A talk at the 1st Constructed Complexities workshop on "" at the University of Surrey, July 2013. http://constructedcomplexities.wordpress.com/
-----------------------
It is well established that many aspects of human cognition are context-dependent, including: memory, preferences, language, perception, reasoning and emotion. What seems to occur is that the kind of situation is recognised and information stored with respect to that. This means that when faced with a similar situation, beliefs, expectations, habits, defaults, norms, procedures etc. that are relevant to the context can be brought to bear. I will call this mental correlate of the kind of situation the “context”. Thus the mental context frames conscious thinking by preferentially providing the relevant information making learning and reasoning practical, as well as allowing relatively “crisp” and logical thought within this frame. This is the “context heuristic” that seems to have been built into us by the process of evolution.
This recognition seems to occur in a rich, fuzzy and largely unconscious manner, which means that it can be hard to give distinct identities and talk about these contexts. It can thus be problematic to talk about “the” context in many cases, and indeed one cannot assume that different people are thinking about the same situation as (effectively) the same context from a third party perspective. Indeed one of the powerful aspects of the context heuristic is that it allows us flip between mental contexts allowing us to thing about a situation or problem from different contextual frames. Due to our facility at automatically identifying context and the indefinable way it is recognised it is hard for people to retrieve what is or signals a context (in contrast to what is relevant when recognised). However, they do seem to be sensitive to when they have the wrong context.
Thus learning is not just a matter of recording beliefs, expectations, habits, defaults, norms, procedures etc. but also a matter of learning to recognise the kinds of situation to organise their remembrance. A large part of our world is humanly constructed, or common (e.g. shared human emotions or a shared environment). Our classification of these kinds of situation is thus heavily coordinated among people of the same society – we learn to recognise situations in effectively the same way and hence remember the relevant beliefs, expectations, habits, defaults, norms, procedures etc. for the same kinds of situation. A shared body of knowledge (in its wisest sense) that constitutes a culture does not only include the foreground beliefs, norms etc. but also how the world is divided into kinds of situation. Some of these contexts will have universal roots, such as the emotion of fear or being hungry, and thus might be approximately the same across cultures (without transmission), others will be specific to cultures.
The
A talk given to the "Social.Path" workshop at the University of Surrey, June 2014.
It is well established that many human abilities are context-dependent, including: language, preference judgement, memory, reasoning, learning and perception. This is usually taken as a negative – that there will be limits on our understanding and modelling of these abilities. However, what is not always appreciated is that context-dependency can be a powerful tool in social coordination and communication. This paper pulls together several theories about the cognition of context, and presents a computational model of context-dependency. It then sketches its role in social communication, coordination and embedding. It looks at some of the approaches to dealing with context in the computer science and social science literature and concludes that none of these squarely faces the problem of context dependency. This points towards a substantial gap in the research and hence a future programme.
Social competence, mental health and disablity
SGSCC (Serious Games for Social & Creativity Competence) project organised a dedicated workshop “Social competences & creativity as a stepping stone towards personal growth, social development and employability” on 17 December 2014 in Brussels, Belgium at VLEVA premises, focusing on the importance of social skills and creativity for people with disabilities which is fundamental to both social integration and professional self-realisation.
http://games4competence.eu/
The SGSCC (Serious Games for Social & Creativity Competencies – 531134-LLP-1-2012-1-BG-KA3-KA3MP) project has been partially funded under the Lifelong Learning program. This web site reflects the views only of the author(s), and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
The Scandal of Generic Models in the Social SciencesBruce Edmonds
Despite overwhelming evidence that many aspects of human cognition are highly context-dependent, generic (that is models that are supposed to hold across different contexts) abound, including: most models of rationality and decision making, and most models that are based on statistically fitting equations to data. Context itself, especially social context, has been systematically by-passed by both quantitative and qualitative researchers. Quantitative researchers claim to be only interested in those patterns that are cross-context. Qualitative researchers only deal with accounts within context. Neither tackle the nature of context itself: how it works, in what ways it impacts upon behaviour.
Dealing with context is notoriously hard: the concept is slippery and its effects hard to identify. However, I claim it is not impossible to research. A combination of rich datasets and newer computational methods could help (a) identify some social contexts and (b) relate what happens within a context to how contexts are collectively constructed. Such a step could help relate quantitative and qualitative evidence in a way that is better founded and hence, perhaps, open the way to the unification of the social sciences as a coherent discipline.
A talk given to the "Social.Path" workshop at the University of Surrey, June 2014.
It is well established that many human abilities are context-dependent, including: language, preference judgement, memory, reasoning, learning and perception. This is usually taken as a negative – that there will be limits on our understanding and modelling of these abilities. However, what is not always appreciated is that context-dependency can be a powerful tool in social coordination and communication. This paper pulls together several theories about the cognition of context, and presents a computational model of context-dependency. It then sketches its role in social communication, coordination and embedding. It looks at some of the approaches to dealing with context in the computer science and social science literature and concludes that none of these squarely faces the problem of context dependency. This points towards a substantial gap in the research and hence a future programme.
Social competence, mental health and disablity
SGSCC (Serious Games for Social & Creativity Competence) project organised a dedicated workshop “Social competences & creativity as a stepping stone towards personal growth, social development and employability” on 17 December 2014 in Brussels, Belgium at VLEVA premises, focusing on the importance of social skills and creativity for people with disabilities which is fundamental to both social integration and professional self-realisation.
http://games4competence.eu/
The SGSCC (Serious Games for Social & Creativity Competencies – 531134-LLP-1-2012-1-BG-KA3-KA3MP) project has been partially funded under the Lifelong Learning program. This web site reflects the views only of the author(s), and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
The Scandal of Generic Models in the Social SciencesBruce Edmonds
Despite overwhelming evidence that many aspects of human cognition are highly context-dependent, generic (that is models that are supposed to hold across different contexts) abound, including: most models of rationality and decision making, and most models that are based on statistically fitting equations to data. Context itself, especially social context, has been systematically by-passed by both quantitative and qualitative researchers. Quantitative researchers claim to be only interested in those patterns that are cross-context. Qualitative researchers only deal with accounts within context. Neither tackle the nature of context itself: how it works, in what ways it impacts upon behaviour.
