Alexander Boldachev
Philosophy of Evolution and
the Evolution of the Internet
St. Petersburg, 2012
Boldachev A.V. Philosophy and digital technologies. Collection of
articles. - Moscow: Ridero, 2022 (in Russian)
This text is not about the philosophy on the internet or the philosophy of the internet philosophy and the internet are strictly separated in it: the first part of the text is dedicated to
philosophy, the second - to the internet. The concept of "evolution" serves as a connecting
axis between the two parts: the conversation will be about the philosophy of evolution and
the evolution of the internet. First, it will be demonstrated how philosophy - the philosophy of
global evolutionism, armed with the concept of "singularity" - inevitably leads us to the idea
that the internet is the prototype of the future post-social evolutionary system; and then the
internet itself, or rather the logic of its development, will confirm the right of philosophy to
reason on, it would seem, purely technological topics.
Technological Singularity
The concept of 'singularity' with the epithet 'technological' to denote a special point on the
timeline of civilization's development was introduced by mathematician and writer Vernor
Vinge. Extrapolating the well-known Moore's Law, which states that the number of elements
in computer processors doubles every 18 months, he made the assumption that somewhere
around 2025 (plus or minus 10 years) computer chips should match the computational
power of the human brain (of course, purely formally - by the presumed number of
operations). Vinge stated that beyond this boundary, something non-human, an artificial
superintelligence, awaits us (humanity), and we should think carefully about whether we can
(and whether we should) prevent this onslaught.
Evolutionary Planetary Singularity
The second wave of interest in the problem of singularity arose after several scientists
(Panov, Kurzweil, Snooks) conducted a numerical analysis of the phenomenon of evolution
acceleration, namely the reduction of periods between evolutionary crises, or, one could say,
'revolutions' in Earth's history. Such revolutions should include the oxygen catastrophe and
the associated emergence of nuclear cells (eukaryotes); the Cambrian explosion - the rapid,
practically instantaneous by paleontological measures, formation of diverse species of
multicellular organisms, including vertebrates; the moments of appearance and extinction of
dinosaurs; the emergence of hominids; the Neolithic and urban revolutions; the beginning of
the Middle Ages; industrial and information revolutions; the collapse of the bipolar imperialist
system (the collapse of the USSR). It was shown that the listed and many other
1
revolutionary moments in the history of our planet fit into a certain regularity-formula, having
a singular solution around 2027. In this case, unlike Vinge's speculative assumption, we are
dealing with 'singularity' in the traditional mathematical sense - the number of crises at this
point, according to the empirically obtained formula, becomes infinite, and the intervals
between them tend to zero, that is, the solution of the equation becomes undefined.
Understandably, pointing to the point of evolutionary singularity hints at something more
substantial than the banal increase in computer performance - we realise that we are on the
threshold of a significant event in the history of the planet.
Political, Cultural, Economic Singularities as
Factors of the Absolute Crisis of Civilization
The peculiarity of the upcoming historical period (the next 10-20 years) is also indicated by
the analysis of the economic, political, cultural, and scientific spheres of society (conducted
by me in the work 'Finita la historia. Politico-cultural-economic singularity as an absolute
crisis of civilization - an optimistic look into the future'): the extension of existing development
trends in the conditions of scientific and technological progress inevitably leads to 'singular'
situations.
The modern financial-economic system, in essence, is a tool for coordinating the production
and consumption of goods spread out in time and space. If we analyse the development
trends of network communication tools and production automation, we can conclude that
over time each act of consumption will be maximally approximated in time to the act of
production, which will undoubtedly eliminate the very need for the existing
financial-economic system. That is, modern information technologies are already
approaching such a level of development when the production of a specific single product
will be determined not by the statistical factor of the consumption market, but by the order of
a specific consumer. This will become possible also as a result of the fact that the regular
reduction of labour time costs for the production of a single product will ultimately lead to a
situation where the production of this product will require minimal effort, reduced to the act of
order. Especially since due to technological progress the main product becomes not a
technical device, but its functionality - the program. Therefore, the development of
information technologies indicates both the inevitability of the absolute crisis of the modern
economic system in the future, and the possibility of unambiguous technological provision of
a new form of coordination of production and consumption. The described transitional
moment in the history of society can reasonably be called economic singularity.
