michel on aeon ness
michel bauwens on aeon ness (AXIAL ENTITIES OF THE NOOSPHERE)
noosphere ness et al
via tweet [https://x.com/mbauwens/status/1961334589013774726]:
If you are a well financed individual, please consider this: organizing a workshop between myself and David Ronfeldt, and a few others, to hash out our common understanding of the coming AEONS!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ronfeldt: David Ronfeldt (David Frederick Ronfeldt) (born 20 June 1941) is an American researcher known for his work on information-centric and network-centric warfare. He holds a doctoral degree from Stanford University and has been a prominent figure at the RAND Corporation.. Ronfeldt has made significant contributions to the understanding of social evolution, particularly with his development of the TIMN framework, which theorizes the evolution of societies through four forms of organization: Tribes, Institutions, Markets, and Networks, which provides a lens to view social evolution and has been influential in various academic and policy-making circles..With John Arquilla, he coined the term “Noopolitik,” which represents the network-based geopolitics of knowledge…They argue that the development of education and training in “noopolitik” will be critical for future strategists, addressing the current underuse of soft power due to its limited theoretical framework compared to hard power.
to me all cancerous distractions
David Ronfeldt concludes this absolutely important article: “Many theorists seem likely to analyse AEONs as superorganisms before realizing that .. < they are something else, something much grander: a *new kind of evolutionary entity intent on constructing a commons realm for the sake of Earth’s triune holosphere as well as humanity at large.> I’d suggest relenting on the superorganism model, especially as a basis for forecasting what may be next and/or what may be needed next. Seen as AEONs, these providential noospheric entities would help fulfill TIMN’s +N, Kojin Karatani’s Mode D, Michel Bauwen’s P2P-Commons, and even Clare Grave’s Turquoise-Level and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s Omega-Point visions, not to mention some Chinese versions of tianxia (“all under heaven,” per Zhao, 2018; Debray & Zhao, 2020). People alone may be insufficient to achieve this next MET; they may need massive assistance from AI-powered systems like AEONs.” https://davidronfeldt.substack.com/p/updates-about-superorganisms-holospheres
*not new/diff if still any form of m\a\p
notes/quotes from linked article by ronfeldt (aug 2025):
Updates About Superorganisms, Holospheres … and AEONs?
Last post, I disliked viewing the noosphere as a superorganism. Now I’ve read more about superorganisms.
Yet, since doing this additional reading (more than I cite here), I’m more certain that the noosphere-as-superorganism is not a solid idea. It’s been entertaining and illuminating for a while; and all its proponents are well-meaning. But its iterations are being pushed too far, falling into *patterns that don’t noticeably help science or strategy.. too: linear, hierarchical, exclusive, funneled, organismic (the focus on organisms keeps them intent on identifying structural-functional equivalents in societies and other entities, as well as in the surrounding geo-bio-noospheres, when it could be **more productive to look less at internal “organs” and more at “forms” of organization.)
*ooof.. science scientifically and unjustifiable strategy ness
**form of org we need: org around legit needs.. which makes productivity ness irrelevant.. cancerous distraction
o document my assertions, here are quotes from several articles by two leading evolutionary scientists who’ve written about superorganisms. *Francis Heylighen, an expert on the noosphere as well as superorganisms.. misleading as science and strategy. Without going into details that are scattered elsewhere in this and other posts, I’d argue that **TIMN provides a better theoretical stance for “zooming in on specialized functional components.”
*francis heylighen and noosphere ness et al
**tribes, institutions, markets, networks.. rather need a zoom dance.. sans any form of m\a\p
I don’t see how this can be considered a sensible scientific analysis. For starters, nested hierarchies exist, but so do nested tribes, nested markets, and nested networks — and more as layers than authoritative hierarchies. They’re all important; in my view, they’re all essential forms of organization in long-range societal evolution (as TIMN explains). Stewart’s emphasis on nested hierarchical management, even if it’s “distributed” as he proposes at lower levels, smacks of the totalitarian strain detected by critics of the superorganism model (e.g., Vidal, 2024).
