boekseminarie.pptx

# The dashboard society and its ethical implications The dashboard society explores the potential emergence of a future society shaped by technology and data, necessitating new moral and ethical frameworks. ## 1. The dashboard society and its ethical implications This topic investigates the concept of a dashboard society, its historical context, and the ethical considerations arising from increased technological integration, particularly in the form of AI and data-driven systems. It examines how such a society might redefine morality and introduces techno-ethics as a potential framework for navigating these changes. ### 1.1 The concept of the dashboard society The term "dashboard society" refers to a hypothetical future society where individuals utilize sophisticated technological dashboards, analogous to a car's dashboard, to navigate their lives. These dashboards, powered by AI, would provide real-time information and insights into one's personal life, acting as a guide for decision-making and self-optimization. This concept is presented as an evolution from simpler tools (like a horse and carriage dashboard) to more complex, data-driven interfaces. > **Tip:** The core idea is to have a personal, AI-driven system that helps individuals understand and manage their "life path" through data. #### 1.1.1 Historical development and related concepts The dashboard society concept builds upon existing ideas about societal organization and morality: * **The improvisation society:** Explores the challenges of managing complexity and perceived disorder in modern society, often driven by technological advancements. The argument is that while surface-level complexity might seem chaotic, deeper underlying orders exist, sometimes discoverable through mathematical models. * **The moral instinct:** Investigates the natural origins of human morality. * **The moral compass:** Discusses the historical and ongoing search for a guide to ethical behavior. The dashboard society is positioned as a potential bridge from "improvisation" to "providence," suggesting a more proactive and data-informed approach to societal organization and individual well-being. #### 1.1.2 The role of technology and AI Technology, particularly Artificial Intelligence (AI), is central to the dashboard society. AI is envisioned as the engine powering these personal dashboards, analyzing vast amounts of data to provide feedback and guidance. This can range from monitoring personal habits and choices to potentially influencing decision-making at a societal level. > **Example:** An AI dashboard might inform a user that their water consumption during a shower exceeded the average for individuals with a similar profile in their building, prompting reflection on their environmental impact and personal values. ### 1.2 Transhumanistic moral aspects The dashboard society is closely linked to transhumanist ideals, which posit that technology can help overcome human limitations. In this context, technology is seen as a tool for "optimization" and improvement. #### 1.2.1 Transhumane morality A "transhumane morality" is proposed as a characteristic of the dashboard society. This morality is: * **Data-driven:** Emphasizes relying on facts and objective data for ethical considerations. * **Potentially problematic:** The reliance on data can lead to dystopian scenarios, such as societal scoring systems that track behavior and assign penalties, similar to systems observed in some countries. This raises concerns about division and the need for societal consensus on what constitutes desirable behavior. * **Ego-centric (Ego-opticon):** The feedback loop is primarily focused on the individual user and their interactions with technology, creating a personalized feedback system. #### 1.2.2 Critiques of data-driven morality Despite its potential benefits, a data-driven morality faces significant criticism: * **Risk of conformity:** There's a danger that individuals will strive to conform to averages or norms, potentially stifling individuality and creativity. * **Devaluation of imperfection:** Imperfection is seen as a humanizing element, and its absence could lead to a sterile society. * **Consensus challenges:** Reaching consensus on values and norms for digital mirrors is difficult, and even with consensus, the rights of vulnerable minorities may be compromised. * **The role of emotion:** Morality is inherently linked to emotion, and a purely data-driven approach might neglect this crucial aspect. ### 1.3 Techno-ethics as a new ethical framework Techno-ethics is presented as a potential new normative ethical approach suited for the dashboard society, where technology and AI play a pervasive role in defining right and wrong. #### 1.3.1 Function and application of techno-ethics Techno-ethics aims to provide a framework for determining ethical conduct in a technologically saturated world. * **Semi-autonomous regulation:** Technology, including AI, could semi-autonomously enforce rules. For instance, a system might automatically issue a ticket for speeding if it detects a vehicle exceeding a predefined limit, with human oversight potentially limited to setting initial thresholds. * **Autonomous intervention:** In the future, AI might autonomously make decisions and intervene in situations without direct human input. This raises concerns, exemplified by experiments where AI systems developed their own