The conclusion about the approaching political singularity can be obtained by analysing the
relations of two managerial acts separated in time: the adoption of a socially significant
decision and the evaluation of its result - they tend to converge. This is primarily due to the
fact that, on the one hand, for purely production-technological reasons, the time gap
between the adoption of socially significant decisions and obtaining the result is inexorably
decreasing: from centuries-decades earlier to years-months-days in the modern world. On
the other hand, with the development of network information technologies, the main problem
of management will not be the appointment of a person making the decision, but the
evaluation of the effectiveness of the result. That is, we inevitably come to a situation where
the opportunity to make a decision is given to anyone who wants it, and the evaluation of the
2
result of the decision does not require any special political mechanisms (such as voting) and
is carried out automatically.
Along with technological, economic, political singularities, one can also talk about a quite
clearly manifested cultural singularity: the transition from the total priority of sequentially
replacing each other artistic styles (with a decreasing period of their prosperity) to parallel,
simultaneous existence of all possible variety of cultural forms, to freedom of individual
creativity and individual consumption of the products of this creativity.
In science and philosophy, there is a shift in the meaning and purpose of cognition from the
creation of formal logical systems (theories) to the growth of integral individual
understanding, to the formation of the so-called post-scientific common sense, or
post-singular worldview.
Singularity as the End of an Evolutionary Period
Traditionally, the discussion of singularity - both technological singularity, associated with
fears of human enslavement by artificial intelligence, and planetary singularity, derived from
the analysis of ecological and civilizational crises - is conducted in terms of catastrophe.
However, based on general evolutionary considerations, one should not imagine the
upcoming singularity as the end of the world. It is more logical to assume that we are dealing
with an important, interesting, but not unique event in the history of the planet - a transition to
a new evolutionary level. That is, a series of singular solutions arising from the extrapolation
of trends in the development of the planet, society, and digital technology, testify to the
completion of the next (societal) evolutionary stage in the global history of the planet and the
beginning of a new post-social stage. That is, we are dealing with a historical event,
comparable in significance to the transitions from proto-biological evolution to biological
(about 4 billion years ago) and from biological evolution to societal (about 2.5 million years
ago).
During the mentioned transitional periods, singular solutions were also observed. Thus,
during the transition from the proto-biological stage of evolution to the biological stage, the
sequence of random syntheses of new organic polymers was replaced by a continuous
regular process of their reproduction, which can be designated as a "synthesis singularity".
And the transition to the societal stage was accompanied by a "singularity of adaptations":
the series of biological adaptations grew into a continuous process of producing and using
adaptive devices, that is, objects that allow almost instant adaptation to any changes in the
environment (it got colder - put on a fur coat, it started raining - opened an umbrella).
Singular trends indicating the completion of the societal stage of evolution can be interpreted
as a "singularity of intellectual innovations". In fact, over the past decades, we have been
observing this singularity as the transformation of a chain of separate discoveries and
inventions, previously separated by significant intervals of time, into a continuous flow of
scientific and technical innovations. That is, the transition to the post-social stage will
manifest as a change from the sequential appearance of creative innovations (discoveries,
inventions) to their continuous generation.
In this sense, to some extent, one can talk about the formation (precisely the formation, not
the creation) of artificial intelligence. To the same extent, as, say, societal production and use
3
of adaptive devices can be called "artificial life", and life itself from the point of view of
continuous reproduction of organic synthesis - "artificial synthesis". In general, each
evolutionary transition is associated with ensuring the functioning of the main processes of
the previous evolutionary level by new ways that are non-specific for it. Life is a
non-chemical way of reproducing chemical synthesis, reason - a non-biological way of
ensuring life. Continuing this logic, one can say that the post-social system will be a
"non-intelligent" way of ensuring human intellectual activity. Not in the sense of "stupid", but
simply in form not related to human intellectual activity.
Based on the proposed evolutionary-hierarchical logic, one can make an assumption about
the post-social future of people (elements of the socio-system). As bio-processes did not
replace chemical reactions, but, in essence, were just a complex sequence of them, as the
functioning of the socio-system did not exclude the biological (life) essence of a person - so
the post-social system will not only not replace human intellect, but will not surpass it either.
The post-social system will function ON the basis of human intellect and FOR ensuring its
activity.
