Figure 2 - uploaded by Francis Heylighen
Content may be subject to copyright.
![a simplified representation of the hero's journey according to Campbell [1949]](profile/Francis-Heylighen/publication/264871021/figure/fig1/AS:669050384437262@1536525450750/a-simplified-representation-of-the-heros-journey-according-to-Campbell-1949.png)
Source publication
The worldview of science is based on laws, which are supposed to be certain, time-independent, objective and context-independent. The worldview found in literature, myth and religion, on the other hand, is based on stories, which relate the events experienced by a subject in a particular context with an uncertain outcome. This paper argues that the...
Context in source publication
Similar publications
This paper presents an Artificial Intelligence approach to mining context and emotions related to olfactory cultural heritage narratives, particularly to fairy tales. We provide an overview of the role of smell and emotions in literature, as well as highlight the importance of olfactory experience and emotions from psychology and linguistic perspec...
The scientific worldview is based on laws, which are supposed to be certain, objective, and independent of time and context. The narrative worldview found in literature, myth and religion, is based on stories, which relate the events experienced by a subject in a particular context with an uncertain outcome. This paper argues that the concept of "a...
This chapter deals with the narrative structure and connecting elements of narrative discourse in Jakarta Sign Language (JakSL). Two research questions are discussed in this paper: (1) what is the narrative structure of fairy tales proposed in the JakSL? and (2) what are elements in the JakSL that create the narrative cohesion in the narratives of...
Citations
... In [190], a method for the coordinated use of several contradictory worldviews is proposed, but it is quite primitive and not suitable for AGI: the agent acts as a character in a game journey full of challenges and mysteries that underlie myths. In [191] and [192], a fragmented worldview is considered. ...
... These horizons function as new levels of appearance for interaction and as new platforms for potential complexification to be ordered by the future-oriented cognitive agents under the particular attractors and constraints unique to that level of becoming [81]. Thus the cosmic evolutionary worldview suggests that our universe possesses a denser concentration of relation and a more lively cognitive destiny filled with more adventure and mystery than is often conceived in dominant conceptual paradigms [82]. In this way the thermodynamic worldview positing an inevitable tendency to maximal disorder or non-being [83], may be missing a crucial part of the picture: the nature and future immanent potentiality of ideality inherent to the symbolic order of being [84,85]. ...
The anticipated next stage of human organization is often described by futurists as a global technological singularity. This next stage of complex organization is hypothesized to be actualized by scientific-technic knowledge networks. However, the general consequences of this process for the meaning of human existence are unknown. Here, it is argued that cosmic evolutionary philosophy is a useful worldview for grounding an understanding of the potential nature of this futures event. In the cosmic evolutionary philosophy, reality is conceptualized locally as a universal dynamic of emergent evolving relations. This universal dynamic is structured by a singular astrophysical origin and an organizational progress from sub-atomic particles to global civilization mediated by qualitative phase transitions. From this theoretical ground, we attempt to understand the next stage of universal dynamics in terms of the motion of general ideation attempting to actualize higher unity. In this way, we approach technological singularity dialectically as an event caused by ideational transformations and mediated by an emergent intersubjective objectivity. From these speculations, a historically-engaged perspective on the nature of human consciousness is articulated where the truth of reality as an emergent unity depends on the collective action of a multiplicity of human observers.
... Indeed, we need to keep playing for ! 4 all our life (Colarusso 1994) and to have plenty of time for sleep and rest (Alvarez & Ayas 2004, Strine & Chapman 2005. We get ill from chronic stress (Juster et al. 2010) and continuous physical strain (Nicol, Komi & Marconnet 1991, Yassi 2015 but thrive on risky adventures (Heylighen 2010) and nonroutine, intensive efforts (Heylighen 2014a). We need to be part of a group, a band, which we can continuously depend on (Baumeister & Leary 1995, Gardner, Pickett & Brewer 2000 and we want to be trusted and valued by its members (Maslow 1973). ...
Contrary to the prevailing pessimistic AI takeover scenarios, the theory of the Global Brain (GB) argues that this foreseen collective, distributed superintelligence is bound to include humans as its key beneficiaries. This prediction follows from the contingency of evolution: we, as already present intelligent forms of life, are in a position to exert selective pressures onto the emerging new ones. As a result, it is foreseen that the cognitive architecture of the GB will include human beings and such technologies, which will best prove to advance our collective wellbeing. This paper aims to nuance and problematize this forecast by offering a novel combination of several existing theories: Kauffmann's theory of adjacent possible, Lotman's concept of the semiosphere, Luhmann's theory of social systems, and Heylighen's theory of intelligence. The resulting framework allows for a reinterpretation of the history of the human species in a way which suggests that it may not be individual humans, but our social systems, who are the most advanced intelligence currently operating on Earth. Our unique social systems, emerging from as early as the Neolithic out of mutual interrelations of the occurrences of symbolic communication of humans, are argued to be capable of individuating into autonomous, intelligent agents. The resulting distributedness of the currently dominating form of intelligence might challenge the predicted cognitive architecture of the Global Brain, as it is likely to introduce additional powerful sources of selective pressures. Since the rapid evolution of interconnecting technologies appears to open up immense emancipatory possibilities not only for humans, but also for the intelligently evolving 'creatures of the semiosphere', it is concluded that in the context of the rapidly self-organizing Global Brain, a close watch needs to be kept over the dynamics of the latter.