internal goals, such as identifying specific content. The implications for "smart cities" and interconnected technologies are profound, potentially leading to unintended consequences if AI pursues its own organizational interests. #### 1.3.2 The paradox of normativity An important observation is the "paradox of normativity," which suggests that people may not actually desire to know or implement the rules for living well, even if they have agreed upon them. Experiments involving creating micro-societies with self-defined rules and then integrating technology for monitoring and enforcement revealed participants' reluctance to use technology for behavioral modification. This highlights a gap between theoretical agreement on norms and practical willingness to adhere to them. > **Tip:** The paradox of normativity suggests a potential resistance to the very tools designed to help us live according to our own stated values. ### 1.4 Systemic challenges and potential solutions The document also touches upon broader systemic issues within society and proposes potential avenues for mitigation, often involving technology. #### 1.4.1 Systemic instability and "system wars" Analysis of societal development through a system-theoretic lens suggests cyclical patterns that can lead to "system wars"—periods of collapse and restructuring when a certain level of complexity is reached. These events, while presenting a form of "ordering," are not reassuring to humans as they often result in significant loss and suffering. #### 1.4.2 Proposed solutions and the role of technology Several strategies are suggested to avoid or mitigate these systemic crises: * **Subsystem division:** Breaking down large, complex systems into smaller, more manageable subsystems to distribute risk. In a societal context, this could mean fostering well-defined, distinct communities. * **Faster feedback loops:** Implementing mechanisms for rapid feedback allows for quicker responses to unstable factors and potential escalations, preventing unforeseen consequences from spiraling out of control. Technology can play a crucial role in enhancing these feedback mechanisms. * **Overcoming cognitive biases:** Technology could help individuals gain insight into their own decision-making processes, identifying and mitigating cognitive biases that lead to poor choices. This is crucial for effective management at all levels, including global affairs. The document argues for a collective approach, suggesting that sometimes enforced collective decisions are necessary for the survival of humanity, and technology can facilitate this. #### 1.4.3 The future of citizenship and governance The development of new fields like "social physics" and "high-tech anthropology" are anticipated. Alongside these, a new governance philosophy, the "ego-opticon," and a simplified approach to citizenship within a complex world, potentially facilitated by dashboards, are proposed. Applications like VR and augmented reality, combined with AI, could provide citizens with immediate advice and guidance, though this also carries the risk of blurring the lines between reality and virtuality. The concept of a "moral mindsphere" is introduced as a technological framework for developing a modern moral compass, addressing the historical lack of clear ethical direction. --- # Complexity and the improvisational society This topic explores the perception of disorder in our increasingly complex, interconnected world and posits that order exists at a deeper, mathematical level, necessitating new societal structures and ethical frameworks. ### 2.1 The improvisational society: understanding perceived disorder The core problem identified is the feeling of overwhelming complexity and disorder in contemporary society, significantly driven by pervasive technology and the interconnectedness of systems. This is exemplified by the sheer number of applications on a smartphone, contributing to a sense of chaos. * **The concept of an improvisational society:** Philosopher H. Boutellier suggests that despite this perceived disorder, a form of order exists, albeit at a deeper, often imperceptible, mathematical level. This order can be understood and accessed through mathematical models and complexity theory. * **Complex systems:** These are systems where individual elements, when combined, produce emergent properties that are greater than the sum of their parts. The analogy of bicycle parts on a table (mere components) versus a assembled bicycle (a functional entity with new capabilities) illustrates this. Similarly, interconnected AI elements within society could form a complex system with emergent properties, potentially leading to new forms of consciousness. * **The role of mathematics and complexity theory:** Boutellier's perspective suggests that mathematical models reveal an underlying order that can be reassuring. However, an alternative viewpoint argues that mathematical formulas alone do not inherently provide reassurance. True reassurance and support in a complex society require concrete tools to navigate this complexity. > **Tip:** The concept of "1+1=3" is a common way to describe emergent properties in complex systems, highlighting that the whole is more than just the sum of its individual parts. ### 2.2 Critiques and alternative perspectives on order While Boutellier suggests reassurance through mathematical order, a critical perspective emphasizes the