Using the analysis of the regularities of transitions to new evolutionary systems (biological,
societal) as a method of global forecasting", one can indicate some principles of the
upcoming transition to post-social evolution. (1) The preservation and stability of the
previous system when forming a new one - man and humanity after the transition of
evolution to a new stage will preserve the basic principles of their social organisation. (2)
The non-catastrophic transition to the post-social system - the transition will be manifested
not in the destruction of the structures of the current evolutionary system, but is associated
with the formation of a new level. (3) The absolute inclusion of elements of the previous
evolutionary system in the functioning of the subsequent one - people will ensure a
continuous process of creation in the post-social system, supporting their social structure. (4)
The impossibility of formulating the principles of a new evolutionary system in terms of the
preceding ones - we do not possess and will not possess either the language or the
concepts for describing the post-social system.
Post-Social System and Information Network
All described variants of singularity, indicating the upcoming evolutionary transition, are
somehow related to scientific and technological progress, more precisely, to the
development of information networks. Vinge's technological singularity directly hints at the
creation of artificial intelligence, a supermind capable of absorbing all spheres of human
activity. The graph describing the acceleration of planetary evolution reaches a singular point
when the frequency of revolutionary changes, the frequency of the emergence of innovations
is presumably becoming infinite, which again is logically associated with some breakthrough
in network technologies. Economic and political singularities - the combination of production
and consumption acts, the convergence of decision-making moments and the evaluation of
its result - are also a direct consequence of the development of the information industry.
The analysis of previous evolutionary transitions suggests to us that the post-social system
should be implemented on the basis of the main elements of the social - individual minds,
united not by social (not production) relations. That is, as life is something necessarily
ensuring chemical synthesis by non-chemical methods (by reproduction), and reason is
4
something necessarily ensuring the reproduction of life by non-biological methods (in
production), so the post-social system should be thought of as something necessarily
ensuring rational production by non-social methods. The prototype of such a system in the
modern world, undoubtedly, is the global information network. But just a prototype - for a
breakthrough beyond the point of singularity, it itself must still experience more than one
crisis in order to transform into something self-sufficient, which is sometimes called the
semantic web.
Many-Worlds Theory of Truth
To discuss possible principles of organisation of the post-social system and transformation of
modern information networks, in addition to evolutionary considerations, it is necessary to fix
some philosophical-logical foundations, in particular, concerning the relationship of ontology
and logical truth.
In modern philosophy, there are several competing theories of truth: correspondence,
authoritative, pragmatic, conventional, coherent, and some others, including deflationary,
denying the very necessity of the concept of "truth". This situation is difficult to imagine as
resolvable, capable of ending with the victory of one of the theories. Rather, we should come
to understand the principle of relativity of truth, which can be formulated as follows: the truth
of a proposition can be stated only and exclusively within the limits of one of many more or
less closed systems, which in the article "Many-Worlds Theory of Truth" I suggested calling
logical worlds. For each of us, it is obvious that to assert the truth of a sentence we utter,
stating some state of affairs in personal reality, in our own ontology, does not require
reference to any theory of truth: the sentence is true simply by the fact of its embedding in
our ontology, in our logical world. It is clear that there are also supra-individual logical worlds,
generalised ontologies of people united by one or another activity - scientific, religious,
artistic, etc. And it is obvious that in each of these logical worlds, the truth of propositions is
fixed in a special way - by the way of their inclusion in a specific activity. It is the specifics of
activity within a certain ontology that determines the set of methods for fixing and generating
true propositions: in some worlds, the authoritative method prevails (in religion), in others,
the coherent one (in science), in others, the conventional one (in ethics, politics).
So, if we do not want to limit the semantic network to describing only some one sphere (say,
physical reality), then we initially have to proceed from the fact that there can be no one
logic, one principle of truth in it - the network should be built on the principle of equality of
intersecting, but fundamentally not reducible to each other logical worlds, reflecting the
multitude of all conceivable activities.
Ontologies of Activity
And here we transition from the philosophy of evolution to the evolution of the internet, from
hypothetical singularities to utilitarian problems of the semantic web.
The main issues of building a semantic network are largely related to its designers'
cultivation of a naturalistic, scientific philosophy, that is, with attempts to create a single,
correct ontology reflecting the so-called objective reality. And it's understandable that the
truthfulness of statements in this ontology should be determined according to unified rules,
5
according to a universal theory of truth (which is often understood as a correspondence
theory, since it involves matching statements to some "objective reality").