Dealing with context is notoriously hard: the concept is slippery and its effects hard to identify. However, I claim it is not impossible to research. A combination of rich datasets and newer computational methods could help (a) identify some social contexts and (b) relate what happens within a context to how contexts are collectively constructed. Such a step could help relate quantitative and qualitative evidence in a way that is better founded and hence, perhaps, open the way to the unification of the social sciences as a coherent discipline.
Social complexity and coupled Socio-Ecological SystemsBruce Edmonds
Talk at the Stockholm workshop on "Analyzing the dynamics of social-ecological systems: Towards a typology of social-ecological interactions", SES-LINK project meeting - Stockholm, June 5-6, 2014.
Personal understanding and publically useful knowledge in Social SimulationBruce Edmonds
There are two different ways in which social simulation can help a researcher - by honing their intution about how certain models and mechanisms (roughly what Polanyi meant by "Personal Knowledge") and in demonstrating hypotheses that might be interesting and relevant to other researchers in the field (roughly what Popper meant by "Objective Knowledge"). Both are valid goals and useful, indeed I would argue both are essential to real progress in social simulation. However, too often, these are conflated and confused, to the detriment of social simulation. This talk aims to clearly distringuish between the two modes, including the different ways of obtaining them, their different (and complementary) uses as well as when and how these are appropriate to communicate to others. In short a "model" of simulation usefullness is outlined with implications for the method of social simulation.
Social Context
An invited talk at the 2018 Surrey Sociology Conference, Barnett Hill, Surrey, November 2018.
Although there is much evidence that context is crucial to much human cognition and social behaviour, it remains a difficult area to research. In much social science research it is either by-passed or ignored. In some qualitative research context is almost deified with any level of generalisation across contexts being left to the reader. At the other extreme, some qualitative research restricts itself to patterns that are generally detectable - that is the patterns that are left when one aggregates over many different contexts. Context is often used as a 'dustbin concept' to which otherwise unexplained variation is attributed.
This talk looks at some of the ways social context might be actively represented, understood and researched. Firstly the ideas of cognitive then social context are distinguished. Then some possible approaches to researching this are discussed, including: agent-based simulation, a context-sensitive analysis of narrative data and machine learning.
Mundane Rationality as a basis for modelling and understanding behaviour wit...Bruce Edmonds
The paper starts out by pointing out the context-dependency of human cognition and behaviour, pointing out that (a) human behaviour can change sharply across contexts but also that (b) behaviour within a given context can sometimes be described in relatively simple terms . It thus argues against a grand theory of rationality that seeks to explain and/or generate human behaviour across of contexts. Rather it suggests an alternative approach whereby "mundane" accounts of rationality are used which are specific to a limited number of contexts. Such an approach has its particular difficulties, but allows the integration of narrative accounts of possible behaviours using a variety of social mechanisms at the micro level with comparisons with aggregate macro data. It is noted that in the resulting simulations that equilibria are simply not relevant within plausible timescales.
How social simulation could help social science deal with contextBruce Edmonds
An invited plenary at Social Simluation 2018, Stockholm.
This points out how context-sensitivity is fundamental to much human social behaviour, but largely bypassed or ignored in social science. I more formal social science, it is usual to assume or fit universal models, even if this covers a lot of different contexts. In qualitative social science context is almost deified, and any generalisation across contexts is passed on to those that learn from it. Agent-based modelling allows for context-sensitive models to be developed and hence the role of context explored and better understood. The talk discussed a framework for analysing narrative text using the Context-Scope-Narrative-Elements (CSNE) framework. It also illustrates a cognitive model that allows for context-dependent knowledge to be implemented wthin an agent in a simulation. The talk ends with a plea to avoid uncecessary or premature summarisation (using averages etc.).
Towards a Context-Sensitive Structure for Behavioural Rules (Context, Scope,...Bruce Edmonds
Slides given at an informal workshop on "Using Qualitative Evidence to inform Behavioural Rules suitable for an agent-based simulation" see http://cfpm.org/qual2rule/
Week 2 - AssignmentAspects of Social Understanding[WLOsnicolleszkyj
Week 2 - Assignment
Aspects of Social Understanding
[WLOs: 3] [CLOs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Prior to beginning work on this assignment, review the Week 1 and Week 2 textbook readings: Chapters 1 through 4 and Chapter 12, perform your own research, and watch the following videos:
How do we know what is true? (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
How do we know what we know? Audi (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
How do we know what we know? Sullivan (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
Knowledge vs thinking - Neil deGrasse Tyson (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
An important aspect of public sociology is gaining an understanding of our social world and coming to informed conclusions based on what we know. Social problems can often occur due to a clash of difference in social understanding, and so sociologists can gain considerable value in understanding the nuances of different perspectives. These perspectives can also change over time as society evolves and individuals develop. The importance of this assignment is to acknowledge that there are varied forms of knowing that form our perspectives in society and presenting how these varied forms of knowing have impacts and value. This assignment is a “thought-piece” that requires you to academically support your ideas, as a presentation of your own developing and evolving social understanding.
In your paper, include the following components:
Elements of Social Understanding (1-2 pages)
Explain the concept of “epistemology” or “how we know what we know.”
Discuss the following elements of social understanding: evidence, theory, value, and beliefs.
Acquisition of Social Understanding (1-2 pages)
Explain the concept of “reflexivity” in social understanding.
Discuss how humans can gain each element of social understanding or how elements are formed.
Defend the importance each element of social understanding has on human knowledge.
