It's A Small World WD-2 from TTucker 8.0 2010

students compared the architecture of a city to that of the brain.

For example, in our last blogging assignment, students compared the architecture of a city to that of the brain, commenting in each case on how the architecture influences creativity. An interesting exercise, to be sure!

Perhaps I should say a word about small worlds, and why their architectures are assumed to facilitate creativity or–as Ron Burt would say–good ideas. Small world networks are characterized by dense clusters (comprised of close associations, or strong ties) that are linked to other clusters within a network by weak ties (or loosely coupled relationships). According to the theory, dense relationships within the clusters give rise to trust and collaboration, which enable collective action, thereby allowing members to more easily execute tasks.

old hat (from Fabrizio Savoca)

However, ideas within a cluster tend to become old hat–that is, because members are so closely associated, they tend to reinforce old ways of thinking and discourage new ideas. To garner new ideas and be creative requires outreach, based on weak ties, and the brokering of ideas across clusters.

At first glance, universities appear to be small worlds.

How does this idea apply to university settings? At first glance, one might assume that universities are ideal small worlds. Indeed, divided up into departments that are grounded in disciplinary practices and domains, the university is constituted of relatively independent departmental clusters, which are linked only indirectly through structurally equivalent ties to the university administration–an organizational paradigm that dates back to the post civil-war research university (Clark Kerr).

Medieval University (courtesy of Wikipedia

As the university, as a whole, has reached outward, how have the local clusters–the disciplinary departments–fared? It is here that one might raise a red flag.

Red Flag Day from Ridock

Recall that for small networks to encourage creativity, outreach is not enough. External exploration requires in-group exploitation, a point that Robert Axelrod makes in his book Harnessing Complexity. However, a search of the university literature yields sparse evidence that external ideas are being capitalized upon collectively among departmental faculty.

..the overall departmental learning (and the knowledge base of the university as a whole) will likely stagnate.

To the contrary, the modus operandi within academic departments appear to be based not on collaboration but rather on competition–competition for salaries, for grants and funding as well as for peer recognition. Hence, the overall departmental learning (and the knowledge base of the university as a whole) will likely stagnate over the long term. To boot, as Carl A. Raschke has noted, new technologies will exacerbate this situation, serving to fray the ties both within the university community as well as those directed outside.

For a preview of the future, one need only consult M. Mitchell Waldrops’ book, Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. In it Waldrop describes how individual scholars, who were in many cases at odds with their disciplinary departments, came together in a very synergistic fashion at the Santa Fe Institute to create the New Science of Complexity. To achieve these kind of synergies, universities might have to consider making some architectural changes to their small worlds.

On Technorati: Clark Kerr, complexity science, Duncan Watts, Harnessing Complexity, Henry Etzkowitz, Mark Grannoveter, Mitchell Waldrop, Robert Axelrod, Ron Burt, small world networks, Steven Strogatz

Finger Pointing (Courtesy of Amarand

When I was a young adolescent, my parents took me to the big city, across the Hudson River, to see my first Broadway play. While I do not remember the name of the play, nor even its plot, the moral of the tale has become a well established component of my super ego. It is summed up in one of the play’s most catchy tunes with words that go something like this: 

If you point your finger at your neighbor, there are three more pointing back at you. The first one says, go easy pard, you haven’t cleaned the rubbish in your own back yard. So if you point your finger at your neighbor, it just ain’t honesty. In your heart you feel that you first must deal with the three that are pointing back at me.

With this song in mind, I typically consider events–both large and small–not only in analytical terms, but also in personal ones.

With this song in mind, I typically consider events–both large and small–not only in analytical terms, but also in personal ones. So, before making any rash moral judgements, I think about what I might do under similar circumstances. The horrendous attack on Mumbai is a recent case in point.

Although unquestionably appalling, from both a moral and a global political standpoint, this event reminds me–as Sri Krishna revealed to Arjuna in the Bhagavad-Gita–that the battle between good and evil is not only inherent in the human condition; we, humans, also have a moral duty to choose sides. As importantly, Krishna goes on to say that, in doing our duty, we should not be so arrogant with respect to our place in the universe as to mull over the consequences of our actions. Although I find this Hindu scripture overall spiritually appealing, I take exception to Krishna’s latter remark. His call to action sounds a little too much like George Bush’s appeal to fight the axis of evil. Just consider the consequences of his lack of forethought!

Herein is a moral dilemma: how does one effectively fight evil without taking it upon oneself, and thereby actually perpetuating it? 

Herein is a moral dilemma: how does one effectively fight evil without taking it upon oneself, and thereby actually perpetuating it?

Pointing my fingers back at myself, I reflect upon my own response when confronting a bully. Although by no means the moral equivalent to the perpetrators of the attacks in Mumbai, bullies share many of the terrorists’ character traits.

In dealing with the bullies I have encountered over the course of my life, I have pursued a number of strategies–some of which have been far more successful than others. Lashing back proved the least effective–a lesson that I learned early in life, on the grammar school playground, when I sought to punch out a boy that tormented me with names such as fatty, fattty. It was I who went home with a black eye, and remonstrations from my teachers that girls don’t fight! However, I must add that the alternative strategy is not vastly superior. While withdrawing from the fray may serve to avoid physical pain, the emotional pain associated with the ensuing anxiety, humiliation, not to mention a tarnished reputation, may not be worth it. Perhaps the best strategy I have found is analogous to the game of box lacrosse. Watching a game one evening, my husband and I were struck by how the players, when hit with the lacrosse stick by one of their opponents, did not get mired in a drawn out fight. Instead, they kept their eye on the main ball, so to speak. Without tarrying, they struck a return blow, and then quickly moved on.

Writing about The Evolution of Cooperation, Robert Axelrod makes a related point. Seeking an effective strategy to the game theoretic prisoner’s dilemma, Axelrod employs a computer simulation to determine the strategy that is most likely to lead to cooperation rather than defection. As he concludes, the optimum strategy is tit for tat. As in the case of box lacrosse, a tit for tat strategy calls upon players to respond in kind to their opponents, but to adjust their strategies in accordance with their opponents’ responses. That is to say, one should respond negatively to a negative response, but positively to a positive one. Over time, according to Axelrod, trust can be established and tensions reduced.

As I see it, India–notwithstanding a horrendous provocation–has responded to the Mumbai attacks according to the strategy of tit for tat. I only wish that the US had done the same in dealing with its concerns about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

On Technorati: Arjuna, attack on Mumbai, Bhagavad-Gita, bullies, good and evil, Krishna, prisoners dillema, Robert Axelrod, self reflection, tit for tat