Lecture presented January 29th, 2002 at The Magnum and Stein Duckworth St., St. John's Nf. in the context of The St. John's Public Lectures in Philosophy Series organized by the Department of Philosophy, Memorial University.

This is the poster for the session. You will need Adobe Acrobat to view it.

From the familiar to the unfamiliar

One of the purposes of metaphors is to help us understand things that are unfamiliar to us. When we evoke or draw on a familiar concept, we can appreciate the properties and attributes of phenomenon that is often unknown or unfamiliar to us. Metaphors are a type of figurative language where statements say something on one level but convey meaning on another level. They are common in literature. Think of for example T.S. Eliot. Eliot wrote-"At the end of all our journeying, we will return to the place of departure and know it for the first time". In this famous quote, Eliot was using familiar concepts of place and of travel to refer to less familiar, more complex, phenomena such as a metaphysical journey or an experience of life, self-awareness, self-discovery or self realisation. Robert Frost's famous poem "The road not taken" exploits metaphor to make the reader appreciate concepts of life's choices and decisions.

Of course, metaphors are not only common in literature. We use them all the time in computing. In this sense, they often allow us to concretise or visualise a phenomenon which cannot be visualised except symbolically. Our thinking about computers is almost completely framed by metaphors. We talk about windows, desktops, mailboxes, trash cans, folders and software programs such as MS Office.

From place to possibilities

When it comes to the Internet, we have used many different metaphors. A lot of these rely on the concept of place or space. Two examples would be "cyberspace" and the "information highway". Of course, corresponding to these metaphors we have the various verbs. We talk about surfing, exploring, browsing, navigating and travelling in this space.

Yet, do these and other spatial metaphors really capture the nature of this phenomenon? Does thinking about the Internet as a Superhighway allow us to appreciate what the Internet is or what it might be? I would argue that it does not. In fact, I believe that the metaphors of space actually constrain and limit our thinking about the Internet and what it might represent.

The problem is that, by relying on the metaphor of the Information or Superhighway, we focus our attention on the infrastructure of the phenomenon. Thinking of it in terms of space is also misleading. For example, how far is it from one hyperlink to another? Are some hyperlinks farther away from each other than others? Are concepts like distance, proximity and place actually relevant when it comes to thinking about the Internet?

Bill Gates argues in his book "The Road Ahead" that the most appropriate metaphor for the Internet is that of a market. This is a metaphor of place again. However, it does nonetheless allow us to shift our thinking away from the infrastructure, towards the functions of the Internet. Yet, if you are like me, this metaphor does not capture for you what this phenomenon might be.

So, I would argue that we need to devise an alternate metaphor. But how do we do this? How do we go about evoking a metaphor that more aptly and accurately allows us to conceptualise the Internet for what it might be?

I propose that we need to take a different approach in our efforts to create metaphors for this phenomenon. We can begin this approach by thinking of the Internet not in terms of its infrastructure, nor in terms of how it operates, nor in terms of place, but in terms of what it makes possible.

The rationale for taking this approach is thus: technologies and tools such as the Internet are not so important in and of themselves. The measure of their power lies in what they make possible. By their very nature, technologies and tools are designed to augment our capacities. The more they do this, the more powerful they are. Let us begin with the example of the printing press to better appreciate this notion.

From Gutenberg to Berners-Lee

Gutenberg's 15th century invention of the printing press in and of itself is not a technology that we think much about. What was important about the printing press lies, not in how it operated or what it did, nor in its mechanical nature. What was important about it is what it made possible. It made possible mass communication, dissemination of ideas, and of knowledge and information. In this sense, it changed civilisation in a way that few other inventions have been able to do. It was at the origin of a social, cultural and scientific revolution.

Another technology invented approximately 400 years later will also have a significant effect on civilization though not nearly as far-reaching an effect as the printing press. The telephone was an important new technology because of what it made possible i.e. one-to-one synchronous communication independent of space. Again, this form of communication has had an impact on society particularly on western culture.

About half a century later the television is born. Unlike the telephone which allowed for one-to-one communication, the television (like radio) serves as a broadcast medium allowing for one-to-many communication.

In the 60s, we have the beginnings of what today we call the Internet. Unlike its communication predecessors, the Internet facilitates many-to-many, one-to-one and one-to-many communication. In 1976, Queen Elizabeth went online with the first royal email message. In 1982, the word Internet is supposed to have been used for the first time. In 1984, William Gibson coined the term "cyberspace" in his famous novel Neuromancer. In 1990, Tim Berners-Lee implemented a hypertext system which evolved into what today is the World Wide Web.

From mechanical tools to cognitive tools

Initially, the web was one of the tools or technologies which combined with others to form what we call the Internet. Some of the other tools were WSFTP, mail readers, Usenet, ICQ, and video-conferencing.

Increasingly, however, the World Wide Web or Web is serving as the interface or medium between the user and all of these other tools. For example, I now go on the web to access my email because I use a web-based email reader. There is a certain converging of these separate Internet technologies and tools to be accessed through a web interface. So we can almost talk about the Web and the Internet synonymously which we often do now. Although we must keep in mind of course that the Internet comprises many tools, one of which is the Web.