Value to Society (1-2 pages)
Summarize how the elements of social understanding work together.
Justify the potential impact if citizens in society do or do not embrace all elements of social understanding.
...
Capturing the Implicit – an iterative approach to enculturing artificial agentsBruce Edmonds
At the Computers as Social Agents workshop @ IVA2013, Edinburgh, August 2013
Abstract:
Artificial agents of many kinds increasingly intrude into the human sphere. SatNavs, help systems, automatic telephone answering systems, and even robotic vacuum cleaners are positioned to do more than exist on the side-lines as potential tools. These devices, intentionally or not, often act in a way that in- trudes into our social life. Virtual assistants pop up offering help when an error is encountered, the robot vacuum cleaner starts to clean while one is having tea with the vicar, and automated call handling systems refuse to let you do what you want until you have answered a list of questions. This paper addresses the problem of how to produce artificial agents that are less socially inept. A distinction is drawn between things which are operationally available to us as human conversational- ists and the things that are available to a third party (e.g. a scientists or engineer) in terms of an explicit explanation or representation. The former implies a de- tailed skill at recognising and negotiating the subtle and context-dependent rules of human social interaction, but this skill is largely unconscious – we do not know how we do it, in the sense of the later kind of understanding. The paper proposes a process that bootstraps an incomplete formal functional understanding of hu- man social interaction via an iterative approach using interaction with a native. Each cycle of this iteration entering and correcting a narrative summary of what is happening in recordings of interactions with the automatic agent. This interac- tion is managed and guided through an “annotators’ work bench” that uses the current functional understanding to highlight when user input is not consistent with the current understanding, suggesting alternatives and accepting new sug- gestions via a structured dialogue. This relies on the fact that people are much better at noticing when dialogue is ”wrong” and in making alternate suggestions than theorising about social language use. This, we argue, would allow the itera- tive process to build up understanding and hence CA scripts that fit better within the human social world. Some preliminary work in this direction is described.
Towards Integrating Everything (well at least: ABM, data-mining, qual&quant d...Bruce Edmonds
A talk given at the SKIN3 workshop in Budapest, May 2014 (http://cress.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SKIN/events/third-skin-workshop)
Innovation or other policy-orientated research has tended to take one of two strategies: (a) work with high-level abstractions of macro-level variables or (b) focus on micro-level aspects/areas with simpler mechanisms. Whilst (a) may provide some comfort in the form of forecasts, these are almost useless for policy since they can only be relied upon if nothing much has changed. Although approach (b) may produce some interesting studies which show how complex even small aspects of the involved processes are, with maybe interesting emergent effects, it provides only a small part of the overall picture and little to guide decision making.
Rather, I (with others) suggest a different approach. Instead of aiming to produce some kind of "adequate" theory (usually in the form of a model along with its interpretation), that instead we aim at integrating different kinds of evidence and find the best ways to present these to policy makers in order to help policy-makers 'drive' by providing views of what is happening. Thus (1) utilising the greatest possible range of evidence and (2) providing rich, relevant but synthetic views of this evidence to the policy makers. Any projections should be 'possibilistic' rather than 'probabilistic' - showing the different ways in which social processes might unfold, and help inform the analysis of risks. The talk looks at some of the ways in which this might be done, to integrate micro-level narrative data, time-series data, survey data, network data, big data using a variety of techniques. In this view, models do not disappear, but rather have a different purpose and hence be developed and checked differently.
This shift will involve a change in attitude and approach from both researchers and those in the policy world. Researchers will have to give up the playing for general or abstract theory, satisfying themselves with more gentle and incremental abstraction, whilst also accepting and working with a greater variety of kinds of evidence. They will also have to stop 'conning' the policy world with forecasts, and refuse to provide these as more dangerous than helpful. The policy world will have to stop looking for a magic 'crutch' that will reduce uncertainty (or provide justification for chosen policies) and move towards greater openness with both data and models.
In this session we had a look at two additional theories of learning: constructivism and connectivism, to find out what they say about how we learn now and in the future.
Additional readings include: Child Power: Keys to the New Learning of the Digital Century by Seymor Papert and Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age by George Seimens.
Your homework was to blog your answer to the following question: Why do some people not consider Connectivism to be a learning theory?
Staging Model Abstraction – an example about political participationBruce Edmonds
A presentation at the workshop on ABM and Theory (From Cases to General Principles), Hannover, July 2019
This reports on work where we started with a complex, but evidence driven model, and then modelled that model sto understand and abstract from it. As reported in the paper:
Lafuerza LF, Dyson L, Edmonds B, McKane AJ (2016) Staged Models for Interdisciplinary Research. PLoS ONE, 11(6): e0157261. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0157261
Some supporting slides on modelling purposes and pitfalls when using ABM in policy contexts to accompany discussion on Modelling Pitfalls at the ESSA Summer School, Aberdeen, June 2019
More Related Content
Similar to Context dependency and the development of social institutions
Social complexity and coupled Socio-Ecological SystemsBruce Edmonds
Talk at the Stockholm workshop on "Analyzing the dynamics of social-ecological systems: Towards a typology of social-ecological interactions", SES-LINK project meeting - Stockholm, June 5-6, 2014.
Personal understanding and publically useful knowledge in Social SimulationBruce Edmonds
There are two different ways in which social simulation can help a researcher - by honing their intution about how certain models and mechanisms (roughly what Polanyi meant by "Personal Knowledge") and in demonstrating hypotheses that might be interesting and relevant to other researchers in the field (roughly what Popper meant by "Objective Knowledge"). Both are valid goals and useful, indeed I would argue both are essential to real progress in social simulation. However, too often, these are conflated and confused, to the detriment of social simulation. This talk aims to clearly distringuish between the two modes, including the different ways of obtaining them, their different (and complementary) uses as well as when and how these are appropriate to communicate to others. In short a "model" of simulation usefullness is outlined with implications for the method of social simulation.
