Comprehensible Mapping of the Variety of Fundamental Governance Functions

TRANSCEND MEMBERS, 2 Sep 2024

Anthony Judge | Laetus in Praesens - TRANSCEND Media Service

AI-assisted Clarification of Cognitive Challenge of Organization of Disparate Memes

Introduction

There is no lack of recognition of the dangerously fragile condition of global civilization, epitomized by ever increasing threats of nuclear catastrophe. The period is witness to major ongoing conflicts, most obviously with respect to Israel-Palestine and Russia-Ukraine, but less obviously in other arenas. As is typical of such conflicts, each side and its supporters, frames its own cause as unquestionably righteous and that of the other as the epitome of wrong doing — possibly meriting repressive legislative measures, and potentially to be qualified as “evil” (Existence of evil as authoritatively claimed to be an overriding strategic concern, 2016; Framing by others of claimants of evil as evil, 2016). There is no lack of authoritative references to the “Axis of Evil“, with the implication that the recognition is necessarily made from the perspective of an “Axis of Good” (Ensuring Dynamics of Sustainability by Appreciative Recognition of Evil, 2022).

As previously noted, there is seemingly little academic or diplomatic capacity to address and transcend that polarization of perspective — and seemingly little motivation to do so. The divisiveness now permeates the social fabric in many countries, rendering highly problematic any fruitful dialogue on such matters. The situation is framed in a curious way by the contrast between the inability to envisage any so-called “two-state” solution and the complex of issues regarding gender identity in the light of the LGBTQ+ controversies. This exploration follows from the earlier evocation of the possibilities and challenges (Reframing “Two-state” Possibilities, 2024; Clarifying a Two-state Pattern Language of 64 Modalities, 2024).

It has been assumed that the challenges of the times can be effectively addressed to an adequate degree by the UN’s Summit of the Future (Jeffrey D. Sachs, The Summit of the Future, Transcend Media Service, 8 July 2024). It remains unclear whether the integrative objectives of such an event will benefit significantly from widespread preoccupation with the dangers of AI following the UN’s earlier AI for Good Global Summit (2023) — events in which it is does not appear that any significant use is made of AI.

Fear-mongering with regard to AI is now a prevailing pattern, variously anticipated (Artificial Intelligence and International Affairs: disruption anticipated, Chatham House, 2018; Anupama Vijayakumar, Potential impact of artificial intelligence on the emerging world order, F1000Research, 11, 2022, 1186). By contrast the potential value of AI to such dialogue has been explored separately (Envisaging the AI-enhanced Future of the Conferencing Process, 2020; Use of ChatGPT to Clarify Possibility of Dialogue of Higher Quality, 2023).

Understanding of the issues is in process of reframing (Katharina E. Höne, Mapping the challenges and opportunities of artificial intelligence for the conduct of diplomacy, DiploFoundation, 2019; Zaman Majed Auda, et al, Artificial Intelligence and Evolution of the Global System, Islamabad Policy Research Institute, 22, 2022; Christina D. Meleouni and Iris-Panagiota Efthymiou, Artificial Intelligence and its Impact on International Relations, Journal of Politics and Ethics in New Technologies and AI, 2, 2023, 1; Fatima Kukeyeva, et al, Theoretical and Methodological Approaches to Studying Artificial Intelligence in the Context of International Relations and International Law, Journal of Central Asian Studies, 2024).

The focus in what follows is on the experimental use of AI — in the form of ChatGPT 4 and Claude 3 — to explore possibilities of comprehensible configuration of the complexity with which global governance processes are associated. It is a development of an earlier initiative (AI-enabled Mapping and Animation of Learning Pathways, 2024). Given global tensions between “West” and “East”, the approach considers both perspectives explicitly, as well as underlying cognitive implications (Coherent Reconciliation of Eastern and Western Patterns of Logic, 2023; Perspectives of AI on Psychosocial Implications of Global Modelling, 2024). In aspiring to save the planet, it is as yet unclear whether the Summit for the Future will seek to benefit from AI facilities — despite its specific intention of ensuring restriction in its use (Global Digital Compact, 2024; Steve Lohr, Will A.I. Ruin the Planet or Save the Planet? The New York Times, 26 August 2024).

The specific focus here is on the use of an adequately complex polyhedra, the truncated tesseract, as a means of “holding” both those interrelated functions held to be objective, as well as the paradoxical insights with which their comprehension may be held to be associated. This is a further development of an AI-enabled methodology to reframe binary bias (Clarifying a Two-state Pattern Language of 64 Modalities, 2024). The 64 vertices of the three-dimensional projection of this 4D configuration offer a framing within which UN’s 8-fold and 16-fold strategic articulations (as with the Millennium Development Goals and the Sustainable Development Goals) can be related to complementary patterns of insight.

The primary bias of this exploration is a preoccupation with rendering complexity comprehensible and coherent in a period in which the disciplines with greatest competence with respect to complexity are seemingly completely indifferent to whether their insights are comprehensible. Comprehension is typically not a concept in disciplines requiring that of others. This is curiously matched by the indifference to complex insights on the part of those most preoccupied with the increasing challenges of governance — despite occasional metaphorical references to “organizational geometry” and “variable integration geometry” (Dennis M. Crossen, Organizational Change Model in a Geometric Framework, International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences, 5, 2014, 4). Given the potential of AI, it is appropriate to question the UN’s capacity to engage with its possibilities — despite explicit calls for innovation (UN deputy chief demands bold policies, innovative solutions for SDGs, UN News, 8 July 2024). Fundamental to the challenge of comprehension of complexity is the cognitive load with which this may be associated in a period of widely acknowledged information overload.

As in the previous experiments, the responses of ChatGPT 4o are distinctively presented below in grayed areas, in parallel with those of Claude 3.5. Given the length of the document to which the exchange gives rise, the form of presentation has itself been treated as an experiment — in anticipation of the future implication of AI into research documents. Web technology now enables the whole document to be held as a single “page” with only the “questions” to AI rendered immediately visible — a facility developed in this case with the assistance of both ChatGPT and Claude 3 (but not operational in PDF variants of the page, in contrast with the original). Reservations and commentary on the process of interaction with AI to that end have been discussed separately (Methodological comment on experimental use of AI, 2024)

TO CONTINUE READING Go to Original – laetusinpraesens.org

Share this article: email mastodon facebook 🔗 copy link

DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

There are no comments so far.