Dear Colleagues:
The phrase that something has "gone viral" entered our lexicon in a non-medical sense some three decades ago, or about the same time that a professor in the James Madison U. social work dept published
an article on the internet and the potential "information superhighway." Like all technologies, those in the game already
knew that the digital world would be transformative and, as w/ all technological changes, could be used for "good" and
for "evil" - depending on one's position, worldview and justificatory mechanisms. That's where the ToK & JUST are particularly helpful, along with the interplay of JII dynamics. I'd encourage everyone on the list unfamiliar with these concepts to spend some
extra time digesting the published and website info on these topics.
In particular, there are direct parallels between the social "vorces" (my acronymic play on "social forces") and the drivers of Gregg's "Influence Matrix", which I'll share with the group down the
road. The key point, however, is that there are social network configurations that shape the flow of information & the attendant justifications. We can actually identify and model the key parameters for the "viral spread" of everything from conspiracy theories
to hit songs, much as epidemiologists can model the spread of pathogens. Or, to restate in positive terms, we can also model how to spread factually useful information to map interventions that can do everything from contain forest fires to reduce the spread
of COVID-19 to promoting life-saving health information of all kinds. But therein lies the rub.
Because we live in a far more complex & culturally interconnected world - and that does not mean the same thing as "culturally integrated world" - we also can map the relative social locations of those
whose interests & resources can vary wildly, which perpetuate the competing justification narratives and the epistemological grounding of those narratives. Or, stated in conventional scientific terms, the 2nd law of thermodynamics means that the expenditure
of energy across any closed systems results in entropy increasing. The forces of accelerating fragmentation have, in the main, exceeded the centripetal forces in much of the "modern world." But not entirely. The good news? Social systems are
not completely closed - and thus we still have time to interject new information & social energy into the pods and areas
where we can effect positive change. I'm pressed for time, but have much more to say about the social forces & social energy that can be harnessed. The short answer is that revamping educations systems and focusing on the younger generations can help us combat
the centrifugal, tribal forces that currently dominate the sociopolitical landscape. But we should not be naive either & recognize that incredibly powerful, well-resourced groups will oppose our efforts to pursue the Enlightenment 2.0 project. I have a simple
example of how all of this play out in the US. with the intractability of the issues surrounding the U.S. healthcare system, but, again, I'll save that for a more formal analytic discourse. I just wanted to sketch some of the broader sociological parameters
within which we can situate the ideas presented in the article Gregg has shared. Love, er, best regards, -Joe
Dr. Joseph H. Michalski
Professor
King’s University College at Western University
266 Epworth Avenue, DL-201
London, Ontario, Canada N6A 2M3
Tel: (519) 433-3491
Email: [log in to unmask]
______________________
eið
+ 1 = 0