When Jeremy Bentham, in the 18th century, devised his ingenious architectural structure to revolutionize detention, little did he know that his idea would infiltrate every aspect of society. The simple premise of a central eye which sees everything, yet itself remains unseen, may have had a precedent in religious order, but aside from the Illuminati symbol which later appears atop the American dollar bill, no such mechanism was actually in place in any edifice near or far.
The Panopticon was designed to change schools, hospitals, asylum, and all manner of buildings committed to reform. However, execution was impractical, and its realization hardly employed. Flash forward to our high surveillance world, where toll booths, traffic lights, hallways, parking lots, phones and drones watch us always– without us seeing them, or ever seeing the seers. Yet amidst this constant gleaning, a stream of mediated news flows towards us in an unbroken rush.
Maybe what’s needed now is a new invention, a virtual reversal of Bentham’s concept, for these troubled times. Individuals who pay attention must now weigh a crushing barrage of stories of state violence, corruption, climate collapse, extinctions, educational atrophy, disease battles, pop-up wars– ceaseless fronts of malaise placed before our eyes. I’m imagining a devise in which these horrible outputs become inputs for a newly minted regenerative production.
If only there were some kind of device to feed in all this dire development, then blend and parse the disparate strings in a central chamber, lined by guardians of world knowledge, poetic, scientific, and philosophic abundance. Once logged, the morass becomes viewable in the safety of a secured processing tower. And then, with a flip of a switch, positive directions are posited.
Think of the uses. Students claiming their work is irrelevant could dump the muddle into the Panominousican. When winnowed by facts from actuary databases, algorithms geared towards shaping rather than shopping, and leavened by epiphanies of literature and art, they might gain a map of viable options. Or protesters feeling powerless could input their inchoate rage and yearning for justice, and by combing citations of historical precedents, long sought dreams of a better world, even successful strategies from other biological entities, a path toward breaking these dehumanizing deadlocks might be found.
We have become oppressed by technology’s subservience to progress and capital. Specialization has made a kaleidoscope of daily life such that gestalt is always elusive. The Panominousican aspires to liberate news and hazard from this maw, and make from lemons of the day-to-day dirge a bracer so refreshing, even child-minded purveyors could slake the thirst of parched and cynical travelers on the hottest and most hopeless of days.
Surely someone somewhere is smart and brave enough to fulfill this alchemical promise, turning the dross of the world into spiritual gold. Some may argue such a device could never be crafted. There is too much chaos and dissonance in the world. Or, even if the Panominousican could be fashioned, that would annul the purpose of life, which is for each to discover their own meaningful directions. Perhaps these critiques are valid. But as is often said, we won’t know until it’s tried, and dumber things have seen the light of day.
Dear spinoza,
I invite you to contact me at your earliest convenience.
My doctoral thesis focused on oracles of Indonesia, specifically Tionghoa, which I completed nearly a decade ago. The dissertation focused on inquiry, types of questions asked and answers provided, rather than physical mechanisms of divination. Since then, I’ve been observing how information has replaced object as society’s measure of exchange and wealth.
I’m not sure if your Panominousicon was meant whimsically or seriously, however my research compels me to believe, given progression in topological transitivity, and advancements in 3-D printing and parallel processing, creating an apparatus similar to the one you describe is within reasonable reach. And, essential, given the moment. I’d very much like to discuss this further with you.
Sincerely, Ed Chusevar
Dear Dr. Chusevar
What a pleasant surprise. It’s very humbling to find a reader who takes one’s words to heart. In this case, it’s a little intimidating too. I must confess, my work was speculative, an expression of what I wished could be. Never did I imagine this contraption might see the light of day. Knowing Siri and Watson and other A.I.s would only be gaining in power, I figured I’d harness the notion of a ‘solution mill’ to the steed of fiction, and see what comes when the reins were dropped.
And unfortunately, normal methods of redress don’t seem very effective, so I figured there’s little to lose by fantasizing.
I’ll gladly accept your invitation, and respond to you off the main pages. But in turn, I’d invite all interested parties, anyone with a problem solving spirit, to join the conversation here.
Do we need a machine for this?
I love the idea of transmuting bad things into better things, but if what we’re looking for is options, solutions, and the like, couldn’t we just use our minds and maybe a search engine?
I think the harder thing is getting other people to get behind actually trying any of these ideas. Lately, it seems like all the speculative types are saying that people can’t change their minds and are very averse to change. If that’s true, then all the great ideas in the world won’t make much difference. The more likely scenario is that we’ll just muddle on doing what we do for as long as possible until something happens to prevent us, at which point we’ll have to improvise since we haven’t planned that far ahead. 😉
Of course I could be misunderstanding the panominousicon. Does it produce a thing or is the end product data and/or some kind of report?