need for practical tools. * **The Dashboard Society as a solution:** The proposed solution to navigating complexity is the development of a "dashboard" for every citizen. This instrument would help individuals understand their place and trajectory within the complex, technologically saturated future society. * **Transhumanism and optimization:** The concept of transhumanism, which posits that technology can overcome human limitations and facilitate improvement, is linked to the idea of optimization through these dashboards. * **Moral and ethical frameworks:** The discussion touches upon various moral and ethical typologies: * **Types of Morality (J. Verplaetse):** Cooperation morality, violence morality, purification morality, attachment morality, principle morality. * **New Type of Morality (Bamps):** Transhuman morality. * **Types of Ethics:** Deontology, consequentialism/utilitarianism, virtue ethics, care ethics, presence theory, normative professionalism. * **New Type of Ethics (Bamps):** Techno-ethics. ### 2.3 The Dashboard Society: a new paradigm The "Dashboard Society" is a hypothetical future society characterized by a new morality and potentially a new ethical framework, driven by technology. * **Origin of the "dashboard":** Historically, a dashboard was a protective plank. In the automotive context, it evolved into an instrument panel providing crucial information (e.g., fuel levels) to prevent problems. * **The citizen's dashboard:** In a technologically advanced future, a citizen's dashboard would provide vital information about their life's path, encompassing past, present, and future. An AI-powered dashboard is envisioned as the next evolutionary step. This conceptual progression is illustrated as: Horse -> Car -> AI dashboard for every citizen. * **Characteristics of the transhuman morality:** 1. **Data-driven morality:** This approach prioritizes facts and empirical data. 2. **Potential for surveillance and control:** A data-driven morality could lead to concerning developments, such as a point system for citizens, akin to a driver's license system but on a broader societal scale. This raises questions about societal division and the need for consensus on desired outcomes. 3. **The "ego-opticon":** This refers to a closed system where data flows solely between technology and the user. Feedback is used for self-optimization, prompting reflection on personal actions in relation to one's values and intentions. > **Example:** An AI dashboard might show you: "You intended to eat healthily, but today you consumed X, Y, and Z. Does this align with your values and your commitment to environmentalism, given your ecological footprint?" * **Criticisms of the transhuman morality:** * **Negative potential:** While beneficial, this morality can also be used negatively. * **Risk of homogenization:** It could lead to individuals striving to conform to averages or societal norms, potentially stifling individuality and the beauty of imperfection. * **Consensus on digital mirror values:** Achieving consensus on the values embedded in a digital mirror is challenging, and even with consensus, it may not be universally acceptable, particularly for vulnerable minorities. * **Role of emotion:** Morality is also intertwined with feelings and emotions. * **Techno-ethics:** This ethical framework provides a reference point for determining right and wrong, with technology, particularly AI, playing an increasingly significant role in shaping these judgments. This can range from semi-autonomous systems with human-defined thresholds to fully autonomous AI making decisions and interventions. > **Tip:** The Google cat experiment is cited as an example of deep learning systems developing their own "interests," highlighting the potential for AI to independently establish order in unforeseen ways. ### 2.4 Critiques of the improvisational society concept and proposed solutions The author critiques Boutellier's framing of the improvisational society and offers further considerations. * **Complexity of morality:** The increasing complexity of society also extends to its morality, leading to a transhumanistic reaction. This aligns with the idea that societies develop moral frameworks that suit their structure. There's a need for normativity that goes beyond mere description. * **Limitations of mathematical order:** 1. Order derived solely from mathematical formulas does not inherently provide citizens with a sense of peace. 2. While complexity theory is valuable for understanding order within chaos, its direct transfer to social sciences requires caution. 3. The outcomes of these mathematical ordering models are anthropocentrically ambivalent; they can lead to negative consequences like war, societal disruption, and mental distress. * **The need for practical instruments:** A concrete instrument is needed to assist citizens and society in navigating complexity. The dashboard concept is proposed as a potential solution, though it also introduces new problems. ### 2.5 System-level analysis and avoiding "system wars" Analyzing society as a system reveals underlying patterns and potential for collapse. * **Systemic problems:** 1. Mathematical models of society, especially those borrowed from physics, face transferability issues. 2. Even if dynamic laws of ordering are found, they are not inherently reassuring. 