Social Context
An invited talk at the 2018 Surrey Sociology Conference, Barnett Hill, Surrey, November 2018.
Although there is much evidence that context is crucial to much human cognition and social behaviour, it remains a difficult area to research. In much social science research it is either by-passed or ignored. In some qualitative research context is almost deified with any level of generalisation across contexts being left to the reader. At the other extreme, some qualitative research restricts itself to patterns that are generally detectable - that is the patterns that are left when one aggregates over many different contexts. Context is often used as a 'dustbin concept' to which otherwise unexplained variation is attributed.
This talk looks at some of the ways social context might be actively represented, understood and researched. Firstly the ideas of cognitive then social context are distinguished. Then some possible approaches to researching this are discussed, including: agent-based simulation, a context-sensitive analysis of narrative data and machine learning.
Mundane Rationality as a basis for modelling and understanding behaviour wit...Bruce Edmonds
The paper starts out by pointing out the context-dependency of human cognition and behaviour, pointing out that (a) human behaviour can change sharply across contexts but also that (b) behaviour within a given context can sometimes be described in relatively simple terms . It thus argues against a grand theory of rationality that seeks to explain and/or generate human behaviour across of contexts. Rather it suggests an alternative approach whereby "mundane" accounts of rationality are used which are specific to a limited number of contexts. Such an approach has its particular difficulties, but allows the integration of narrative accounts of possible behaviours using a variety of social mechanisms at the micro level with comparisons with aggregate macro data. It is noted that in the resulting simulations that equilibria are simply not relevant within plausible timescales.
How social simulation could help social science deal with contextBruce Edmonds
An invited plenary at Social Simluation 2018, Stockholm.
This points out how context-sensitivity is fundamental to much human social behaviour, but largely bypassed or ignored in social science. I more formal social science, it is usual to assume or fit universal models, even if this covers a lot of different contexts. In qualitative social science context is almost deified, and any generalisation across contexts is passed on to those that learn from it. Agent-based modelling allows for context-sensitive models to be developed and hence the role of context explored and better understood. The talk discussed a framework for analysing narrative text using the Context-Scope-Narrative-Elements (CSNE) framework. It also illustrates a cognitive model that allows for context-dependent knowledge to be implemented wthin an agent in a simulation. The talk ends with a plea to avoid uncecessary or premature summarisation (using averages etc.).
Towards a Context-Sensitive Structure for Behavioural Rules (Context, Scope,...Bruce Edmonds
Slides given at an informal workshop on "Using Qualitative Evidence to inform Behavioural Rules suitable for an agent-based simulation" see http://cfpm.org/qual2rule/
Week 2 - AssignmentAspects of Social Understanding[WLOsnicolleszkyj
Week 2 - Assignment
Aspects of Social Understanding
[WLOs: 3] [CLOs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
Prior to beginning work on this assignment, review the Week 1 and Week 2 textbook readings: Chapters 1 through 4 and Chapter 12, perform your own research, and watch the following videos:
How do we know what is true? (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
How do we know what we know? Audi (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
How do we know what we know? Sullivan (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
Knowledge vs thinking - Neil deGrasse Tyson (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
An important aspect of public sociology is gaining an understanding of our social world and coming to informed conclusions based on what we know. Social problems can often occur due to a clash of difference in social understanding, and so sociologists can gain considerable value in understanding the nuances of different perspectives. These perspectives can also change over time as society evolves and individuals develop. The importance of this assignment is to acknowledge that there are varied forms of knowing that form our perspectives in society and presenting how these varied forms of knowing have impacts and value. This assignment is a “thought-piece” that requires you to academically support your ideas, as a presentation of your own developing and evolving social understanding.
In your paper, include the following components:
Elements of Social Understanding (1-2 pages)
Explain the concept of “epistemology” or “how we know what we know.”
Discuss the following elements of social understanding: evidence, theory, value, and beliefs.
Acquisition of Social Understanding (1-2 pages)
Explain the concept of “reflexivity” in social understanding.
Discuss how humans can gain each element of social understanding or how elements are formed.
Defend the importance each element of social understanding has on human knowledge.
Value to Society (1-2 pages)
Summarize how the elements of social understanding work together.
Justify the potential impact if citizens in society do or do not embrace all elements of social understanding.
...
Capturing the Implicit – an iterative approach to enculturing artificial agentsBruce Edmonds
At the Computers as Social Agents workshop @ IVA2013, Edinburgh, August 2013
Abstract:
Artificial agents of many kinds increasingly intrude into the human sphere. SatNavs, help systems, automatic telephone answering systems, and even robotic vacuum cleaners are positioned to do more than exist on the side-lines as potential tools. These devices, intentionally or not, often act in a way that in- trudes into our social life. Virtual assistants pop up offering help when an error is encountered, the robot vacuum cleaner starts to clean while one is having tea with the vicar, and automated call handling systems refuse to let you do what you want until you have answered a list of questions. This paper addresses the problem of how to produce artificial agents that are less socially inept. A distinction is drawn between things which are operationally available to us as human conversational- ists and the things that are available to a third party (e.g. a scientists or engineer) in terms of an explicit explanation or representation. The former implies a de- tailed skill at recognising and negotiating the subtle and context-dependent rules of human social interaction, but this skill is largely unconscious – we do not know how we do it, in the sense of the later kind of understanding. The paper proposes a process that bootstraps an incomplete formal functional understanding of hu- man social interaction via an iterative approach using interaction with a native. Each cycle of this iteration entering and correcting a narrative summary of what is happening in recordings of interactions with the automatic agent. This interac- tion is managed and guided through an “annotators’ work bench” that uses the current functional understanding to highlight when user input is not consistent with the current understanding, suggesting alternatives and accepting new sug- gestions via a structured dialogue. This relies on the fact that people are much better at noticing when dialogue is ”wrong” and in making alternate suggestions than theorising about social language use. This, we argue, would allow the itera- tive process to build up understanding and hence CA scripts that fit better within the human social world. Some preliminary work in this direction is described.