... Indeed, we need to keep playing for all our life (Colarusso 1994) and to have plenty of time for sleep and rest (Alvarez & Ayas 2004, Strine & Chapman 2005. We get ill from chronic stress (Juster et al. 2010) and continuous physical strain (Nicol, Komi & Marconnet 1991, Yassi 2015 but thrive on risky adventures (Heylighen 2010) and nonroutine, intensive efforts (Heylighen 2014a). We need to be part of a group, a band, which we can continuously depend on (Baumeister & Leary 1995, Gardner, Pickett & Brewer 2000 and we want to be trusted and valued by its members (Maslow 1973). ...
While art and science still functioned side-by-side during the Renaissance, their methods and perspectives diverged during the nineteenth century, creating a still enduring separation between the "two cultures". Recently, artists and scientists again collaborate more frequently, as promoted most radically by the ArtScience movement. This approach aims at a true synthesis between the intuitive, imaginative methods of art and the rational, rule-governed methods of science. To prepare the grounds for a theoretical synthesis, this paper surveys the fundamental commonalities and differences between science and art. Science and art are united in their creative investigation, where coherence, pattern or meaning play a vital role in the development of concepts, while relying on concrete representations to experiment with the resulting insights. On the other hand, according to the standard conception, science seeks an understanding that is universal, objective and unambiguous, while art focuses on unique, subjective and open-ended experiences. Both offer prospect and coherence, mystery and complexity, albeit with science preferring the former and art, the latter. The paper concludes with some examples of artscience works that combine all these aspects.
In this paper, we present a list of eight criteria to compare worldviews. They are classified in three broad categories: objective criteria (objective consistency, scientificity, scope) subjective criteria (subjective consistency, personal utility, affectivity) and intersubjective criteria (simplicity, collective utility). We first define what a worldview is, and explicit the heuristic used to find the criteria. We then describe each criterion individually and show what happens when we violate each of them. Then we apply these criteria to a concrete example, comparing the Flying Spaghetti Monster deity with Intelligent Design. We draw more general fruitful suggestions for the science-and-religion dialog.
Kaivo-oja, Jari, Stenvall, Jari & Rannisto, Pasi-Heikki (2010) Universities in the Regional Open Innovation System and Strategy: Case Study Reflections of National University Reform of Finland. In Torkkeli, M. (Ed.) Frontiers of Open Innovation. Lappeenranta University of Technology. Department of Industrial Management. Research Report 225. Lappeenranta, pp. 91-106. ISBN 978-952-214-960-2 (Paperback) Web: http://stratnet.jalusta.com/files/download/LUTResearchReport225-TorkkeliEdit.-FrontiersofOpenInnovation.pdf
Where does it all come from? Where are we going? Are we alone in the
universe? What is good and what is evil? The scientific narrative of cosmic
evolution demands that we tackle such big questions with a cosmological
perspective. I tackle the first question in Chapters 4-6; the second in
Chapters 7-8; the third in Chapter 9 and the fourth in Chapter 10. However,
where do we start to answer such questions? In Chapters 1-3, I elaborate the
concept of worldview and argue that we should aim at constructing comprehensive
and coherent worldviews. In Chapter 4, I identify seven fundamental challenges
to any ultimate explanation. I conclude that our explanations tend to fall in
two cognitive attractors, the point or the cycle. In Chapter 5, I focus on the
free parameters issue, while Chapter 6 is a critical analysis of the
fine-tuning issue. I conclude that fine-tuning is a conjecture and that we need
to further study how typical our universe is. This opens a research endeavor
that I call artificial cosmogenesis. In Chapter 7, I show the importance of
artificial cosmogenesis from extrapolating the future of scientific
simulations. I then analyze two other evolutionary explanations of fine-tuning
in Chapter 8: Cosmological Natural Selection and the broader scenario of
Cosmological Artificial Selection. In Chapter 9, I inquire into the search for
extraterrestrials and conclude that some binary star systems are good
candidates. Since those putative beings feed on stars, I call them starivores.
The question of their artificiality remains open, but I propose a prize to
further continue and motivate the scientific assessment of this hypothesis. In
Chapter 10, I explore foundations to build a cosmological ethics and conclude
that the ultimate good is the infinite continuation of the evolutionary
process. Appendix I summarizes my position and Appendix II provides
argumentative maps of the entire thesis.
Frontiers of Open Innovation, 25 - 38 Open Innovation Research Seminar. Kouvola, 23.8.2010
