Behaviours and Ethics – Group Debate
Download Full Report Here [PDF]
Access to Technology
The group discussion began with an exploration of access to technology, with Michael Magruder debunking the myth that, “everyone can do it,” explaining that “you have to have the money to engage with technology”. Ash Nehru was keen to point out that it depends what you classify as technology by giving the example of India where “everyone has mobile phones” despite many being very poor and that “people who have not been educated at all are all carrying around machines”. Indeed it is worth considering that, even if people don’t necessarily have access to their own computer and a broadband connection, digital technology is still very likely to affect them – particularly in relation to mobile phones which increasingly provde cheap ways to access the internet. The group went on to discuss how this use of mobile devices, often by people who can’t read, is potentially changing the way literacy is operating in India. However despite what appears to be a beneficial trend, Nehru also expressed concern in terms the control that these “machines” have over people in India, since they have a limited ability to mould them and their software and become truly empowered by them.
Collective Wisdom
The group then went on to consider ‘collective wisdom’ in relation to changing behaviours and ethics. Collective wisdom or collective intelligence, is where shared knowledge arrived at by individuals and groups is used to solve wider problems and conflicts.
Professor Anna Craft hinted towards the current emergence of collective wisdom by asking “where are our identities are located now?” She went on to explain that, “it’s not just what we are able to do with others but how this shifts our ethical awareness to a collective one” which is important. Going further, it is not just about trusting that collective wisdom will emerge but crucially about trusting and creating the environment and the conditions for it to emerge. The group went onto discuss virtual environments such as World of Warcraft where notions of collective wisdom are at the core of the experience. In these spaces young people have the opportunity to be agents of change rather than objects of it. The group considered that through this empowered collective behaviour a significant shift towards collective wisdom is already present as a new (digital) ethics.
Wikipedia stands out as a shining example of the power of collective wisdom and intelligence, however due to its factual nature, it does somewhat limit creativity and playfulness. As such it’s useful to look towards gaming – one example where we can see the strength of collective wisdom combined with creativity is in the game Little Big Planet (LBP) , where players not only have to collaborate in order to complete levels but they also have the opportunity to create levels together which they can then share online for others to play. The combination between the complexity offered by the gaming platform of LBP and the social aspect of the playing of the game itself enabled by the internet, has created a powerful, educational and literally ‘game changing’ experience which depends on collective wisdom.
In a similar way to how LBP is creating co-authored levels for the game, Professor Anna Craft pointed out that one key aspect we can already be thinking about in the context of collective wisdom in schools is how young people can “co author the learning experience” and how we can open avenues in order to embrace their willingness to do this.
Privacy and the acceptance of artificial life
What does a departure from privacy mean for young people?
The influence of collective modes of thinking, which have been significantly enabled by networked technology, challenge ideas of classical consciousness. To that end Mike Stubbs wittily called for there to be a theologian in the room in order to be able to have the debate between the ‘old’ and the ‘new’. He went on to suggest that as young people “are departing from classical notions of consciousness and privacy”, as demonstrated through an almost ubiquitous use of social networks, they are finding themselves in a more porous and fluid spaces which need us to ask a whole set of new questions. Stubbs went on to suggest that we are “acknowledging obsolescence” and as a result departing from romantic and nostalgic notions of the past. As such he suggested that a key question to ask is whether we are happy to accept a far more mechanistic society? Toby Coffey went on to add to this view by calling for a psychologist to be present – in order to understand some of the emotional issues around the new models of privacy that we can see emerging.
Death and Virtual Space
Currently there is a great deal of concern surrounding our ‘data trails’ and how the information that certain companies gain about us as we use the internet is affecting our privacy. This can impact on our jobs and our personal relationships but, as Michael Magruder pointed, out an important question we need to ask is not how we live with this but “how we die in virtual space?”. Luke Powell challenged the notion that we will actually be able to ‘die’ at all saying that “you leave a bit of yourself with every discussion you have had, every paper you have written…” suggesting that it is indeed impossible to erase your data trail completely. In more practical terms Magruder explained how at some fundamental level his artworks in Second Life are in fact owned by the makers of the platform, Linden Lab , and that very often we tick the terms and conditions box without having read what this actually means.
Skills for the Future
Michael Magruder suggested that parents can “educate their children though dialogue,” which aims to openly and honestly raise awareness about the sorts of issues that they will face when interacting in digital environment. Mike Stubbs asked how we can tackle nostalgia in society? How we can involve teachers and schools in conversations around the new questions that the digital future poses? Benedict Arora affirmed the importance of getting more schools to work directly with young people to co-produce learning, since this involvement from young people has the potential to change the traditional and nostalgic dynamic that we find in many schools in the UK today. Indeed this is a challenge when schools tend to move at a slower paces of change in contrast to the high paced changes in the digital world.
Professor Anna Craft laid out some of the challenges explaining that, “student engagement will continue to be an issue for governments of any complexion”. She suggested that it would be useful for us to ask “what kind of skills sets need to be nurtured and what kind of dispositions need to be encouraged?” She explained that she see “lots of opportunities within the school environment for really good creative dialogue between students and teachers” which she reckons, could bring technology and new modes of thinking right into the heart of the educational system. However, she was keen to point out that implementation of these sorts of strategies is a major hurdle. Craft thinks it “is going to have to come through a Trojan Horse!” and, as such, she explained that she “sees a real role for the work of project such as Robots and Avatars and organisations such a NESTA” to create the conditions needed for change, because tackling the current system and making it dynamic demands “highly creative responses”.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.