Towards Integrating Everything (well at least: ABM, data-mining, qual&quant d...Bruce Edmonds
A talk given at the SKIN3 workshop in Budapest, May 2014 (http://cress.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SKIN/events/third-skin-workshop)
Innovation or other policy-orientated research has tended to take one of two strategies: (a) work with high-level abstractions of macro-level variables or (b) focus on micro-level aspects/areas with simpler mechanisms. Whilst (a) may provide some comfort in the form of forecasts, these are almost useless for policy since they can only be relied upon if nothing much has changed. Although approach (b) may produce some interesting studies which show how complex even small aspects of the involved processes are, with maybe interesting emergent effects, it provides only a small part of the overall picture and little to guide decision making.
Rather, I (with others) suggest a different approach. Instead of aiming to produce some kind of "adequate" theory (usually in the form of a model along with its interpretation), that instead we aim at integrating different kinds of evidence and find the best ways to present these to policy makers in order to help policy-makers 'drive' by providing views of what is happening. Thus (1) utilising the greatest possible range of evidence and (2) providing rich, relevant but synthetic views of this evidence to the policy makers. Any projections should be 'possibilistic' rather than 'probabilistic' - showing the different ways in which social processes might unfold, and help inform the analysis of risks. The talk looks at some of the ways in which this might be done, to integrate micro-level narrative data, time-series data, survey data, network data, big data using a variety of techniques. In this view, models do not disappear, but rather have a different purpose and hence be developed and checked differently.
This shift will involve a change in attitude and approach from both researchers and those in the policy world. Researchers will have to give up the playing for general or abstract theory, satisfying themselves with more gentle and incremental abstraction, whilst also accepting and working with a greater variety of kinds of evidence. They will also have to stop 'conning' the policy world with forecasts, and refuse to provide these as more dangerous than helpful. The policy world will have to stop looking for a magic 'crutch' that will reduce uncertainty (or provide justification for chosen policies) and move towards greater openness with both data and models.
In this session we had a look at two additional theories of learning: constructivism and connectivism, to find out what they say about how we learn now and in the future.
Additional readings include: Child Power: Keys to the New Learning of the Digital Century by Seymor Papert and Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age by George Seimens.
Your homework was to blog your answer to the following question: Why do some people not consider Connectivism to be a learning theory?
Staging Model Abstraction – an example about political participationBruce Edmonds
A presentation at the workshop on ABM and Theory (From Cases to General Principles), Hannover, July 2019
This reports on work where we started with a complex, but evidence driven model, and then modelled that model sto understand and abstract from it. As reported in the paper:
Lafuerza LF, Dyson L, Edmonds B, McKane AJ (2016) Staged Models for Interdisciplinary Research. PLoS ONE, 11(6): e0157261. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0157261
Some supporting slides on modelling purposes and pitfalls when using ABM in policy contexts to accompany discussion on Modelling Pitfalls at the ESSA Summer School, Aberdeen, June 2019
A talk at the workshop on "Agent-Based Models in Philosophy: Prospects and Limitations", Rurh University, Bochum, Germany
Abstract:
ABMs (like other kinds of model) can be used in a purely abstract way, as a kind of thought experiment - a way of thinking about some aspect of the world that is too complicated to hold in our mind (in all its detail). In this way it both informs and complements discursive thought. However there is another set of uses for ABMs - empirical uses - where the mapping between the model and sets of observation-derived data are crucial. For these uses, one has to (a) use the mapping to get from some data to the model (b) use the model for some inference and (c) use the mapping again back to data. This includes both predictive and explanatory uses of ABMs. These are easily distinguishable from abstact uses becuase there is a fixed and well-defined relationship between the model and the data, this is not flexible on a case by case basis. In these cases the reliability comes from the composite (a)-(b)-(c) mapping, so that simplifying step (b) can be counterproductive if that means weakening steps (a) and (c) because it is the strength of the overall chain that is important. Taking the use of models in quantum mechanics as an example, one can see that sometimes the evolution of the formal models driven by empirical adequacy can be more important than the attendent abstract models used to get a feel for what is happening. Although using ABM's for empirical purposes is more challenging than for purely abstract purposes, they are being increasingly used for empirical explanation rather than thought experiments, and there is no reason to suppose that robust empirical adequacy is unachievable.
Mixing fat data, simulation and policy - what could possibly go wrong?Bruce Edmonds
A talk given at the CECAN workshop on "What Good Data could do for Evaluation" at the Alan Turing Institute, 25th Feb. 2019.
Abstract:
In complex situations (which includes most where humans are involved) it is infeasible to predict the impact of any particular policy (or even what is probable). Randomised Control Trials do not tell one: what kinds of situation a policy might work in, what are enablers and inhibitors of the effectiveness of a policy. Here I suggest that using 'fat' data and simulation might allow a possibilistic analysis of policy impact - namely an exploration of what could go surprisingly wrong (or indeed right). Whilst this does not allow the optimisation of policy, it does inform the effective monitoring of policy, and basic contingency planning. However, this requires a different approach to policy - from planning and optimisation to an adaptive approach, with richer continual monitoring and a readiness to tune or adapt policy as data comes in. Examples of this are given concerning domestic water consumption (in the main talk), and in supplementary slides: voter turnout and fishing.
Using agent-based simulation for socio-ecological uncertainty analysisBruce Edmonds
A talk given in the MMU Big Data Centrem, 30th October 2018.