Why are these tools so important? Because they are multiple, malleable, and able to be manipulated by the Internet users themselves.

I'd like us to take a detour for a moment in order to focus on the concept of tools. Tools were first created and used to augment physical capacities such as to extend the length of the arms or to increase the power of muscle such as a saw, an axe or a shovel. The industrial age saw the creation of many new tools and technologies far more complex than their predecessors. These tools greatly enhanced our physical capacities because they were artificially powered. The information age brought yet further advancements to tools. However, this time, instead of augmenting our physical capacities, these tools allowed us to extend our cognitive reach by making more efficient or effective certain cognitive processes. A computer allows its users to extend their cognitive reach as do the software, languages and programs on the computer. However, unlike the saw that aids in the execution of a tangible, physical task, these information age tools allow the user to perform more efficiently and effectively mental or cognitive tasks. We can therefore refer to these aids as cognitive tools. Internet tools make it possible to perform multiple cognitive tasks:

• They make it possible to experience phenomenon virtually without the need to be in the physical presence of the atoms of this phenomenon i.e. we can experience them in bits and bytes only. In this sense, the tools can augment spatial as well as temporal reach by eliminating constraints related to distance and to time.
• They allow users to access services directly without the need for intermediaries. We can use as examples here banking services or even publishing services-each user can directly publish information online providing they have access to the tools but they do not need a publisher or editor. We can access music directly through peer-to-peer file trading tools such as Napster.
• The tools facilitate asynchronous & synchronous many-to-many, one-to-one and one-to-many communication on a global scale and independent of time and place
• The technology of hypertext facilitates non-linear representation and retrieval of massive amounts of information. By representation I mean that users not only get information from the Internet but they also put information on there. And this information is presented n a nonlinear way with hyperlinkages between documents and pictures allowing us to jump not only from page to page but from topic to topic.
• The tools can augment memory by providing access to a voluminous, current, multimodal database of information distributed over servers situated globally;
• We can use tools to access other tools. For example using a web browser we can access a tool such as Flash in order to build interactive animated artefacts.
• We can even take advantage of metatools or tools to build other tools. We can use tools such as VRML to build new tools. For example, we can use them to build an interface which can be manipulated by other users in order to help them navigate through simulated 3d worlds.

What is important here is the nature of the tools. However, what is equally important is that they are multiple. What is most important is that they are in the hands of the user. So what we have are millions of people each sitting in front of a node or computer terminal each making use of these tools. They are using search engines to locate and retrieve information. They are using tools for synchronous or asynchronous communication. They are using tools to shop and to sell. They are using tools such as HTML to share and exchange knowledge. They are using tools to participate in e-learning experiences. Others are using tools to create further tools. So there are multiple interactions between the tools and users and between users themselves. And this takes place largely through web-based interfaces or browsers. These are all mediated interactions via a computer screen.

From outside to inside of the Internet

So what we have now then is a multiplicity of mediated interactions between users and tools and between the users themselves via an interface. We also have the symbolic artefacts that result from or are produced by these interactions. The knowledge and information-the Web pages for example are these artefacts. So we have:

• Individual users
• Sophisticated cognitive tools
• Artefacts

We can argue further that without any one of these elements, the Internet as we know it today would not be the same. Without the tools, it would cease to exist altogether and without the users it would cease to exist completely as well.

This last point is a very important one. Let's imagine for a moment a "12 monkeys" type movie scenario in which some virulent disease destroys all humans on the face of the earth. Let's assume as well that all the mechanical and electronic connections (the metanetwork) remain in place since they would be immune to biological viruses and bacteria. All the users are destroyed. Reflect for a moment on what would happen to the Internet. What would happen is that it would simply cease to exist and or evolve.

This scenario reminds us that we need to be cautious about thinking of the Internet as something that exists outside of, separately from or independently of its users. We must remember not to conceptualise the Internet as being an entity separate from us rather we can conceptualise it with the users as a part of it. In this sense, we can say that "we are the Internet" in the same way that we sometimes will say "we are the world". We are not outside of the Internet. Nor is it outside of us. We are inside of it because we are a part of it.

From central to distributed intelligence

We are perhaps now ready to begin to imagine a metaphor that might make the Internet more familiar to us and help us better conceptualise it.

We know that the metaphor must reflect or model processes of interaction and interconnectedness. To find a metaphor that does this we can look to the natural sciences. Some biological models account for interaction in organisms.

If we think of the Internet as an organism then the users become cells. These cells interact with each other. Each of those cells has all the apparatus necessary to lead a life of its own. Each cell has an individual existence. The life of the organism (in this case the Internet) comes from the way in which the cells interact in pursuing their own goals. This interaction results in the creation of an entity much larger than any of the individuals.

This large entity or organism constitutes a complex dynamic system: complex because of the multiple patterns of interaction and dynamic because it is constantly evolving, adapting and growing which prevents it of course from being described in purely mechanical terms. This complexity increases with each of the interactions and with each additional user and as new tools evolve and as new artefacts are added.

