Critique of Networked Reason: The Phenomenology of the Collective Mind Table of Contents 1. Introduction: networking and time.

The Methodology and logic of

the interdisciplinary science of networks: physics, biology, neurology, social science, cognitive science, engineering (pages 1-20) Part A hardware networks: physics, chemistry, biology, neurology 2. 3. 4. 66) Part B content and software networks: social sciences, cognitive science and linguistics 5. 6. 7. Social networks and the social science of networks (pages 66-90) Linguistic networks (pages 91-110) Cognitive networks and the cognitive science of networks (pages Physical networks and the physics of networks (pages 21-30) Biological networks and the biology of networks (pages 31-45) Neurological networks and the neurology of networks (pages 46-

111-176) Part C scientific, engineering and organizational networks 8. 9. 10. 11. Corporate networks and the organization of the networks (pages Learning networks (188-208) Scientific and research networks (pages 209-220) Engineering networks and the design of networks (pages 221-232)
1

177-187)

Part D the future of networks 12. 260) 13. Social sciences 2.0 and humanities 2.0 (pages 261-270) The social dark matter and dark energy of the crowd (pages 233-

14. Sources (pages 271-280)

Chapter 1 Introduction: The new methodology, the new concepts, and the new logic of the interdisciplinary science of networks: physics, biology, social science, cognitive science, engineering 1.1 The new science of network needs a new logic of networks In his article "Network Takeover" Barbashi (2012) shows how the network paradigm is replacing the reductionist paradigm. This paradigm leads to a new science: network science. Biologists and physicians already understand that "cancer gene", is a network of approximately 300 genes mutations. Without understanding the network connections between these 300 genes, you cannot understand and cannot cure the cancer. Because of the new methodology of the new network science, we realize that one gene is not a separate instruction booklet to build a particular organ in the body, but each gene contains links to other genes, in the genomic network. Similarly neurologists and cognitive scientists already understand that there is no one "neuron consciousness", but that consciousness, like cancer, is the result of emergent properties, from a network of synaptic connections between a large numbers of neurons. The emergent properties of networks are also the causes of financial crises, the collapse of the power grid or the Internet, etc. Until the early 21st century, there were no tools to view, simulate, and gain empirical data on networks scales of millions of nodes and billions of connections between nodes. But at the beginning of the 21st century,
3

companies like Google and Facebook, became a kind of telescope and microscope, which allows us to view and extract data from millions of billions of documents and links between documents in the case of Google, and from the millions of people and billions of connections between them in the case of Facebook. Is it possible that Google and Facebook, or their successors, will in future, serve not only as a telescope and a microscope of organizations, but also as a stethoscope, that will enable us to diagnose and cure economic and political ills? Time will tell, and that we will deal with in the chapters on biological-medical networks, and networking technologies.

In the above image, we see how the visualization of the Internet, enable the discovery of a universal basic law of the networks. This is the first map (1999) of a large computer network, and it represents part of the WWW. Each point represents a document, and each link represents a web address. Barabasi discovered the law of Scale-free networks, under
4

which documents are gaining links according to Pareto Law, namely that less than 1% of the documents, attracts more than 99% of the links. This law was discovered in the same year in which a first version of the algorithm Page-Rank of Google, were discovered. There is a deep connection between the development of "optics of networks" (tools like Google and Facebook telescope and microscope), and the development of "astronomy and physics of networks". Something similar happened in previous centuries regarding the relationship between the optics of the stars and understanding the laws of astronomy and their underlying physical laws. The observations of Brahe, Kepler and Galileo, paved the way for Newton's laws, especially the law of gravity, that could explain the astronomical observations of the period. Google and Facebook have a double effect: First, they enable us to understand similar phenomena in the billions of connections between nodes, not just networks of documents (Google), and of people (Facebook), but also networks of neurons, genes, finance, energy, etc. Second, they not only provide a wealth of data, but also show lack a comprehensive theory of networks. Partial theories explaining the behavior of the networks before "network science" were fractal and chaos theory, the theory of self-organization, complexity theory, and more. What is common to all these theories is that they cross the old disciplines of physics, mathematics, biology, social science, cognitive science, etc. Perhaps as Descartes created a synthesis of algebra with geometry in analytic geometry, and as Newton created a synthesis of mathematics
5