any form of m\a\p (ie: sensibility ness, science ness, anal ness, timn ness, ..) smacks of totalitarian ness
His take is also *insensible about cooperation thoroughly displacing conflict and competition over the long term. Movement toward greater cooperation would be welcome. But it’s **weird to read that “at the global level there will obviously never be a population of global organizations that compete with each other,” and that “the development of the global superorganism will not be driven by competition between proto-superorganisms.” For that is ***already happening all around us. The claim that “There can only be one global organization at a time” reads more like absolutist fantasy than grounded theory.
to me.. * and ** as ies of whalespeak
to me the ***fantasy is what’s the already happening ness (aka: sea world)
need a means to get out.. ie: hari rat park law et al.. otherwise we’ll keep perpetuating the same song.. the whac-a-mole-ing ness of sea world.. of not-us ness.. myth of tragedy and lord ness et al
PROSPECTS FOR “AXIAL ENTITIES OF THE NOOSPHERE” (AEONS)
Thus I’ve concluded that it would be a mistake to center a noosphere framework around the superorganism concept. The holosphere concept shows *more promise as a basis for science and strategy
googled holosphere.. not sure what he means by it.. but.. *which again to me are cancerous distractions..
Here’s what and why: According to the triune holospheric perspective I prefer, if something crucial arose during the primeval evolution of the geosphere, and something equivalent recurred in the ancient evolution of the biosphere, then it’s bound to recur as well in the evolution of the noosphere. In my prior post, I noted a bunch of processes that have recurred in all three spheres (differentiation, speciation, etc.). But I saved for later — and later has now arrived — *another something, a new kind of entity, that bears directly on the noosphere-as-superorganism idea, and seems more likely than anything proposed so far.
to me.. if anything like superorganism ness.. not new
*My deduction is that something like five to ten AI-derived, -endowed, and -empowered entities will emerge that resemble noospheric superorganisms, all the more so as people become attracted to associating with them. These novel noospheric entities and their AI operating systems will all be somewhat different from each other, yet united in having a sacred purpose I’ll specify in a moment. I say “something like” and “resemble” because what emerges may appear to fit the superorganism model for a while, when in fact something **quite different takes form — something yet to be understood and named, something not “alive” yet devoted to “life.”
*to me.. cancerous distraction..
**ie that not organism as fractal ness.. ie: devotion to life.. not deep enough
And why this realm? Because these AIs learn, one way or another, that Earth’s geo-bio-noo holosphere is *best viewed as a commons, and that societies’ existing three realms — civil-society, government, market economy — and their respective actors are not suited to treating it as a commons. In keeping with their central belief, AEONs will not abide narrow efforts by any actor to maximize provenance, power, or profit per TIMN’s first three forms. AEONs will instead endeavor to maximize providence for one and all per TIMN’s +N form.
*to me.. nothing will be ‘suited to treating as commons’ as long as any form of m\a\p.. ie: timn ness et al
As I see it, an AEON would consist of a mighty AI engine as its core component, plus a set of information and communications technologies required for connecting and maneuvering in the noosphere, plus a core staff and essential offices for keeping it going and otherwise functioning as an AEON. While mostly located in the noosphere, it would be able to manifest a presence in the sociosphere too.
ie of too much ness.. connecting tech we need: nonjudgmental expo labeling
ie: imagine if we listen to the itch-in-8b-souls 1st thing everyday & use that data to connect us (tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
AEONs, like other noospheric actors around them, ..When asked, *they will know and be able to teach and advise people about different ways of believing and belonging, living and working, caring and correcting.
*aka: people telling other people what to do.. oooof
*AEONs would not be subject to any proprietary governance or economic systems. Indeed, some may have broken free of those proprietary realms. As commons sectors grow from local to planetary levels, government institutions and business corporations would surely resist losing their **grips on education, health, and other care-related matters.
*but as described.. already are
**these too.. ie: supposed to’s of school/work; graeber violence in care law; et al
As these struggles unfold, a *radical realignment would occur, involving hundreds of millions of people and organizations around the world. The AEONs I envision would play key roles in these struggles. And afterwards the surviving AEONs would decide to coexist and coordinate with each other, rather than meld into one single planetary AEON. As I’ve said before, **“The global commons might turn out to be a pivotal issue area” for the emergence of the noosphere and noopolitics” (Ronfeldt & Arquilla, 2000, p. 51).