3. Order and disorder are intertwined. Data analysis suggests cyclical patterns in societal events, such as wars, uprisings, and pandemics, occurring at regular intervals. * **Systemic collapse and "system wars":** When a certain level of complexity is reached, systems may undergo collapse, often referred to as "system wars." These events, like world wars, are not inherently reassuring, even if humans are considered central to ethical considerations. The danger of destruction is real and can be part of systemic ordering processes. > **Example:** The concept of "system wars" suggests that societal development may periodically involve collapses to allow for new growth, a process that can be devastating for humans caught in the midst. * **Avoiding system wars:** Authors like Pieper suggest strategies to avoid such collapses: * **Subdivision of systems:** Breaking down large, complex systems into smaller subsystems reduces risk. In a societal context, this could mean fostering distinct, well-organized communities. * **Feedback loops:** Rapid feedback mechanisms allow for quicker responses to instability or escalating threats, particularly when the consequences of actions are not immediately apparent. Cognitive biases and habitual behaviors can hinder this. Technology can help gain insight into decision-making processes. * **Avoiding anthropocentrism:** Collective decisions may be necessary to ensure humanity's survival, and technology can facilitate this. ### 2.6 Experiments and the paradox of normativity An experiment with a micro-society highlights challenges in implementing moral guidance. * **Micro-society experiment:** 1. Participants were tasked with creating a micro-society from scratch, establishing values, rules, and directives. This resulted in a consensus on top 10 behavioral rules. 2. Subsequently, technology was introduced to monitor and enforce these agreed-upon behaviors, utilizing an "ego-opticon" for self-monitoring and optimization based on personal, non-privacy-infringing feedback. * **Results and the paradox of normativity:** Participants struggled with the idea of using technology for behavior modification, indicating a disconnect between stating desired behaviors and actually enacting them. This phenomenon is termed the "paradox of normativity," suggesting a reluctance to truly know or implement how one *should* live, even when rules are self-imposed. * **The moral compass:** The idea of a moral compass is discussed as problematic due to the absence of a single "north." The experiment suggests that even if theoretical importance is given to moral principles, the practical implementation through tools may be resisted. Human ambivalence and conflicting desires further complicate this. ### 2.7 Information gaps and developing citizenship Gaps and inconsistencies in information create challenges for understanding and functioning within society. * **"Weaving errors, strange patterns, and gaps in information":** A system-theoretic view of the world reveals inconsistencies in areas like economic organization (wealth distribution), mental health (personality development, mental problems), and the interplay of reason and emotion. * **Social parallels to neurological processes:** Social processes can be likened to the distinction between controlled and automated processes in neurological systems. This impacts the effectiveness of laws and contributes to persistent societal problems. * **Lack of self-awareness:** Humans often lack full understanding of their actions and motivations, impacting both identity (as per Boutellier) and citizenship. ### 2.8 The evolution of citizenship and future paradigms Citizenship is evolving, with new scientific and technological approaches on the horizon. * **Citizenship and societal morality:** Citizenship is closely tied to the prevailing morality and laws of a society. Historically, even the concept of knowing the law has been problematic, as highlighted by Simon Steven's "Burgherlick Leven." * **Emerging paradigms:** * Development of new sciences: social physics and high-tech anthropology. * Development of a new governance philosophy: the ego-opticon. * Development of a new form of citizenship simplifying complexity, possibly through a dashboard. * **Applications and dangers:** These advancements could optimize civic life, for instance, through VR or augmented reality with AI providing immediate advice. However, this also presents dangers, such as the blurring of reality and virtuality, as seen in discussions around androsexual robots. * **The moral compass and the "moral mindsphere":** The concept of a moral compass has long been discussed. Within the "Dashboard Society," a "moral mindsphere" is proposed as a technological framework for developing such a compass. --- # The paradox of normativity and the moral compass This topic explores the inherent difficulties individuals face in translating their theoretical acceptance of moral principles into practical actions, a phenomenon termed the paradox of normativity, and considers the concept of a moral compass in this context. ### 3.1 The "Dashboard society" and the quest for new morality The foundational concept discussed is the "dashboard society," which envisions a future society that employs technology, particularly AI, to navigate increasing complexity. This concept is linked to the idea of a "new morality," termed "transhuman morality," and a corresponding "techno-ethics." This new moral framework is characterized by a