Both social and ecological systems can be highly complex, but the interaction between these two worlds - a socio-ecological system (SES) - can add even greater levels. However, the maintenance of SES are vital to our well being and the health of the planet. We do not know how such systems work in practice and we lack good data about them (especially the ecological side) so predicting the effect of any particular policy is infeasible. Here we present an approach which tries to understand some of the ways in which SES may go wrong, but constructing different complex simulation models and analysing the emergent outcomes. These, in silico, examples can allow for the institution of targeted data gathering instruments that give the earliest possible warning of deleterious outcomes, and thus allow for timely remedial responses. An example of this approach applied to fisheries is described.
Agent-based modelling,laboratory experiments,and observation in the wildBruce Edmonds
An invited talk at the workshop on "Social complexity and laboratory experiments – testing assumptions and predictions of social simulation models with experiments" at Social Simulation 2018, Stockholm
Culture trumps ethnicity!– Intra-generational cultural evolution and ethnoce...Bruce Edmonds
Essential to understanding the impact of in-group bias on society is the micro-macro link and the complex dynamics involved. Agent-based modelling (ABM) is the only technique that can formally represent this and thus allow for the more rigorous exploration of possi-ble processes and their comparison with observed social phenomena. This talk discusses these issues, providing some examples of some relevant ABMs.
A talk given at the BIGSSS summer school on conflict, Bremen, Jul/Aug 2018.
An Introduction to Agent-Based ModellingBruce Edmonds
An introduction to the technique with two example models of in-group bias and voter turnout.
An invited talk at the BIGSSS Summer Schools in Computational Social Science, at the Jacobs Bremen University, July 2018.
Mixing ABM and policy...what could possibly go wrong?Bruce Edmonds
Invited talk at 19th International Workshop on Multi-Agent Based Simulation at Stockholm on 14th July 2018.
Mixing ABM and Policy ... what could possibly go wrong?
This talk looks at a number of ways in which using ABM in the context of influencing policy can go wrong: during model construction, with model application and other.
It is related to the book chapter:
Aodha, L. and Edmonds, B. (2017) Some pitfalls to beware when applying models to issues of policy relevance. In Edmonds, B. & Meyer, R. (eds.) Simulating Social Complexity - a handbook, 2nd edition. Springer, 801-822.
Different Modelling Purposes - an 'anit-theoretical' approachBruce Edmonds
Models are a tool, not a picture of reality. There are many different uses for models. The intended use of a model - its 'purpose' - affects how it is judged, checked and developed. Much confusion and bad practice in modelling can be attributed to not clearly identifying the intended 'purpose' for a model. Neo-classical Economics is used to illustrate some of these confusions. In some (but not all) uses the model stands in for a theory (at least key aspects of it), but this can happen in different ways and at different levels of abstraction. The talk looks at some of these different ways and advocates a staged, inductive methodology for theory development instead of one that jumps to high generality and simple models which confuse different uses.
A talk given at the Workshop on "From Cases To General Principles - Theory Development Through Agent-Based Modeling" see http://abm-theory.org
Socio-Ecological Simulation - a risk-assessment approachBruce Edmonds
An invited talk in Tromsoe, 5 June 2018.
Both social and ecological systems are complex, but when they combine (as when human societies farm/hunt) there is a double complexity. This complexity means it is infeasible to predict the outcome of their interaction and unwise to rely on any prediction. An alternative approach is to use complex simulations to try and discover some possible ways that such systems can go wrong. This can reveal risks that other approaches might miss, due to the fact that more of the complexity is included within the model. Once a risk is identified then measures to monitor its emergence can be implemented, allowing the earliest possible warning of this. An example of this approach applied to a fisheries ecosystem is described.
A talk at the workshop on "Thinking toys (or games) for commoning, Basel, 5/6 April, Switzerland.
This describes a simple model of anonymous donation of resources, with minimal group structuring.
Am open-access paper on this model is at: http://cfpm.org/discussionpapers/152
The model can be freely downloaded from:
http://openABM.org/model/4744
A talk at ESSA@Work, TUHH (Technical University of Hamburg), 24th Nov 2017.
Abstract: Simulation models can only be justified with respect to the models purpose or aim. The talk looks at six common purposes for modelling: prediction, explanation, analogy, theoretical exposition, description, and illustration. Each of these is briefly described, with an example and an brief analysis of the risks to achieving these, and hence how they should be demonstrated. The importance of being explicitly clear about the model purpose is repeatedly emphasised.
The Post-Truth Drift in Social SimulationBruce Edmonds
A talk at the Social Simulation Conference, Dublin, September 2017.
Abstract
The paper identifies a danger in the field of social simulation a danger of using weasel words to give a false impression to the world about the achievements of our field. Whether this is intentional or unintentional, the effect might be to damage the reputation of the field and impair its development. At the root of this is a need for brutal honesty and openness, something that can be personally difficult and that needs social support. The paper considers some of the subtle ways that this kind of post-truth drift might occur, including: confusion/conflation of modelling purpose, wishing to justify pragmatic limitations in our work, falling back to unvalidated theory, confusing using a model for a way of looking at the world for something more reliable, and seeking protection from critique in vagueness. It calls on social simulation researchers to firmly reject such a drift.
Drilling down below opinions: how co-evolving beliefs and social structure mi...Bruce Edmonds
A talk at ODCD2017, Jocob's University, Bremen, July 2017. (http://odcd2017.user.jacobs-university.de/)
The talk looks at an alternative to "linear" models which deal with a euclidean space of opinions (usually a 1D space). This is a model of belief change, where both social influence and internal consistency of beliefs co-evolve with social structure. Thus this goes beyond most opinion dynamics models in a number of ways: (a) it deals with beliefs that may underlie measured opinions (b) the internal coherency among sets of beliefs is important as well as social influence (c) the social structure co-evolves with belief change and (d) the social structures are complex and continually dynamic. The internal consistency of beliefs is based on Thagard's theory of explanatory coherence, which has some empirical support. The model seems to display some of the tensions and processes that are observed in politics, for example: the tension between moderating views so as to connect with the public vs. reinforcing the in-group coherency. It displays a dynamic that can reflect a number of different courses including those that result turning points in opinions.