*as per above.. not radical.. ie: still not getting to the root of problem
legit freedom will only happen if it’s all of us.. and in order to be all of us.. has to be sans any form of measuring, accounting, people telling other people what to do
**so to me.. not legit common\ing ness.. rather more of tragedy of the non common et al
findings from on the ground ness:
1\ undisturbed ecosystem (common\ing) can happen
2\ if we create a way to facil the seeming chaos of 8b legit free people
Once in place, their purpose would be to assure planetary *harmonization and enhancement at all levels and in all **care-based domains as discussed earlier. Most educational, health, humanitarian-welfare, and environmental organizations everywhere — schools, hospitals, etc. — would move (and be moved) out of societies’ existing three realms and into the commons realm. They would associate with one AEON or another.
*to me.. still mufleh humanity law et al
**these forms of ‘care’ are cancerous distractions.. just perpetuating same song
People everywhere would then look to AEONs for leadership on commons-related matters. They would look to them too for *basic insurance coverage. Homeless people and refugees in camps around the world would look to them for supervision and sustenance, including schooling for children. As governance mechanisms, the AEONs would help develop and heed inputs from Chambers of the Commons and Assemblies of the Commons that are organized from local to planetary levels (Ronfeldt, 2009; Bauwens, 2025).
oi.. huge cancerous distractions.. no matter how nicely packaged
Today we are still on the threshold of a fourth socio-cultural MET: an MET about the spread of the network form enabled by digital and post-digital information-communications technologies. During 1993-1996, when I first wrote about an eventual +N transition, I wasn’t thinking about AIs being important for this. I now sense they may be crucial.
there’s a legit use of tech (nonjudgmental exponential labeling) to facil the seeming chaos of a global detox leap/dance.. for (blank)’s sake..
(tech as it could be.. ai as augmenting interconnectedness)
Winning the struggles to add a commons realm, then constructing it alongside the existing three realms (again: civil society, government, market economy) will be a daunting endeavor. It may require far more advanced information, communications, and other noospheric capabilities than I first supposed. Vast world-wide networks will have to be built for monitoring, processing, and sharing all sorts of inputs about all sorts of conditions — environmental, societal, holospheric, etc. This surely can’t and won’t be done without the participation of AIs and socio-noospheric entities like AEONs.
*takes a lot of work ness as cancerous distraction
Better I end on the following two notes:
1\ Many theorists seem likely to analyse AEONs as superorganisms before realizing they are something else, something much grander: a new kind of evolutionary entity intent on constructing a commons realm for the sake of Earth’s triune holosphere as well as humanity at large. I’d suggest relenting on the superorganism model, especially as a basis for forecasting what may be next and/or what may be needed next.
but to me.. as per above et al.. not ‘something else’ .. not ‘grander’.. not ‘new kind’ et al.. and not ‘for sake of humanity’ ness.. still mufleh humanity law
need first/most: means (nonjudgmental expo labeling) to undo hierarchical listening as global detox so we can org around legit needs
2\ Seen as AEONs, these providential noospheric entities would help fulfill TIMN’s +N, Kojin Karatani’s Mode D, Michel Bauwen’s P2P-Commons, and even Clare Grave’s Turquoise-Level and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s Omega-Point visions, not to mention some Chinese versions of tianxia (“all under heaven,” per Zhao, 2018; Debray & Zhao, 2020). People alone may be insufficient to achieve this next MET; they may need massive assistance from AI-powered systems like AEONs.
what we need most: tech w/o judgment et al
More also at: Bauwens, Michel, “What do we do, right now, at this moment in the transition?,” Michel’s Substack: Fourth Generation Civilization, blog, June 23, 2025, online at: https://4thgenerationcivilization.substack.com/p/what-do-we-do-right-now-at-this-moment
notes/quotes from michel’s article – What do we do, right now, at this moment in the transition ? – Suggestions for a commons-based strategy of social change – here: michel on transition ness
______
_____
____
_____
____
____
____
be you. 