Reaction to the Siemens presentation on Groups, Connectives and Networks

As with most folks at the Second Life Cohort afternoon meeting
yesterday, I am more comfortable with George's understanding of
groups as a form of, rather than distinct from, networks.  As I said
yesterday, I think of groups as inward facing and networks as outward
facing, like solar systems (groups) and galaxies (networks) of
different types.

Stephen seemed to have an emphasis on belonging to group as a
pleasant process.  George seemed to have an emphasis on
individualness and desire not to belong to a collective or group.
But both seemed to be saying that there was some negative
association with groups (in Stephen's case that it's quaint but
stifling and outdated and in George's case that it is opposed
to humanity's striving for individualism).  George seemed to express
the fear of the writers of Star Trek who warned of the Borg
mentality and being assimilated into non-humanity. 

I found it interesting that where Stephen seemed to be saying
that individuality (networks rather than groups) is desirable,
George seemed to emphasize the words "need" and "necessary."
There is a need, Siemens says, for human recognition. I found
this timely as I am being marginalized at work (perhaps because
of my disabilities) which is all the more dangerous since I
work in Knowledge Management where networking is essential!  But
my contributions, expertise and position are being ignored and
taken over by others who are claiming them for their own.  So George's
statements about the need for recognition resonated with me.  

Other points from George's presentation:

- Basis of collective intelligence is the self. 

- Groups/collectives = type of network 

- Externalize concepts into context 

- What we know a function of how we relate it to other entities,
people, and how distributed across a social/technological network 

-Protection of self and recognition of our contributions are
NEEDED as part of our humanity (This is the part that resonated
with me but also sets up dissonance with my thoughts on humility.
WHere does my human need of recognition conflict with servanthood
and turn into pride?  And isn't the basis of Knowledge Management
the sharing of information?  Again, at work, as I am trying to
assert my role as a key player in Knowledge Management, as the need
for facilitators even in Connectivism training, I am being told
that is wrong.)

- Self not created thru socialization but shaped and
expressed thru socialization negotiation and conversation with
other people. (This is interesting in the context of Missions.
The change from non-Believer to Believer is framed within the
context of being shaped by connecting to one group of Believers
or another which forms us like a pot on the potter's wheel.
Believers must be careful about creating converts to their own
image versus the image of Christ, in keeping with Paul's warning
to those who were saying "I follow Paul!" or "I follow Apollos!",
rather we should all follow/be shaped in the image of CHRIST alone.

Connectives = Mosaic
Collectives - melting pot; the self is absorbed (not to be confused
with being "self-absorbed."

- Must relate with and trust others to schieve complex goals.
Yet must retain identity as much as possible 

- Innovation is deviation
- Recognize need of deviation for growth
- Particular results requires control of network (This is a revist
of what we've dealt with in the class so far; connections are good
but there must be an ordering or filtering if one is to achieve
specified goals, even if other goals are allowed in addition).
In Missions context this would be like the application of creeds.
Beliefs which grow out of the beliefs in the creeds are okay, but
not if they conflict with the creeds and the basic, agreed
understanding "This is what a Christian believes."

networks:
agent autonomy
Complexity
Task specialization (degree of specialization)