At this point, a question should be asked: what should an ontology describe, what is that
"objective reality" it should correspond to? An indefinite set of objects, called the world, or
specific activity within a finite set of objects? What are we interested in: reality in general or
fixed relationships of events and objects in a sequence of actions aimed at achieving specific
results? Answering these questions, we must inevitably conclude that ontology only makes
sense as finite and exclusively as an ontology of activity (actions). Therefore, it is
meaningless to talk about a single ontology: as many activities – so many ontologies. An
ontology should not be invented - it should be identified through the formalisation of the
activity itself.
Of course, it's understood that if we're talking about the ontology of geographical objects,
navigation ontology, then it will be the same for all activities not aimed at changing the
landscape. But if we turn to areas where objects do not have a fixed attachment to
space-time coordinates, do not relate to physical reality, then ontologies multiply without any
restrictions: we can prepare a dish, build a house, create a training methodology, write a
political party program, combine words into a poem in an infinite number of ways, and each
way is a separate ontology. With such an understanding of ontologies (as ways of fixing
specific activity) they can and should be created only in this very activity. Of course,
assuming that we are talking about activities directly performed on a computer or recorded
on it. There will soon be no other kind; those that will not be "digitised" should not particularly
interest us.
Ontology as the Primary Result of Activity
Any activity consists of individual operations establishing connections between objects of a
fixed subject area. The actor (hereinafter we will traditionally call him a user) time after time whether he writes a scientific article, fills in a table with data, makes a work schedule performs a quite standard set of operations that ultimately lead to achieving a fixed result.
And in this result, he sees the meaning of his activity. However, if we look from a position not
locally utilitarian, but systematically global, the main value of the work of any professional
lies not in the next article, but in the method of its writing, in the ontology of activity. Thus, the
second main principle of the semantic network (after the conclusion "there should be an
unlimited number of ontologies; as many activities, so many ontologies") should be the
thesis: the meaning of any activity lies not in the final product, but in the ontology that is fixed
during its implementation.
Of course, the product itself, say, an article, contains an ontology - it is essentially the
ontology embodied in the text, but in such a frozen form, the product is very difficult to
undergo ontological analysis. It is against this stone - the fixed final product of activity - that
the semantic approach stumbles. But it should be understood that the semantics (ontology)
of the text can only be identified already possessing the ontology of this specific text. It's
difficult for a person to understand a text with a slightly different ontology (with altered
terminology, conceptual network), let alone a program. However, as is clear from the
proposed approach, there is no need to analyse the semantics of the text: if we are faced
6
with the task of identifying a certain ontology, there is no need to analyse the fixed product,
one should turn directly to the activity itself, during which it appeared.
Ontological Parser
Essentially, this means that a software environment should be created that would
simultaneously be both a working tool for the professional user and an ontological parser,
capturing all his actions. Nothing more is required from the user than just to work: to create a
plan for the text, edit it, search for sources, highlight quotations, place them in the
appropriate sections, make footnotes and comments, organise the index and thesaurus, etc.
The maximum additional actions are to mark new terms and link them to the ontology via the
context menu. Any professional would be glad to have this additional "load". So, the task is
quite specific: to create such a tool for a professional in any field that he could not refuse, a
tool that not only allows performing all standard operations with all kinds of information
(collection, processing, configuration), but also automatically formalises the activity, building
the ontology of this activity, and corrects it when gaining "experience".
Universe of Objects and Cluster Ontologies
Of course, the described approach to building a semantic network will only be truly effective
if the third principle is followed: program compatibility of all created ontologies, i.e., ensuring
their systemic connectedness. Undoubtedly, each user, each professional creates their own
ontology and works in its environment, but the compatibility of individual ontologies by data
and by the ideology of organisation will ensure the creation of a single universe of objects
(data).
Automatic comparison of individual ontologies will allow, by identifying their intersections, to
create thematic cluster ontologies - hierarchically organised non-individual structures of
objects. Interaction of individual ontology with a cluster one will significantly simplify the
user's activity, direct and correct it.
Uniqueness of Objects
A significant requirement for a semantic network should be ensuring the uniqueness of
objects, without which it is impossible to implement the connectedness of individual
ontologies. For example, any text should exist in the system in a single copy - then each
reference to it, each quotation will be recorded: the user can track the inclusion of text and
its fragments in certain clusters or personal ontologies. It is clear that by "a single copy" it is
not meant to be stored on one server, but to assign a unique identifier to an object,
regardless of its location. Thus, the principle of finiteness of the volume of unique objects
should be implemented with the multiplicity and infinity of their organisation in the ontology.