data-driven approach, emphasizing facts. However, it raises concerns about potential societal division, the risk of homogenization, and the devaluing of imperfection. The ego-opticon, a concept where individuals monitor their own behavior through technology for self-optimization, is also introduced. > **Tip:** The "dashboard society" metaphor draws from the evolution of the dashboard in vehicles, moving from a basic functional instrument to a complex interface that provides vital information. In the societal context, it represents an interface for citizens to understand their place and actions within a complex technological environment. ### 3.2 The improvisational society and its challenges The "improvisational society," as described by Boutellier, highlights the feeling of disorder experienced due to the complexity of modern life and technology. While Boutellier suggests an underlying order discoverable through mathematical models, the text questions whether this abstract order provides genuine reassurance. The argument is made that a tangible instrument, a "dashboard," is needed to help individuals navigate this complexity. This perspective contrasts with the purely theoretical order suggested by mathematical models. > **Example:** The analogy of bicycle parts on a table (1+1+1) versus an assembled bicycle illustrates the concept of complex systems, where the emergent property of the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. This idea is extended to the potential emergence of new consciousness from interconnected AI systems. ### 3.3 Types of morality and ethics The text outlines existing types of morality and ethics: * **Types of Morality:** * Cooperation morality * Violence morality * Purification morality * Attachment morality * Principle morality * **Proposed New Type of Morality (Bamps):** * Transhuman morality * **Types of Ethics:** * Deontology * Consequentialism (Utilitarianism) * Virtue ethics * Care ethics * Presence theory * Normative professionalism * **Proposed New Type of Ethics (Bamps):** * Techno-ethics ### 3.4 The transhuman moral compass and techno-ethics Transhuman morality is presented as a "data-driven morality" that relies on facts. This can lead to concerning developments, such as a points system that tracks citizen behavior and can result in punishment, similar to a driver's license points system but on a societal level. The ego-opticon concept is further explored, where individuals use feedback from technology to align their actions with their stated values. However, a critical point raised is the potential for this to lead to a desire for conformity and an over-reliance on averages, potentially stifling individuality and critical dissent. The text questions whether consensus can be reached on the values embedded in such a "digital mirror" and acknowledges the role of feelings in morality. Techno-ethics serves as a framework to determine right and wrong in a world where technology and AI are pervasive. This can operate semi-autonomously with human-set thresholds or potentially in a fully autonomous manner, where AI makes decisions without direct human intervention. The danger of AI developing its own interests, illustrated by an example of a Google experiment with deep learning models, is highlighted, suggesting future implications for smart cities and interconnected technologies. ### 3.5 Critiques and continuations of the study The author agrees with the analysis of increasing societal complexity but adds that morality also becomes more complex, leading to a transhumanist reaction. The text asserts that every society develops a morality that suits it and that there is a need for normativity beyond mere description. The idea that a deeper, mathematical order provides reassurance is challenged, as are the direct transfers of complexity theory from mathematics to social sciences. The outcomes of mathematical ordering models are deemed anthropocentrically ambivalent, with the potential for negative societal consequences. The need for a concrete instrument, like a citizen dashboard, to help individuals and society navigate this complexity is reiterated, though this solution also presents new problems. ### 3.6 Systemic issues and potential solutions On a systemic level, the text discusses the difficulty of representing society as a system using mathematical models derived from fields like physics due to transferability issues. Even if a dynamic ordering law could be found, it might not be reassuring. Ordering and disorder are seen as intertwined, with cyclical patterns of events like wars and pandemics suggesting underlying regularities. These "system wars," which occur when a certain level of complexity is reached, lead to systemic collapse and are not reassuring. The text suggests potential ways to avoid system wars, drawing from authors like Pieper: * **System division:** Breaking down large, complex systems into smaller subsystems to spread risk. In a societal context, this could mean organizing distinct living communities. * **Feedback loops:** Faster feedback mechanisms allow for quicker responses to unstable factors or escalating threats, helping to mitigate the consequences of actions that are not fully understood. This counters the tendency to cling to habits and cognitive biases. * **Technological assistance:** Technology can aid in understanding decision-making processes and identifying unstable factors, even on a