by lukeghr

As output to a body of research into Artificial Intelligence I designed a language that hopes to promote and support trans-disciplinary research projects.

data < information < knowledge < wisdom

1.0 The intelligence cycle.

Methods for trans-disciplinary interaction are a more pressing need than ever. In a world of wicked problems and big data we need ways to bridge gaps in communication that develop between highly specialised fields.

Artificial means designed, intelligence is a value system.

1.1 The results of 4 weeks research.

Based on the above insight, which was developed along with a host of others which can be deciphered from here and here, I decided to design my own value system based on what I believe to be a sensible way to interact with the world, as such I accept it’s inherent bias as a product of the medium.   

Through analysis of actors within a system my proposed language attempts to understand the decisions that went into their manifestation. The current method of valuing an individual’s intelligence focuses on efforts to help them perform ‘better’, creating a lot of unnecessary stress on specific parts of a system.

2.0 The 6 fundamentals

Instead 21CI builds an image of what actually matters, a thing as it exists in reality along with how it relates to it’s local environment. With this knowledge gathered it allows one to make informed decisions based on what is actually feasible rather than what is desired. For example you might use it as a bench marking tool for assessing the quality of products you produce, or to discover how the recent changes to a company’s business model effected CO2 release in their supply chain. 

If a reading is taken and then a subsequent one at some point later in time you have two moments to compare. By discussing these in a group or alone you can begin to understand the object as a semiotic artifact, unpacking the intricacies of it’s construction and relationship to the system around it.

The language is formed of 6 core dichotomies. Theses are based on fundamental elements of society, which together characterise the human condition as it exists today.

The quality and quantity of the actors references

ratified – unfounded

Increase or reduce the functionality of other actors in the environment

positive – negetive

How clear is it, has it been well justified or conceived as wild speculation

irrational – rational

Does the actor distribute value to itself or others

to other – to self

Does the actor fit in with it’s environment or does it stand out

innovative – uniform


Does the actor make sustainable use of resources of is it inefficient

sustainable – inefficient