Yahoo奇摩 網頁搜尋

搜尋結果

  1. Dr. Salingaros is a member of the INTBAU College of Traditional Practitioners and is on the INTBAU Committee of Honor. Dr. Salingaros was one of the “50 Visionaries who are Changing Your World” selected by the UTNE Reader in 2008. In Planetizen’s 2009 survey, he was ranked 11th among “The Top Urban Thinkers of All Time”.

    • Description
    • Discussion
    • More Information

    here's the background to the theory, reprinted fromhttp://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2006/02/27/p2p_economic_potential_as_an.htm For Alan Page Fiske, see http://www.rmt.ucla.edu/ (relational models), http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/anthro/faculty/fiske/(bio) "According to Fiske, there are four basic types of inter-subjective dynamics, valid across time...

    Interpretation by Michel Bauwens

    Every type of society or civilization is a mixture of these four modes, but it can plausibly be argued that one mode is always dominant and imprints the other subservient modes. Historically, the first dominant mode was kinship or lineage based reciprocity, the so-called tribal gift economies. The key relational aspect was 'belonging'. Gifts created obligations and relations beyond the next of kin, creating a wider field of exchange. Agricultural or feudal-type societies were dominated by aut...

    Interpretation by David Ronfeldt

    "my take on fiske is different from your own. you equate the tribal form with equality-matching, but i equate it to his communal-sharing form. you think his communal-sharing form matches p2p nicely. in my view, none of his forms match the network form the way i'd like. here's what i say there: - "One psychologist (Fiske, 1993) posits that all social relationships reduce to four forms of interaction: communal sharing, authority ranking, equality matching, and market pricing. People develop the...

    Clarification by Alan Fiske

    " Although I’m not an expert on economic anthropology, I think it’s clear that it’s crucial to distinguish between two types of ‘tribal’ societies: First there are subsistence hunting and gathering societies, which have little or no stored surplus. Although it’s a big generalization, the dominant principle for production and exchange in these foraging communities is usually CS; they are often strongly anti-AR. Second, there are a few hunting and gathering societies with stored surpluses and t...

    Fiske, A. P., & Haslam, N. 2005. The four basic social bonds: Structures for coordinating interaction. In Mark Baldwin, Ed., Interpersonal Cognition, 267–298. New York: Guilford.
  2. 2006年7月2日 · The dimensions introduced below are discussed in detail in later chapters. The six dimensions of facilitation. 1. The planning dimension. This is the goal-oriented, ends and means, aspect of facilitation. It is to do with the aims of the group, and what programme it should undertake to fulfil them.

  3. Both focus on the authority of personalities to approve a decision instead of focusing on the idea or action itself. Stigmergy is neither competitive nor traditionally collaborative. With stigmergy, an initial idea is freely given, and the project is driven by the idea, not by a personality or group of personalities.

  4. 3 More information Description WAMOTOPIA 2023: From December 16, 2023, to January 1, 2024, Wamians will jointly undertake a profound exploration of the future world, weaving a spectacular emergence, a prototype society of the future in Chiang Mai.

  5. In order to resolve these truths we declare 3 fundamental responsibilities of all Cognicist minds: A Cognicist mind must not injure another mind, remove the autonomy of another mind, or through inaction allow harm to occur to another mind when at all possible. A mind can and should protect their own existence and autonomy except where it ...

  6. 2014年5月17日 · The characteristics of chaordic organizations. The chaordic commons is a network infrastructure created to support P2P-like initiatives, created by Dee Hock, the former chairman of Visa International and author of The Chaordic Age. Here are the principles behind the movement. • Are based on clarity of shared purpose and principles.