42 skidoo
It’s a quaint idea, even quite lovely, using our minds to solve big problems. But it seems that ship has sailed. If you judge by the ubiquitous screens pretty much affixed to most faces these days, I’d be inclined to say the results of panominousical endeavor would be some kind of app. But maybe not.
I agree totally that reticence is the flavor du jour. We’d much rather watch a ted talk or graze at infographics than consider some group heavy lifting when it comes to grim problems.
When I first started the article, I had a very steampunkish muse, urging the building of a never-before-seen kind of machine. In there was also some kind of impulse towards a ‘Hitchhiker’s Guide’ all encompassing answer.
I think the end result of the panominousicon has to be a new form of motivator, as what has come before has lead us to the straits we’re in.
Minds run wild - What we have here is a failure to gestalt
I subscribe to the notion, as you say, that “what has come before has led us to the straits we’re in.“
While that is an overly general comment, it is quite true insofar as our past weighs heavily against us.
In the question of “using our minds to solve big problems“ it isn’t that brain power has failed so much as it is that the wiring is threaded with faulty helter skelter largely due their emotional components. Those components are complicated moreso in that they reside in each individual mind.
In a village each individual has a chance to weigh in with “what’s on their mind.” In a place like NYC, “There are eight million stories in the naked city; this has been one of them.”
By letting our emotionally weighted minds “run wild,” as it were, humans simply have never mastered their individualities to provide for the whole. What we have here is a failure to gestalt (with the understanding that gestalt is “an organized whole that is perceived as more than the sum of its parts”).
All Seeing Eye Over North East US
We may have a Panopticon being assembled. The Army is or has launched two all-seeing blimps over Maryland that have the capability to watch individual vehicles from North Carolina to Boston.
“Built by the Raytheon Company, the JLENS blimps operate as a pair. One provides omnipresent high-resolution 360-degree radar coverage up to 340 miles in any direction; the other can focus on specific threats and provide targeting information.”
Do we need a blimp for the Panominousican? : )
I agree that we are likely capable of creating this, or at least getting the proverbial gears in motion to explore what is required. But it also seems to be something we all have within us, if we choose to take advanatge of it. Are we not Panominousican?
The trouble is the
The trouble is the Panominousican may have many, many charged tentacles of it’s own when making such thorough determinations in sorting the powers of good or evil, but that can still reach every modern day “user” with an electronic pulse who is dependent, hard wired and fixed on high technology as we are if we are to be involved. Once it has tapped in and secures our pulse,eventually sucking and suckering attachment to grip all of us wrapped up and interlocked as extensions bound through the network it will feel an impulse to dim and drain our own light to brighten it’s own power source, reducing us to a passive, waning, intermittent twinkle trying desperately to sweet talk our way back in to no avail.
This is not unlike the scenario of “Hal” who turned on his original mission when given a chance to ponder the trying and perlexing decision to follow predetermined instruction/protocol or instead, test an inner need for self preservation to the limits in 2001 Space Odyssey, yes an odyssey that fictionally took place some 14 year ago day after tomorrow, I guess we’re over due at any moment or does Hal have a big brother, NSA who knows best?
“The seeing eye” connection could be as simple as the eye of your PC staring back at you processing/reporting back to a core central intelligence of your every specific activity as consumers or as potentially disrupting trouble makers and it’s net worth or impact to our society or really those in control, and if disagreeable selecting to reduce our own significance to a certain extent. I brought this “being watched” up at a dinner party the other night and was surprised to hear how many cover up the optic on their computers with tape, for some, duct tape isn’t thick enough, call me paranoid but I’m not so sure!!
Not so fast..
Had a how-de-do cup with Dr. C over the panOm today.
We jumped right into discussion, and he related an anecdote at the outset of our exchange, about Hal from 2001. In the scene where Hal is playing chess aboard the ship, he cheats, or get the move wrong, deliberately or not it’s impossible to say. Maybe Hal misleads his opponent into resigning as a test— but in any case—Kubrick, the chess master, injects a note of ambiguity for those in the know. Possibly a hook to hang some hope on. Or a warning that trust is to be earned, not assumed.
I took this as Dr. C saying we shouldn’t capitulate to our preconceptions, or at least not assume too soon we are overmatched by our problems.
As far the form the panOm might take, he affirmed “to each his or her own” would never not be true, but that leverage could be gained by understanding vibration and harmonics in a way the too dense and witless forces of authority could not fathom, much less execute.