with physics in mathematical physics, so we need today to create the synthesis of Mathematics - Physics - Biology - Sociology - Economy computer science, to the new science of networks. Who said synthesis can contain only two disciplines? Why not four or seven disciplines? From all these disciplines we already revealed general network rules that apply to all disciplines, like the law of Scale-free networks in Figure 1 above, that say that less than 1% of the documents attract more than 99% of the links. In physics less than 1% of the stars (black holes) attract more than - 99% of the mass in the universe. In epidemics less than 1% of carriers account for more than 99% infection. In economics less than 1% of the population attract 99% of the wealth, etc. 1.2 The new discoveries in the book 1.1.1 The detailed analysis presented in the book of all types of networks, show that when dealing with social networks, we need new kinds of thinking, logic and intuition. It turns out, for example, that Kant's categories (space, time, causality, etc.), are only part of the basic concepts of human cognition. Kant's list is pre-network. We need new basic categories (like self reference, emergence, Meta, evolution, and more). 1.1.2 The synergy between the fundamental laws of social networks creates new types of organization and social structures. The four following laws show that tools like search engines, networks and smart phones, create amplified organizations and amplified social structures. Metcalfe's law: The number of possible cross-connections in a network grows as the square of the number of computers in the network increases. Thus, the community value of a network grows as the square of
6

the number of its users increase.

Shirky law: The massive drop in

collaboration costs between network members, relative to the static costs of the organization and management in the pre-network era. Axelrod Law: The rapid growth of trust between network members is proportional to the number and frequency of iterations, McLuhan law: New types of media increase the entropy of organizations and societies. 1.1.3 The discovery of the optics of the social network. Social Networks are a kind of "microscope and telescope of the social sciences". As the telescope and the microscope were a kind of "amplifiers of the eyes", which enable us to find tiny organisms such as bacteria, and astronomical entities such as galaxies, so the social networks allows us to discover new phenomena in every area that concern networks, for example, "the dark matter of the history and of the social sciences." 1.1.4 The "Copernican revolution" in history and the social sciences, assert that the crowd is "the dark matter of history ", and the dominant power of the social sciences. Social networks allow "Copernican revolution" in all sciences. Disciplines like history, political science, economic theory and management science, stressed by the end of the 20th century, the central role of genius and leader. Social networks discovered the error. The crowd has always been the key player of the history, politics and economics. But scientists until now see only the tip of the iceberg, or as Tolstoy say: "Historians are like the farmer who sees the smoke emitted from the ship, and think the smoke is the moving force of the ship, as the horse pulling the wagon." It seems that before Copernicus people thought that the earth is the center of the world and that the Sun orbits the Earth. Copernican revolution showed that the Earth is a tiny

rock moving through the universe. We will show that leaders and geniuses have a marginal role in history, and in social life. 1.1.5 The discovery of the network logic: the network science takes shape as key concept in understanding a wide range of disciplines: network physics, network biology, network linguistic, network cognitive science, network social science. But most researchers in the science of networks, analyze networked entities (ants, social network, neural network), using Aristotelian pre-network logic. The new network logic includes important implications for the domain of Artificial Intelligence (AI). 1.1.6 The new network science shows that human natural intelligence is much more intuitive than thought from Aristotle to Turing. This is a possible explanation for the failure of artificial intelligence project in the last 70 years. Heidegger understood this at the beginning of the 20th century. But only in the mid and late 20th century, it was understood mainly by the School of Toronto (Havelock, Parry, McLuhan, Ong), that the preliterate mind have a different logic than that of the literate one. Studies in the field of artificial intelligence of Winograd and Dreyfus show that the dominant paradigm throughout the 20th century of artificial intelligence, failed because it was inferential and logical of the literate person. In contrast, the logic of the illiterate person is different and does not follow the Aristotelian representational-inferential paradigm, but follow the emergent-embedded paradigm. Accordingly, the reasoning and logic of the networked mind is different than the Aristotelian logic and the Turing machine. Instead we need a network model, "Turing Network."

1.1.7 The possibility that there exist an Info-Social power that flow in social networks, like electro-magnetic power flowing in the electricity grid. However, this force could be detected empirically and in quantifiable mathematics, only since the advent of social networking. Social networks are a "telescope and microscope" of the social sciences. Google algorithm PageRank is the information component, while the Facebook algorithm EdgeRank is the social component.