Ryan Kuder brought up Teilhard, the Omega Point and the Noosphere at the Social Media Club, so it wasn't really a detour yesterday after all.
I think it's fascinating that a Jesuit Priest, Teilhard, was heavily involved in Paleontology and embraced evolution into his own framework to arrive at a concept of a shared mind or noosphere back in the 30s. Oh yes, he had his issues with the church...
Today, a rudimentary example of the power of the net can be seen with the oft maligned Twitter. Beyond simple "what am I doing" updates, Shel Israel is able to use Twitter for real-time restaurant recommendations, and research pointers. While this sounds like a nice convenience, no big deal, it's a rudimentary example of tapping into local domain knowledge while he is traveling. This exhibits just a taste of the power of things to come, for those who are tightly networked together.
Imagine legal expertise being on tap as needed, medical, financial, etc. Each member of the group benefits from the specific expertise of domain experts. The noosphere is the endpoint of that merging, expanding the base of knowledge. I boldly predict that the next level of networking will support these interactions. (probably already here but I'm just not aware of them!)
The noosphere includes a spiritual element as well, and the darker wolf in sheep's clothing Shel vs. Loren is a good example for that prerequisite, for in order for the noosphere to arrive, a simultaneous need for better reconciliation and attenuated aggression is needed. When energy, creativity and hostility are wasted on a feud (a mini- "Hell Realm" from Buddhism), it prevents the networked benefits from fully applying, despite the perceived entertainment value. The real loss is to the rest of the network, from the lost or diverted participation of talented individuals. As Teilhard writes, the connectedness of individuals should induce "the pervasion of the human mass by the power of sympathy". Not quite there yet...but this is one particular social aspect of the singularity that has been largely passed over in the rush to detail the technology advances. I'd like to look at this aspect in more detail in future posts.
Interesting that many respond to the singularity in terms of predictions that have failed to materialize, (former AI predictions cited here!). That's just the point. So a prediction that we will be unable to predict is perhaps circular. Taking the case of Teilhard with the "Omega Point" and H.G. Welles with the "World Brain", their predictions appear to be prescient, (although the timing of their fulfillment was wisely not included in their predictions).
While it is amazing that they were accurate in their predictions 80 years back, are there predictions being put forth today that will also seem prescient in another 80 years? Given accelerated change, it is argued that it is easier to foresee earlier in the curve, before the knee is hit.