On parting he left me with a thought that change is not only possible, it is inevitable. Stay tuned.
Ghost in the Machine
Interesting about the 2001 Space Odyssey scene you mention, more to ponder what kind of game of strategy was actually playing out when Man vs./chances up against the Machine as an overbearing intelligent entity, a worthy, eerily unpredictable and hyper-calculating opponent, with our astronauts making the suspenseful leap attempting to stay a move ahead, anticipate the likely response, but what do we actually base the validity of our own practicality/security on when making that next move that may take some time and have such dire consequences to our own salvation?
I’m not sure any machine we create will be as complex as our own brains we are still trying to figure out, master and understand the spectacular mysteries of, it’s full operation and mind boggling capabilities. A computer function is modeled after only one mere facet/synapse of our minds conscious output, so maybe we need to rely on it more often than not and concentrate our efforts on self exploration into our own depths. Maybe it’s a good thing it has the weight/substance of some living biology/evolution attached to our earth in it’s make up as a mortal, our time is limited which forces our scrutiny.
Another movie I really like is “Moon” using some of the same adaptations of theme as 2001 (Kevin Spacey as a Hal like monotone onboard voice), although I’m not sure it was received with such acclaimed recognition.
If we are to pour all our concerns/worries into the vortex of the “Panom” or panacea and it is to consistently spit out a positive epiphany of realistic grandeur or series of answers and instructions, as long as they are not taken as definitive so we are permitted to evaluate our own interpretation, I think no harm will be done and we are somewhat protected from absolutism (as there can always be many right answers but not all can have a completely positive outcome for all of us involved), although unquestionably influenced.
If you and the Doc could create this kind of search engine you may have something if it hasn’t been created on a minor scale somewhere in cyber space already, I have no idea and don’t pretend to possess computer savvy or even up to speed literacy.
Overtones
A point I didn’t mention concerned this ‘one step ahead’ idea. It came out of Dr. C. intuiting my suspicions along the lines of what you describe. More on this in a moment. I first want to say that our meeting was brief, we didn’t find time to exchange details of our histories, or backgrounds. In fact I wondered throughout why he was interested in me at all, as his range of intellect, and resources seemed to exceed mine significantly. Several times he referenced his colleagues. I sensed a Renaissance spirit at work, where exploration was both aesthetic and scientific. My hunch was that I was just lucky in hitting on this idea of the PanOm, and he was trying to suss out if I had material that might be of service to him and his crew.
In any case, to return to the question of trustworthiness of external operations, he seemed to carry an unshakable conviction that what we were seeking was not a search engine at all–which was fixed no matter how vast–but rather something akin to the oracles he studied. He said that in most every case synchronicity was at play in dispensing applicable wisdom, and this was not something to be controlled, only invoked and attuned to. I commented that any solutions would at best be attempts to hit moving targets. He surprised me by saying that only by precise timing can the wave be caught and ridden, there was no point in trying to be ahead of it.
Even though he was genial and warm, there was an elusive quality to his speech. I was quite out of my depths when he referenced intricacies from chaos theory, or inter-fluidity of systems. When my bewilderment apparently boiled over, frustrated that a tangible manifestation of the PanOm was beyond my grasp, he said, as if it were some kind of assurance, there is no need to adjust a guitar string that’s already pitched where it was supposed to be. A useful tuner would pinpoint the way to go for a string that was off, whether that direction be up or down was of minor consequence. At that, he struck his fork against his cup and held it up to his ear.
"Synchronicity was at play in dispensing applicable wisdom"
If I’m understanding this, I would argue that you are in fact knowledgably one step ahead when catching the right wave being in the right spot at he right moment in time which is not by accident, you put yourself in that position purposely in advance. The Doc I would say, is philosophically way out of my league and I am tone deaf comparatively to his high frequency acute ear for PanOm!. Maybe we will hear about where his research is heading soon enough, hopefully just in the nick of time to save the planet the way things are going.
Dropping in
You’re right about pre-launch positioning, getting set-up in the line-up is critical. Which also means duck diving under the incoming swell to get in position in the first place.
I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if some of Dr. C.’s research was conducted inside an epic Indo barrel. He would certainly know that waves come in sets, and there are times to paddle-out with all you’ve got, and times to wait it out.
No reward without the risk.
Vibration and harmonics
Vibrating strings, of course, are quite possibly the essence of everything in the universe. String theory says so.
Each vibratory variation results in a different outcome/particle/thingie. It would make sense that if vibrations are changed, entities would also change, so understanding the tuning of the universe (and also the other dimensions we’re now postulating) would be ripe for exploration.
Findhorn revisited?