This document provides an overview of concepts related to rationality, language, and collective wisdom in networked societies. It discusses theories of bounded rationality and how individuals have limited cognitive abilities. It also examines the role of language beyond just communication, and how persuasion and lies are incorporated into social uses of language. The document advocates moving beyond formalistic views of rational agents to incorporate the networked and social aspects of decision-making. It discusses how collective intelligence through open information and crowd expertise can help address conflicts. The masses are posited as a potential source of collective wisdom.

1. Conflicts, Bounded Rationality and
Collective Wisdom in a Networked Society
J. Francisco Álvarez. UNED. Madrid. Spain
jalvarez@fsof.uned.es @alvarezuned
http://es.slideshare.net/FALVAREZUNED

2. Language is not just a complex
communication system
Dascal, Marcelo. "Language as a cognitive
technology." International Journal of Cognition
and Technology 1.1 (2002): 35-61.
Mirolli, Marco, and Domenico Parisi. "Language
as a cognitive tool." Minds and Machines 19.4
(2009): 517-528.

3. “ Strategic uses of argument” by Jon
Elster, 1992
Arrow, K. J. et al. Barriers to conflict resolution. WW Norton & Company, 1995.

4. Language more than means to codify and
transmit information
Silences, rhetorical components, direct lies,
white or altruistic lies, are incorporated into the
social use of language as persuasive tool which
constitute a large part of our communicative
practices

5. The
truth
is,
we
all
lie
-­‐
and
by
‘we,’
we
mean
everyone!

6. Is it smart to be rational?
“we
don’t
cheat
and
steal
as
much
as
we
would
if
we
were
perfectly
ra=onal
and
acted
only
in
our
own
self-­‐interest”.
Ariely,
Dan
(2012)
The
(Honest)
Truth
About
Dishonesty:
How
We
Lie
to
Everyone
–
Especially
Ourselves.
"¿Es
inteligente
ser
racional?"
Álvarez,
J.
Francisco,
Sistema:
Revista
de
ciencias
sociales
109
(1992):
73-­‐92.

7. We need other view on human
rationality
To
analyse
diverse
situa=ons
in
which
conflicts
emerge
apparently
as
a
result
of
mistakes
in
communica=ve
processes,
a
wider
no=on
of
our
concep=on
of
language
is
necessary,
one
more
extended
than
the
cost-­‐benefit
analysis
that
is
oTen
at
the
basis
of
much
theorizing
on
language

8. Dascal, Marcelo (2004): "Argument,
war and the role of the media in
conflict management."

9. “Let us dub “Hard Reason” a conception of rationality that admits
only the use of rigorously defined concepts, of experimentally
controlled data, and of logically valid arguments. On this view, all
solvable problems and disputes can be solved by strict adherence to
the above requirements, which provide a decision procedure
determining which side is right and which is wrong. ... Nevertheless,
there are those who hold a conception of rationality that admits also
the use of concepts that are not definable in terms of necessary and
sufficient conditions, the occasional reliance upon data and
propositions that are only presumably correct, ... and the existence
of a variety of ways of resolving controversies which do not
necessarily amount to a decision procedure. Let us dub this
conception of rationality “Soft Reason”- Marcelo Dascal ., 2004

10. Dascal, Marcelo. "Language as a cognitive technology."
International Journal of Cognition and Technology 1.1
(2002): 35-61
The
main
objec=ve
of
Dascal´s
proposal
is
“to
cri=cize
the
very
idea
of
communica=on
as
a
primary
func=on
of
language:
The
old
idea
that
language
serves
to
convey
thought
or
other
forms
of
cogni=ve
content,
but
need
not
play
any
role
in
the
forma=on
of
the
thoughts
it
conveys.”

11. Bounded rational agents
The
adop=on
of
a
formalis=c
and
individualis=c
perspec=ve
on
reasoning,
choice
and
decision
is
a
spring
of
paradoxes
and
conflicts,
because
agents
immersed
in
conflicts
are
drawn
or
modelled
as
ra=onal
individuals
with
well-­‐defined
targets
and
full
capabili=es
to
access
informa=on.
It
isn't
taken
into
account
(as
Herbert
Simon
has
said
long
=me
ago)
that
the
agents
don't
have
all
the
=me
needed,
their
capabili=es
of
calcula=on
and
memory
are
limited,
and
as
such
they
can't
make
their
preferences
be
taken
fully
into
considera=on.