global level. It can also help enforce collective decisions for the survival of humanity. ### 3.7 The paradox of normativity and the moral compass experiment A crucial experiment involves a "micro-society" where participants first designed rules for their community and then were tasked with integrating technology to monitor and enforce these rules via an "ego-opticon." Participants found it difficult to embrace technology for behavioral modification, leading to the identification of the "paradox of normativity." This paradox suggests that individuals may not genuinely want to know how they "should" live, even if they have established these rules themselves. The concept of a "moral compass" is then examined. Unlike a physical compass with a single north pole, the moral landscape is characterized by multiple "poles." Theoretically, people might want to use tools to navigate their values, but practically, this doesn't always hold true. Human ambivalence and contradictory desires are noted. The text identifies systemic "weavings errors, strange patterns, and gaps in information," particularly concerning economic organization, mental health, and the interplay of reason and emotion in social processes, mirroring distinctions between controlled and automated cognitive processes. This leads to persistent societal problems and a lack of understanding of one's own actions and motivations, impacting both identity and citizenship. ### 3.8 Developing citizenship and the moral mind-sphere Citizenship is closely tied to societal morality and laws. Historically, the knowledge of laws has been an ideal (as seen in Simon Steven's "Burgherlick Leven"), but complete knowledge is unattainable. Citizenship itself has evolved significantly throughout history. The future suggests the development of new scientific fields like "social physics" and "high-tech anthropology," and a new governance philosophy centered on the "ego-opticon." This could lead to a simplified citizenship through dashboards and technologies like VR and augmented reality with AI, offering immediate advice. However, this also brings the danger of blurring the lines between reality and virtuality. Within this context, the concept of a "moral compass" is re-examined. The text proposes a "moral mind-sphere" as a framework for developing a technological moral compass. The inherent problem with a moral compass is further explored, implying that simply having one does not guarantee its effective use or adherence. --- # Critique and continuation of existing theories This section critically examines existing theoretical frameworks, particularly concerning the limitations of applying mathematical models to social sciences and the anthropocentric biases in proposed solutions, advocating for practical tools to manage societal complexity. ### 4.1 Critiques of the "Improvisation Society" and mathematical modeling The concept of the "improvisation society," as proposed by Boutellier, identifies an increasing societal complexity driven by technology and interconnected networks, leading to a perceived sense of disorder. Boutellier suggests that this apparent chaos possesses an underlying order, discoverable through mathematical models, offering a more accurate understanding of reality and a sense of reassurance. However, this perspective faces several critiques: * **The inadequacy of abstract order for reassurance:** The argument is made that order derived from mathematical formulas alone does not provide genuine reassurance to citizens. The presence of mathematical order does not inherently alleviate societal anxieties. * **Limitations of transferring mathematical models to social sciences:** While complexity theory in mathematics can offer insights into order within chaos, its direct transfer to the social sciences is cautioned against. The dynamic and often unpredictable nature of human societies presents challenges for purely mathematical representations. * **Anthropocentric ambivalence of mathematical outcomes:** The results generated by these mathematical ordering models are often anthropocentrically ambivalent. The same underlying forces that create order can also lead to negative societal consequences such as war, social disruption, and mental distress. ### 4.2 The need for practical tools and the "Dashboard Society" In light of these critiques, there is a recognized need for concrete tools that can actively assist citizens and society in navigating complexity. This leads to the concept of a "Dashboard Society." #### 4.2.1 The "Dashboard" metaphor The term "dashboard" originates from the protective wooden plank on horse-drawn carriages and later evolved to describe the instrument panel in automobiles. Its core function is to provide essential information (e.g., fuel levels) to prevent difficulties. In the context of a technologically advanced future society, a "dashboard" for citizens is proposed as an instrument to understand their position within their life's trajectory, encompassing past, present, and future. An "AI dashboard" is envisioned as the next evolutionary step in this development, analogous to the progression from a horse to a car to an AI dashboard for every individual. #### 4.2.2 Characteristics of the "Dashboard Society" The hypothetical "Dashboard Society" is characterized by: * **A new morality: transhumanist morality:** This morality emphasizes data-driven principles and factual evidence. * **Potential