclusions: new problems
The Popperian induction model used as the process base for this article requires that new
problems arise from the conclusions. This were formed and the most significant three
were
1. The need for a general information theory,
2. The need for a new scientific paradigm and the critique of human thinking and
3. The need for the evolutionary information strategy for the human kind.
These also involve the reduction of information that Kåhre presented, conclusions drawn
from conclusions. The three new problems will now be discussed in more detail.
One of the main fields of philosophy is epistemology, study of information and
knowledge. It has been shown in this article that information is a wider concept and
involves other types of information such as the information of life found on DNA, the
technical information of computers, the mathematical information theory (Kåhre 2002),
entropy-negentropy duality, information of existence in the qubit and finally cybernetics.
A unified information theory is required similarly to how a unified energy concept was
required to merge diverged energy concepts of the 19th century. It also seems like the
systems theory could be a possible preliminary theory. The developed or systems theory,
Bertalanffy, discussed the limits of human knowledge widely in his main work General
Systems Theory. These limits are formed through biology; i.e. senses, brain size and
structure; through culture through the present paradigm of the science and finally
through language (Bertalanffy 2003, p. 222-250).
The other tools of the Popperian evolutionary induction theory employed in this article in
addition to its process are common sense and criticism. Out of these the common sense is
problematic for systems theory and complexity management in that sense that the
successful analysis of a complex and non-linear system is often out of reach37 for an
analysis done on pen and paper with common sense only. This is also evident based on
systems theory. When we are discussing the limits of human knowledge, we must deeply
understand what kind of a systemic and evolutionary entity a human being is. A
preliminary new theory for this problem of common sense being insufficient is the type of
science that can only be done on computers (Pagels 1989). One must thus raise
modelling, visualization and computational science on computers next to common sense
when one discusses complex systems.
On a global level the human kind can no longer afford evolutionary trials such as those
that have been done on smaller and lower level societies when there were more isolated
society units. Success of each of those trials was not important for the human kind. The
existence can similarly experiment with the human kind. If we destroy ourselves and a
37
E.g. the solution to the structure of the hydrogen bomb and ENIAC-computer, section 3.3.
significant part of other life on Earth, the development is likely to continue based on the
surviving elements as has happened during previous global catastrophes. It should be
noted that this next global catastrophe, possible self-caused, will just have a special
significance for the human kind. The preliminary theory to solve this problem is the
evolutionary and ecological information strategy of the global human kind.
This information strategy can be connected to the previous ones, i.e. the new science
paradigm and the general information theory. The time is limited. The solution is still
hopefully in our reach and the tools required involve the latest expansion of the human
kind, expanding the human intelligence and information with global computer-based
information technology. It’s most significant application is the management of
complexity, a new global level. At the same time systems theory demands a new kind of
humility from us that Galilee, Darwin and DNA-pioneers have already tried to teach us.38
38
This paragraph is the conclusion drawn from the conclusions of the conclusions, the third level in compression of this article, or the loss of information as presented by Kåhre or Enqvist.
References:
Ahvenainen Sakari. Sotilasfilosofi Quincy Wright ja sodankäynnin muutos –
Informaatioajan evolutiivinen ja systeeminen näkemys sodankäyntiin. Sotatieteellisen
seuran vuosikirja Tiede ja Ase 2008 (p. 134 – 159) (In Finnish) (Military Philosopher Quincy
Wright and the Change of Warfare – The Systemic and Evolutionary Point of View of the
Information Era towards Warfare. The Year Book 2008 of the Finnish Society of Military
Science)
Ahvenainen Sakari. 2004. Tekniikka sodankäynnin osana. Kirjassa: Puolustusjärjestelmien
kehitys - Sotatekninen arvio ja ennuste 2020 STAE 2020, osa 2. (sivut 11 – 56)
Pääesikunnan Sotatalousosasto. (pages 11 – 56) (in Finnish) (Technology as a Part of
Warfare. In a book: Development of Military Systems – Military Technological Assessment
and Prediction 2020, part 2. Finnish General Staff of the Armed Forces – Department of
Military Economy)
Airaksinen Timo. 2000. Tekniikan suuret kertomukset – Filosofinen raportti. 2003. (In
Finnish) (Great Stories of Technology – Philosophical Report)
Baeyer Hans Christian. 2004. Information – The New Language of Science. Phoenix
(paperback) (1st print 2003).