We can also note in regard to this organism that its behaviour is unpredictable and somewhat anarchic. It does not respond to central control. It is a distributed system instead. This is why we cannot think of the Internet as the brain in the organism. It does not have properties of centralisation rather it has properties of distribution. In this organism, the whole itself does not embody intelligence but each cell does. For example, the associations or links which are made between cells are made by the users and facilitated by the tools. The hyperlinks between artifacts are there by virtue of having been each coded in individually by humans using Web page design tools and the technology of HTML a language designed to facilitate this process or creating hyperlinkages.

The organism cannot learn new information or generate information on its own. Only the users -or, in this case, the cells are able to accomplish this. The "intelligence" comes from each of the cells. The equivalent of memory is a distributed memory since the stored information and content lie on individual servers and computers operated by different individuals. So we can think of an organism that has for example a decentralized or distributed nervous system. The organism operates on this basis of distribution. Without it, the organism would not have any intelligence or memory.

From organism to superorganism

Yet this property of distribution is not limiting. On the contrary. The fact that the organism as a whole is not intelligent, that only the cells are, is what makes this organism unique among organisms. In fact it makes it not only unique but even more powerful than the typical organism. With the Internet, the cells or users are self-aware and intelligent. Each one is very powerful because its capacities are further augmented by the cognitive tools. Furthermore, the individual cells are actually organisms themselves which means we have a metaorganism (organism of organisms). For this reason, we can characterise the Internet, not only as an organism, but instead as a superorganism.

This concept of a superorganism is not a new one. In the past, the metaphor has generated a lot of interest from science fiction writers such as H.G.Wells to theologians like Pierre Theillard de Chardin. Some individuals liken society to a superorganism. Others consider all life forms, including humans to be the parts of a planet-sized superorganism. Insect societies such as ant colonies are sometimes characterised as superorganisms. All of these have in common that they are highly complex, that each cell of the superorganism is an organism in and of itself.

When it comes to the Internet, researchers with the Principia Cybernetica Project would like to create what we could call a super-super-organism. This project has a mission to determine ways in which to bestow greater intelligence to the Internet's main tool - the Web. They would like to see a Web that actively thinks as it interacts with users. In this sense, in addition to a distributed intelligence in each cell or user, there would be intelligence inherent in the system i.e in the Web itself.

Projects such as those of Principia Cybernetica remind us of the evolving and emerging nature of the Internet. And there are many other projects ongoing all over the world now as I speak. Aleready we have a very rudimentary form of this intelligence in the form of cookies or minature programs that reside on your hard drive which you download each time you visit certain sites. Cookies can be used by site administrators to tailor information to the user to give them for example the weather for their area or stock quotes related to prior personal information which they have provided to the site. A more intelligent web would be able to assess things such as prior knowledge. Under these circumstances, the information or route to the information would depend on whether you are a novice or an expert. Such knowledge may be assessed by information you provide directly or you may be profiled or modeled based on the pattern of your interactions with the site. Another way of adding intelligence would be to have the web create links that are not already placed there by the users. An intelligent Web would create links and associations between concepts. Tim Berners Lee is working on such a project right now. He calls his research semantic webs.

I have only mentioned a very small number of projects. The important point is that these projects indicate that the Internet as we know it is still in its infancy and is very much changing and growing and becoming perhaps more intelligent. And this leads me to the final section of my lecture:

From being to becoming

When I first began preparing this lecture, the question I wanted to ask was: "What is the Internet"? As I began reading on the topic and as I talked to people, my thinking on the topic evolved. I also found that as part of this process of answering my question, I needed to engage in thinking about thinking. I had to ask myself if the way I was thinking about the Internet was going to predetermine the potential or possible conceptions that I could have of it. It was in this process of metathinking that I realized that I had phrased the question incorrectly. The phrasing was suggesting that the Internet was in a given, set or frozen state of being. Yet the more I thought about the Internet, the more I began to conceptualize it as something that is very much in a state of emergence or of becoming.

No doubt, as the Internet evolves and emerges so too will our thinking about it emerge. We have done a fair amount of thinking here tonight. We have taken in this lecture a number of "journeys" to use yet another metaphor. We have gone from the familiar metaphor to the unfamiliar Internet itself. We have gone from the perspective of the Internet as place to its consideration in terms of the possibilities it offers. Historically, we have gone from Joahnnes Gutenberg to Tim Berners-Lee and from mechanical tools to cognitive tools. We have moved from consideration of the Internet as being outside of us to a perspective that sees us as inside of and as part of the Internet. We have gone from thinking about the concepts of centralized intelligence and organisms to thinking of distributed intelligence and superorganisms. Finally we have gone from thinking about the Internet in terms of being in a given state to thinking about it as something that is becoming or emerging.

Of course, this is but one journey which you might take in your attempts to make sense of this phenomenon. Or perhaps this is a place of departure from which you can wander off on your own. I invite you then to wander and to begin thinking about the Internet either as a superorganism or a superhighway or perhaps as something else. Perhaps, in your journey, you may go by way of "The road not taken" or the road less traveled. In this case, you may adopt the perspective that the level of complexity of the Internet is actually so great, it exceeds at this time our abilities as humans to grasp it with or without reliance on metaphors.