12. Amartya K. Sen
“The
formula=on
of
maximizing
behaviour
in
economics
has
oTen
paralleled
the
modelling
of
maximiza=on
in
physics
and
related
disciplines.
But
maximizing
behaviour
differs
from
nonvoli=onal
maximizing
because
of
the
fundamental
relevance
of
the
choice
act,
which
has
to
be
placed
in
a
central
posi=on
in
analyzing
maximizing
behaviour”
(Sen,
1997,
p.
745)
Sen,
Amartya.
"Maximiza=on
and
the
Act
of
Choice."
Econometrica:
Journal
of
the
Econometric
Society
(1997):
745-­‐779.

13. Buridan´s ass
“(i) maximization can save your life and (ii) only an ass
will wait for optimization” (A.K. Sen)

14. The new social operating system
The intertwined society produces the affordances to facilitate expansion of collective
wisdom built upon networked individualism
Álvarez, J Francisco. "Networked: The New Social
Operating System by Lee Rainie and Barry
Wellman." Science and Public Policy 40.6 (2013):
823-824.
Networked individualism

15. Reputation and refutation as social
components of interaction
Dascal,
Marcelo.
"Reputa=on
and
refuta=on:
nego=a=ng
merit."
AMSTERDAM
STUDIES
IN
THE
THEORY
AND
HISTORY
OF
LINGUISTIC
SCIENCE
SERIES
4
(2001):
3-­‐18.

16. Sperber, Dan et al. "Epistemic vigilance."
Mind & Language 25.4 (2010): 359-393.
“No
act
of
communica=on
among
humans,
even
if
it
is
only
of
local
relevance
to
the
interlocutors
at
the
=me,
is
ever
totally
disconnected
from
the
flow
of
informa=on
in
the
whole
social
group”
(H.
Mercier
and
D.Sperber,
2010,
p.
379).

17. To set conflicts on their feet
1) Beyond false dilemmas and paradoxes. Reasoning
systems don´t begin in our heads and then settle into
the earth.
2) Tension between the interest of elites that enter into
conflict with the opinions of the masses provoke an
authentic paradox of collective action.

18. Open government and crowd expertise
Open
access
to
informa=on
and
ins=tu=onal
arrangements
directed
towards
team
knowledge
could
offer
other
kinds
of
tools
to
confront
conflict,
even
possible
benefits
which,
indirectly
and
not
wanted,
could
be
obtained
from
the
existence
of
the
conflict
itself.
“Crowd
exper=se”
is
emerging
as
an
actual
possibility,
and
it
must
be
incorporated
to
confront
conflicts.
The
exper=se
func=on
works
in
delibera=ve,
argumenta=ve
and
mo=va=onal
contexts
and
courses
of
ac=on;
it
is
not
an
isolated
ac=vity.

19. The masses as a source of collective
intelligence
“We
are
learning,
including
in
a
prac=cal
way,
that
the
grouping
of
human
beings
can
produce
results
we
didn't
expect
and
that,
as
a
product
of
the
interac=on,
the
ac=on
of
collec=ves
goes
much
further
than
the
capabili=es
that
each
one
of
its
members
has”.
Álvarez, J. F. (2014). La irrupción de las masas y la
sabiduría colectiva (The inrushing of masses and
the collective wisdom). Investigación y ciencia, (454),
50-51.
Madrid 15-M 2011

20. Collective Wisdom?
“We allow that each individual knows less of these affairs than those
who have given particular attention to them, yet when they come
together they will know them better” Aristotle PolíYca
(III,
10,
1282a15)
“The diverse many are often smarter than a group of select elites
because of the different cognitive tools, perspectives, heuristics, and
knowledge they bring to political problem solving and prediction”(H.
Landemore, 2014, “Yes, We Can (Make it up on Volume): Answers to
Critics” Critical Review, 1-2, pág. 184
“The language a decision maker uses to verbalize his preferences
restricts the set of preferences he may hold” (A. Rubinstein, 2000,
Economics and Language, Cambridge U.P., p. 55)

21. Collective Wisdom
Madrid 15-M

22. “Don’t let us forget that the causes of human actions are
usually immeasurably more complex and varied than our
subsequent explanations of them.”
― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Idiot