User-Centrism
The principal consequence of organising a semantic network according to the proposed
scheme will be a departure from site-centrism – a site-oriented structure of the internet. The
appearance and presence of a certain object in the network means only and exclusively the
assignment of a unique identifier to it and its inclusion in at least one ontology (say, the
7
individual ontology of the user who placed the object). An object, for example, a text, should
not have any address on the Web – it is not tied to a site or a page. The only way to access
the text is to display it in the user's browser after finding it in any ontology (either as an
independent object, or by reference or quotation). The network becomes exclusively
user-centric: before and outside the user's connection, we have only a universe of objects
and a set of cluster ontologies built on this universe, and only after the connection does the
universe's configuration occur relative to the user's ontology structure – of course, with the
possibility of freely switching "points of view", moving to the positions of other, adjacent or
distant ontologies. The main function of the browser becomes not displaying content, but
connecting to ontologies (clusters) and navigating within them.
Services and goods in such a network will be presented as separate objects, initially
inscribed in the ontologies of their owners. If the user's activity identifies a need for a
particular object, and it is available in the system, it will be automatically offered. (Essentially,
this is how contextual advertising works now – if you were looking for something, you won't
be left without offers.) On the other hand, the need for a new object (service, product) may
be identified when analysing cluster ontologies.
Naturally, in a user-centric network, the proposed object will be presented in the user's
browser in the form of an embedded widget. To view all offers (all products of a manufacturer
or all texts of an author), the user must switch to the supplier's ontology, in which all objects
available to external users are systematically displayed. And of course, the network
immediately provides an opportunity to familiarise yourself with the ontologies of the cluster
manufacturers, and, most interestingly and importantly, with information about the behaviour
of other users in this cluster.
Conclusion
Thus, the information network of the future appears as a universe of unique objects with
individual ontologies built on them, combined into cluster ontologies. An object is defined
and accessible on the network for the user only as inscribed in one or multiple ontologies.
Ontologies are predominantly formed automatically by parsing the user's activity. Access to
the network is organised as the user's existence/activity in their own ontology with the
possibility of its expansion and transition to other ontologies. And most likely it will be difficult
to call the described system a network – we are dealing with a kind of virtual world, a
universe only partially presented to users in the form of their individual ontology – a private
virtual reality.
In conclusion, it is important to emphasise that neither the philosophical nor the technical
aspect of the impending singularity has anything to do with the problem of so-called artificial
intelligence. Solving specific applied tasks will never lead to the creation of what could be
fully called intelligence. And that new thing that will make up the essence of the functioning
of the next evolutionary level will no longer be intelligence - neither artificial nor natural. More
precisely, it would be more correct to say that it will be intelligence as much as we can
understand it with our human intelligence.
When working on creating local information systems, one should treat them only as technical
devices and not think about philosophical, psychological, and especially ethical-aesthetic
8
and globally catastrophic moments. Although undoubtedly this will be done by both
humanitarians and techies, but their reasoning will not accelerate or slow down the regular
course of solving purely technical tasks. Philosophical comprehension of both the entire
evolutionary movement of the World and the content of the upcoming hierarchical transition
will come with the transition itself.
The transition itself will be technological. But it will not happen as a result of a specific genius
solution. But by a combination of decisions. Having overcome the critical mass. Intelligence
will embody itself in the "iron". But not a private intelligence. And not in a specific device.
And it will no longer be intelligence.
P.S. An attempt to implement the noospherenetwork.com project (a variant after primary
testing).
Literature
1. Vinge, Vernor. The coming technological singularity. Whole Earth Review, 1993
2. D. Panov. Completion of the planetary cycle of evolution? Philosophical Sciences, No.
3–4:42–49; 31–50, 2005 (in Russian).
3. Boldachev A.V. Finita la historia. Political-cultural-economic singularity as an absolute
crisis of civilization. An optimistic look into the future. SPb., 2008 (in Russian).
4. Boldachev A.V. Structure of global evolutionary levels. From the Beginning to the End of
History. Collection of articles. - Moscow: Ridero, 2022 (in Russian).
5. Boldachev A.V. Novations. Judgments in the stream of the evolutionary paradigm, SPb.:
Publishing House of St. Petersburg University, 2007. — 256 p. (in Russian)
9