Bateson Gregory. 2000. Steps to Ecology of Mind. The University of Chicago Press (1st
print 1972).
Bertalanffy Ludwig von. 2003. General Systems Theory – Foundations, Development,
Applications. George Braziller. New York (1st print 1969).
Buzan Barry & Little Richard. 2000. International Systems in World History – Remaking the
Study of International Relations. Oxford University Press.
CD-Fakta, suomenkielinen (elektroninen) tietosanakirja. 2004. v 1.00. WSOY. (In Finnish)
(CD-Facta. Finnish (electronic) encyclopaedia 2004)
Diamond Jarred. 2007. Romahdus – Miten yhteiskunnat päättivät tuhoutua tai menestyä.
Terra Cognita. (In Finnish) (Collapse – How the Societies Chose to Collapse or to Survive)
Diamond Jarred. 2005. Tykit, taudit ja teräs – Ihmisten yhteiskuntien kohtalot. Terra
Cognita. In Finnish) (Guns, diseases and steel – The Destinies of the Civilisations of
Mankind)
Enqvist Kari. 2007. Monimutkaisuus – Elävän olemassaolomme perusta. WSOY. (In
Finnish) (Complexity – The Base of our Living Existence)
Kauffman Stuart. 1995. At Home in the Universe – The Search of the Laws of Self-
Organization and Complexity. Oxford University Press.
Kåhre Jan. 2002. The Mathematical Theory of Information. Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Lieberman Philip. 2000. Eeva puhui – Ihmisen kieli ja ihmisen evoluutio. Terra Cognita (in
Finnish) (Eva spoke – The Language and Evolution of Man)
Logan Robert K. 2007. The Extended Mind: The Emergence of Language, the Human Mind
and Culture. University of Toronto Press.
Maturana, Humberto R; Varela, Francisco. 1998. The Three of Knowledge – The Biological
Roots of Human Understanding. Shambala. London.
McNeill J. R. & McNeill W. H. 2006. Verkottunut ihmiskunta – Yleiskatsaus
maailmanhistoriaan. Vastapaino (in Finnish) (Networked Mankind – General Review to
the History of Mankind).
Niiniluoto Ilkka. 1999. Johdatus tieteenfilosofiaan – Käsitteen- ja teoriamuodostus. Otava
) (in Finnish) (Introduction to the Philosophy of Science – Idea and Theory Formation)
Pagels Heinz R. 1989. Dream of Reason – The Computer and the Rise of Sciences of
Complexity. Bantam Books. New York
Paloheimo Eero. 2002. Megaevoluutio. WSOY (in Finnish) (Megaevolution)
Popper Karl R. 1979. Objective Knowledge – An Evolutionary Approach. Clarendon Press
Oxford. Revised edition. (1st print 1972).
Pulkkinen Jarmo. 2004. Sudenluista supertietokoneeseen – Laskemisen kulttuurihistoria.
Art House In Finnish) (From wolf bones to super computers – Culture History of
Counting).
Roland Alex. 1997. Technology and War. American Diplomacy 1997.
(http://www.unc.edu/depts/ diplomat/AD_Issues/amdipl_4/roland.html) 3.5.2008.
SEP, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. 2005. Online encyclopaedia about philosophy)
http://plato. stanford.edu/ (11.7.2010).
Shannon Claude E. & Weaver Warren. 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication.
University of Illinois Press.
Skyttner Lars. 2005. General systems theory – Problems, perspectives, Practice. World
Scientific.
Smith Adam. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.
(http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN1.html#B.I, Ch.1, Of the Division of Labor
(4.7.2010)).
Smith J. M. & Szathmáry E. 1995. The Major Transitions in Evolution. Oxford University
Press.
Spinoza Benedictus de (suomentanut Vesa Oittinen). 1994. Etiikka (in Finnish).
Gaudeamus. (Ethics)
Stonier Tom. 1990. Information and the Internal Structure of the Universe. Springer-
Verlag. London.
Taylor Alastair M. 1973. Some Political Implications of the Forrester World System Model.
Kirjassa: Laszlo Erwin. World System – Models – Norms – Variations. International Library
of Systems Theory and Philosophy. Braziller. New York.
Wiener Norbert. 2000. Cybernetics: or Control and Communication in the Animal and the
Machine. The MIT Press Tenth printing. (1st print 1948).
Wright Quincy. 1942 (2 volumes) and 1983 (Reprint, 1 volume). A Study of War. The
University of Chicago Press.