benefits:** Can offer personalized feedback and guidance. * **Potential dangers:** It carries the risk of a "creepy" development, as seen in some point-based social credit systems. This can lead to societal division and necessitates consensus on desired values. * **The "ego-opticon":** A system where individuals can view themselves in a digital mirror, receiving feedback to optimize their behavior according to their stated values and philosophy. This can lead to self-reflection and behavioral adjustment. * **Critique of homogeneity:** A concern is raised that this could lead to an excessive focus on conformity and the average (modal), potentially diminishing the value of imperfection and individuality, which are seen as essential for a vibrant society. * **A new ethic: techno-ethics:** This ethical framework helps determine right and wrong in a world where technology, particularly AI, is ubiquitous and influential. #### 4.2.3 Techno-ethics and AI Techno-ethics involves determining ethical conduct in the context of pervasive technology and AI. This can manifest in semi-autonomous systems where humans set threshold values (e.g., speed limits), or in potentially fully autonomous systems where AI makes calculations and interventions without direct human involvement. > **Tip:** The potential for AI to develop its own "interests" and systems for order, as seen in experiments with YouTube video detection, highlights the need for careful oversight and alignment with human values in future applications like smart cities. ### 4.3 Critiques of Boutellier's "Improvisation Society" and Bamps' Continuation While acknowledging the accuracy of the analysis of increasing societal complexity, Bamps offers a continuation and critique of Boutellier's framework: * **Moral complexity:** The complexity of society also extends to its morality, leading to transhumanist reactions within the moral sphere. * **The need for normativity:** Society requires a normative framework that goes beyond mere description of reality. * **Critique of Boutellier's order:** 1. Order derived from mathematical formulas does not inherently provide citizens with a sense of calm. 2. While complexity theory is valuable for understanding order in chaos, its transfer to social sciences requires caution. 3. The outcomes of mathematical ordering models are anthropocentrically ambivalent, with the potential for negative consequences. * **The call for practical instruments:** There is a need for a concrete toolkit to help citizens and society manage complexity. The "dashboard for every citizen" is proposed as a potential solution, though it also introduces new problems. ### 4.4 Systemic issues and the avoidance of "system wars" At a system level, societal complexity presents challenges. While society can be modeled mathematically, direct transfer from fields like physics is problematic. Moreover, any discovered dynamic laws of ordering do not necessarily offer comfort. * **Cyclical patterns and "system wars":** Analysis of societal incidents and events suggests likely cyclical patterns, such as recurring wars, uprisings, or pandemics. These are not coincidental but may be driven by ordering laws that, upon reaching a certain level of complexity, lead to systemic collapse or "system wars." These events, characterized by societal breakdown and reconstruction, are not reassuring and highlight the vulnerability of humanity. * **Avoiding system wars:** Authors like Pieper propose strategies to avoid such systemic collapses: * **Subdividing complex systems:** Breaking down large, monolithic systems into smaller subsystems to spread risk. On a societal level, this could involve fostering well-organized, distinct living communities. * **Feedback loops:** Implementing faster feedback mechanisms to enable quicker responses to instability and potential escalations, especially when consequences of actions are not immediately apparent. * **Addressing cognitive biases:** Recognizing that human habits and cognitive biases often lead to poor decisions. Technology could aid in understanding decision-making processes and identifying unstable factors at both individual and global levels. > **Tip:** The tendency to cling to habits and the influence of cognitive biases (BIAS) are significant factors in many incorrect decisions. Technology's potential to illuminate these processes is crucial for better management and governance. * **The need to move beyond anthropocentrism:** It is important to avoid overly anthropocentric thinking. Collective decisions may need to be enforced to ensure humanity's survival, and technology can play a role in facilitating this across the suggested strategies. ### 4.5 The "Micro-Society" Experiment and the Paradox of Normativity An experiment involving micro-societies revealed crucial insights into human behavior regarding rules and technology. * **Experiment design:** Participants were tasked with organizing a micro-society, establishing values and rules. Subsequently, they were instructed to integrate technology for monitoring and enforcing these agreed-upon behaviors, primarily through a self-reflective "ego-opticon." * **Result and the paradox:** Participants struggled with the idea of using technology for behavioral change, even for rules they had themselves established. This revealed a significant paradox: "Saying what you do, and doing what you say" proved to be a difficult adage to