A talk at the ESSA Silico Summer School in Wageningen, June 2017. It looks at some of the different purposes for a simulation model, and how complicated one should make one's model
Modelling Innovation – some options from probabilistic to radicalBruce Edmonds
A talk on the various kinds of innovation based on Margret Boden's types of creativity . Given at the European Academy, Ahrweiler, Germany 31st May 2017.
Francesca Gottschalk - How can education support child empowerment.pptxEduSkills OECD
Francesca Gottschalk from the OECD’s Centre for Educational Research and Innovation presents at the Ask an Expert Webinar: How can education support child empowerment?
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
This slide is special for master students (MIBS & MIFB) in UUM. Also useful for readers who are interested in the topic of contemporary Islamic banking.
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfThiyagu K
This slides describes the basic concepts of ICT, basics of Email, Emerging Technology and Digital Initiatives in Education. This presentations aligns with the UGC Paper I syllabus.
A review of the growth of the Israel Genealogy Research Association Database Collection for the last 12 months. Our collection is now passed the 3 million mark and still growing. See which archives have contributed the most. See the different types of records we have, and which years have had records added. You can also see what we have for the future.
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp NetworkTechSoup
Dive into the world of AI! Experts Jon Hill and Tareq Monaur will guide you through AI's role in enhancing nonprofit websites and basic marketing strategies, making it easy to understand and apply.
Context dependency and the development of social institutions
1. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 1
Context-dependency and the
development of social institutions
Bruce Edmonds
Centre for Policy Modelling
Manchester Metropolitan University
2. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 2
Philosophical Context
• A Naturalist Position
• Knowledge comes about as a result of cognitive and
social processes (usually a combination of both)
• These result in beliefs that are reliable and useful to
greater (or lesser) extents
• That a belief is developed as the result of social
processes does not mean that it is less reliable than
ones that are more individually produced…
• …rather it depends on the nature of these
processes and the uses to which one wishes to put
the knowledge to
3. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 3
Putting this a bit stronger…
• One cannot ignore the nature of the cognitive
and social processes if one wants to obtain a
useful and reliable understanding of the nature
of knowledge and its instantiations
• (unlike other things such as computation,
energy conservation etc.) there is no such
thing as abstract or general intelligence,
knowledge, reasoning, learning etc. separate
from the contingent particularities of human
cognition, society and the world we live in
• Rather our intelligence and knowledge have
been developed with respect to the needs and
abilities of our species
4. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 4
Outline of talk
This talk will (attempt to):
1. look at some plausible roots of human
cognition and its characteristics
2. in particular at the context-dependency of
human cognition and its usefulness for
social coordination
3. then apply this to the development and
entrenchment of social institutions
4. and finish by drawing some philosophical
corollaries
5. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 5
Social Intelligence Hypothesis (SIH)
• Kummer, H., Daston, L., Gigerenzer, G. and Silk, J. (1997)
• The crucial evolutionary advantages that
human intelligence gives are due to the social
abilities and structures it facilitates
• This explains the prevalence of specific
abilities such as: imitation, language, social
norms, lying, alliances, gossip, politics etc.
• Social intelligence is not a result of general
intelligence applied to social organisation, but
the essential core of human intelligence
• in fact our “general” intelligence could be
merely a side-effect of social intelligence
6. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 6
An Evolutionary Story
Social intelligence implies that:
• Groups of humans can develop their own,
very different, (sub)cultures of technologies,
norms etc. (Boyd and Richerson 1985)
• These allow the group with their culture to
inhabit a variety of ecological niches (e.g.
the Kalahari, Polynesia) (Reader 1980)
• Thus humans, as a species, are able to
survive catastrophes that effect different
niches in different ways (specialisation)
7. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 7
Social Embedding (SE)
• Granovetter (1985) AJS 91 (3): 481-510
• Social Embedding contrasts with the under-
and over-socialised models of behaviour
• Only looking at individual behaviour or
aggregate behaviour misses crucial aspects
• That the particular patterns of social
interactions between individuals matter
• In (Granovetter 1992) applied to emergence of
institutions conceptualised in terms of an
accretion then „lock in‟ growing from a network
of personal relations
8. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 8
Implications of Social Embedding
• In many circumstances agents can learn to exploit the
particular expertise and knowledge in their society,
rather than do it themselves (invest in what Warren Buffet
invests in)
• This has the corollary that the causes of behaviour
might be spread throughout large parts of its society –
“causal spread”
• This knowledge is often not explicit but is something
learned – this takes time
• This is particularly true of social knowledge – studying
guides as to living in a culture are not the same as living
there for a time
• In particular the detail of when and where sets of
behaviours/strategies are appropriate may be highly
context dependent
9. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 9
The Difficulty of Talking about
Context
• The word “context” is used in many different
senses across different fields
• Somewhat of a “dustbin” concept resorted to
when more immediate explanations fail (like
the other “c-word”, complexity)
• Problematic to talk about, as it is not clear that
“contexts” are usually identifiably distinct
• Mentioning “context” is often a merely signal
for a more “humanities oriented” or
“participatory/involved” approach and hence
resisting the encroachment of reductionists
10. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 10
A (simplistic) illustration of context from the
point of view of an actor
11. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 11
Situational Context
• The situation in which an event takes place
• This is indefinitely extensive, it could include
anything relevant or coincident
• The time and place specify it, but relevant
details might not be retrievable from this
• It is almost universal to abstract to what is
relevant about these to a recognised type
when communicating about this
• Thus the question “What was the context?”
often effectively means “What about the
situation do I need to know to understand?
12. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 12
Cognitive Context (CC)
• Many aspects of human cognition are context-
dependent, including: memory, visual perception,
choice making, reasoning, emotion, and language
• The brain somehow deals with situational context
effectively, abstracting kinds of situations so
relevant information can be easily and preferentially
accessed
• The relevant correlate of the situation will be called
the cognitive context
• It is not known how the brain does this, and
probably does this in a rich and complex way that
might prevent easy labeling of contexts
13. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 13
Combining Context Recognition with
Crisp “within context” reasoning etc.
• Rich, unconscious, imprecise, messy cognitive
context recognition using many inputs
(including maybe internal ones)
• Crisp, costly, conscious, explicit cognitive
processes using material indicated by
cognitive context
Context
Recognition
Context-Structured
Memory
Reasoning/plan
ning/belief
revision/etc. etc.
14. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 14
The Context Heuristic
• The kind of situation is recognised in a rich,
fuzzy, complex and unconscious manner
• Knowledge, habits, norms etc. are learnt for
that kind of situation and are retrieved for it
• Reasoning, learning, interaction happens with
respect to the recognised kind of situation
• Context allows for the world to be dealt with by
type of situation, and hence makes
reasoning/learning etc. feasible
• It is a fallible heuristic…
• …so why do we have this kind of cognition?
15. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 15
Foreground
features
Later recognition
Belief
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor n
Factor n+1
Factor n+2
Etc.
Consequences
1. Learning Situation
Belief
Factor 1
Factor 2
Factor n
Factor n+1
Factor n+2
Etc.
Inferences/
predictions/
decisions
2. Application Situation
Possible abstraction to a „context‟
Assumed
features
The Context Heuristic Illustrated
16. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 16
Implications of Context-Dependency
• Behaviour of observed actors might need to change
sharply across different social contexts
• The relevant behaviour, norms, kinds of interaction
etc. might also need to change
• These may need to be different for different groups
as well as different kinds of situation
• Some kinds of social behaviour are necessarily
context-dependent (e.g. compliance)
• It is likely that a lot of social knowledge, behaviour
etc. will not be generic or amenable to de-
contextualisation (e.g. by reifying context)
17. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 17
Social Context
• Since humans are fundamentally social beings…
• …social context is often most important
• e.g. an interview, a party or a lecture
• Their recognition is aligned between individuals‟
cognition due to social interaction over time
• This has immediate social utility in that individuals
will bring the same set of norms, expectations,
habits, terms, etc. for the same kind of situation
• Thus allowing different ways of coordinating for
different kinds of situation
• If they were not aligned it would be hard to
communicate as identifying common referents
would be missing
18. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 18
Studying Context-Specific Behaviour
• Context-dependency is not magic, nor does context-
dependency imply relativism
• Just because a lot of behaviour is not generic does not
mean it is not ameanable to study, just more resource
consuming
• If one correctly identifies social context, one should
observe more regularity and identifiable patterns in
human behaviour
• Trending techniques (such as agent-based modelling,
data-mining, big data) have the potential to help identify,
represent and explore context and context-dependency
in combination with existing methods
• Identifying it could aid the placing in situ of qualitative
knowledge and facilitate informing agent-based
simulations at the micro-contextual level
19. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 19
The Co-Development and Entrenchment of
a Shared Social Context
• Over time, due to their similarities, certain kinds of
situation become recognised as similar by participants
• This facilitates the development of a set of shared
habits, norms, knowledge, language etc. that is specific
to that kind of situation
• The more this is distinguished with specific features in
this way, the more recognisable it becomes as a distinct
context
• Over time this (associated with that kind of situation)
can become increasingly entrenched
• These may then become institutionalised in terms of
infrastructure, training etc. (e.g. how to behave in a
lecture theatre, data projection technology, etc.)
including stigmergic mechanisms of coodination
20. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 20
Some Comments
• Under this view, institutions come out of a natural
human cognitive ability that has its roots in the evolution
of our species
• This ability is precisely the ability to develop complex
constructions for social coordination over a continguent
social history that are specific to different kinds of
situation
• They can be recognised (by other encultured
individuals) with a high degree of reliability
• But they have flexibility and are developed and passed
down as part of a rich and independent culture
• They do not determine behaviour, but rather provide
appropriate, socially negotiated frames for it
• Individuals have the ability to consider a situation as if it
were a different context
21. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 21
Building on Granovetter 1992
• The “nest” of personal networks is replaced
with a wider model of a social context
• And thus brings with it other aspects of social
coordination: norms, expectations, habits,
language etc.
• The explanation is grounded in considerations
of human cognition and its likely social
development
• This suggests ways forward in studying it
• The „lock in‟ is explained in terms of a plausible
social process
22. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 22
Philosophical Corollaries
• Context-dependency is not the same as relativity or
subjectivity due to the reliability of their
intersubjective recognition (due to social
alignment/co-development), hence our knowledge
of social institutions might be effectively inter-
subjective and reliable
• Social institutions are often embedded/signaled in
many ways (physically, legally, educationally, etc.)
as well as culturally embedded, so that their
existence is not limited to a social construct
• Although the form of any particular institution might
be specific to a particular culture and socially
constructed, its roots may be in the nature of human
cognition and its evolutionary situation
23. Context-dependency and the development of social institutions, Bruce Edmonds, 1st Constructed Complexities Workshop, Surrey, June 2013, slide 23
The End
Bruce Edmonds
http://bruce.edmonds.name
Centre for Policy Modelling
http://cfpm.org
The SCID Project
http://scid-project.org
Editor's Notes
Whilst fish live inhabit, we (as humans) inhabit society
Reader 1980, Man on Earth
that is NOT either trying to understand/program an agent on their own (against an environment) or as a uniform and completely socialized part of a society
AI, NL, Sociology, Philosophy, Mobile devices, Psychology, Cognitive ScienceFor detailed argument seem my previous papers on thisDustbin Like complexitywill talk about this problem later
Social Intelligence HypothesisWittgenstein, Vygotsky, TomaselloContexts are often described using their social features “I was talking to my mother”