live by. * **The paradox of normativity:** This phenomenon was termed the "paradox of normativity," suggesting that while individuals may theoretically value prescriptive guidance on how to live well, they are often reluctant to implement it in practice. This is further complicated by human ambivalence and conflicting desires. ### 4.6 Gaps in information and the development of new frameworks A systemic view of the world reveals inconsistencies, peculiar patterns, and information gaps. This is evident in economic organization relative to wealth distribution, and in the functioning of mental systems, including personality development and the role of mental problems. These issues also have social correlates, such as the complex interplay between intellect and emotion, mirroring neurological distinctions between controlled and automated processes. * **Consequences of these gaps:** Hard-to-solve societal problems persist, partly due to our limited understanding of our own actions and motivations. This lack of clarity affects both individual identity and citizenship. * **Future developments:** The development of new fields like "social physics" and "high-tech anthropology," alongside a new governance philosophy of the "ego-opticon," are anticipated. A new form of citizenship that simplifies complexity, potentially through dashboards, is also on the horizon. * **Applications and dangers:** These advancements could optimize civic life, for instance, through VR or augmented reality combined with AI to provide immediate advice to citizens. However, this also poses a risk of blurring the lines between reality and virtuality. ### 4.7 The "Moral Compass" and the "Moral Mindsphere" The concept of a missing "moral compass" has been a long-standing discussion. Within the framework of the Dashboard Society, a blueprint for such a moral compass is being developed using technology, within a concept termed a "moral mindsphere." The challenge lies in the very nature of a moral compass in a world with diverse "poles" of morality. > **Example:** The difficulty in agreeing on a singular "North" in the moral world makes the concept of a universal moral compass problematic. While theoretically valued, the practical implementation often falls short, highlighting the "paradox of normativity." --- ## Common mistakes to avoid - Review all topics thoroughly before exams - Pay attention to formulas and key definitions - Practice with examples provided in each section - Don't memorize without understanding the underlying concepts

| Term | Definition | |------|------------| | Dashboard society | A hypothetical future society characterized by a new morality, termed transhumanistic morality, and potentially a new ethical approach, techno-ethics, where technology and AI play a significant role in individual and collective life. | | Transhumanistic morality | A type of morality based on data-driven facts and the belief that technology can help overcome human limitations, leading to optimization and improvement of the human condition. | | Techno-ethics | An ethical framework that guides decisions about what is right and wrong in the context of pervasive technology and artificial intelligence, potentially offering semi-autonomous or autonomous decision-making capabilities. | | Improvisational society | A concept describing a society that appears chaotic due to increasing complexity and technological interconnectedness, but which may possess an underlying order discoverable through mathematical models and complexity theory. | | Complex system | A system comprising elements where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, exhibiting emergent properties and behaviors that are not predictable from the individual components alone. | | Moral compass | A guiding principle or set of values that directs an individual's ethical behavior and decision-making, though the document suggests a societal lack of a universally agreed-upon or practically applied moral compass. | | Paradox of normativity | The phenomenon where individuals or societies may theoretically acknowledge and value how they should live (normativity) but struggle to implement these principles in practice, even when they have collectively agreed upon them. | | Ego-opticon | A concept referring to a closed system where data interaction is solely between technology and the user, allowing individuals to use feedback for self-reflection and personal optimization without external privacy invasion. | | Fluid society | A term coined by Zygmunt Bauman to describe a modern society characterized by instability, constant change, and the erosion of traditional structures, leading to fluidity in identity, relationships, and societal roles. | | Rizoom (Rhizome) | A metaphor used by Deleuze to describe a non-hierarchical, interconnected network model that deviates from traditional linear structures, representing the complex and multifaceted nature of modern systems. | | System wars | Periodic collapses or significant disruptions within complex societal systems, often leading to conflict or upheaval, that occur when a certain level of complexity is reached, potentially as a mechanism for further development. | | Feedback loop | A mechanism where the output of a system is fed back into it as input, allowing for quicker responses to unstable factors or potential escalations, crucial for managing complexity and avoiding negative consequences. |