From Digital Twins to Digital Selves and Beyond

This open access book aims at deepening the understanding of the relation between cyber-physical systems (CPSs) as socio-technical systems and their digital representations with intertwined artificial intelligence (AI). The authors describe why it is crucial for digital selves to be able to develop emotional behavior and why a humanity-inspired AI is necessary so that humans and humanoids can coexist. The introductory chapter describes major milestones in computer science which form the basis for the implementation of digital twins and digital selves. The subsequent Part I then lays the foundation to develop a socio-technical understanding of the nature of digital twins as representations and trans-human development objects. Following the conceptual understanding of digital twins and how they could be engineered according to cognitive and organizational structures, Part II forms the groundwork for understanding social behavior and its modeling. It discusses various perception-based socio-emotional approaches before sketching behavior-relevant models and their simulation capabilities. In particular, it is shown how emotions can substantially influence the collective behavior of artificial actors. Part III eventually presents a symbiosis showing under which preconditions digital selves might construct and produce digital twins as integrated design elements in trans-human ecosystems. The chapters in this part are dedicated to opportunities and modes of co-creating reflective socio-trans-human systems based on digital twin models, exploring mutual control and continuous development. The final epilog is congenitally speculative in its nature by presenting thoughts on future developments of artificial life in computational substrates. The book is written for researchers and professionals in areas like cyber-physical systems, robotics, social simulation or systems engineering, interested to take a speculative look into the future of digital twins and autonomous agents. It also touches upon philosophical aspects of digital twins, digital selves and humanoids

From Digital Twins to Digital Selves and Beyond

This open access book aims at deepening the understanding of the relation between cyber-physical systems (CPSs) as socio-technical systems and their digital representations with intertwined artificial intelligence (AI). The authors describe why it is crucial for digital selves to be able to develop emotional behavior and why a humanity-inspired AI is necessary so that humans and humanoids can coexist. The introductory chapter describes major milestones in computer science which form the basis for the implementation of digital twins and digital selves. The subsequent Part I then lays the foundation to develop a socio-technical understanding of the nature of digital twins as representations and trans-human development objects. Following the conceptual understanding of digital twins and how they could be engineered according to cognitive and organizational structures, Part II forms the groundwork for understanding social behavior and its modeling. It discusses various perception-based socio-emotional approaches before sketching behavior-relevant models and their simulation capabilities. In particular, it is shown how emotions can substantially influence the collective behavior of artificial actors. Part III eventually presents a symbiosis showing under which preconditions digital selves might construct and produce digital twins as integrated design elements in trans-human ecosystems. The chapters in this part are dedicated to opportunities and modes of co-creating reflective socio-trans-human systems based on digital twin models, exploring mutual control and continuous development. The final epilog is congenitally speculative in its nature by presenting thoughts on future developments of artificial life in computational substrates. The book is written for researchers and professionals in areas like cyber-physical systems, robotics, social simulation or systems engineering, interested to take a speculative look into the future of digital twins and autonomous agents. It also touches upon philosophical aspects of digital twins, digital selves and humanoids

From individual characters to large crowds: augmenting the believability of open-world games through exploring social emotion in pedestrian groups

Crowds of non-player characters improve the game-play experiences of open-world video-games. Grouping is a common phenomenon of crowds and plays an important role in crowd behaviour. Recent crowd simulation research focuses on group modelling in pedestrian crowds and game-designers have argued that the design of non-player characters should capture and exploit the relationship between characters. The concepts of social groups and inter-character relationships are not new in social psychology, and on-going work addresses the social life of emotions and its behavioural consequences on individuals and groups alike. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of current research in social psychology, and to use the findings as a source of inspiration to design a social network of non-player characters, with application to the problem of group modelling in simulated crowds in computer games

On the adaptive advantage of always being right (even when one is not)

We propose another positive illusion – overconfidence in the generalisability of one’s theory – that fits with McKay & Dennett’s (M&D’s) criteria for adaptive misbeliefs. This illusion is pervasive in adult reasoning but we focus on its prevalence in children’s developing theories. It is a strongly held conviction arising from normal functioning of the doxastic system that confers adaptive advantage on the individual

Understanding player experience in social digital games : the role of social presence

Including others in a playful activity fundamentally changes the concept of play into social play. This thesis focuses on social play in digital gaming. Previous studies have revealed the crucial part of social interaction in play, as the intrinsic need to belong seems to be the core motivation for engaging in such activities. Besides interacting with the game and focusing on the game content, gamers are confronted with emotions, behaviours, opinions and performances of others that can easily be perceived when playing side by side (co-located co-play). However, the widespread penetration of the Internet also allows for social play without the restriction of co-players having to be in the same room (mediated co-play). In online co-play settings a smaller amount of social information can be exchanged compared to co-located co-play. These settings therefore differ in the way gamers can interact with each other, which has an influence on how digital gaming is experienced. Focus groups, contextual inquiries, and four experimental studies were employed to uncover which aspects of social play in digital gaming make mediated and co-located co-play feel different. The first study was conducted to explore the motivations of gamers to physically meet others to play digital games, compared to meeting them online. Based on interpersonal communications, focus groups and contextual inquiries, findings revealed that the appeal of co-located above online co-play results from the sociable, warm, sensitive, personal and intimate interactions that are possible when playing side-byside. Furthermore, co-located co-play offers the possibility to experience social fun before and after game play, which often is not afforded in online co-play. The first lab experiment was conducted to empirically demonstrate to what extent player experience is influenced by the way co-players are present; e.g. as a virtual (human controlled), mediated or co-located co-player. Results on self-reports indicated that playing sidebyside significantly adds to the enjoyment and involvement in games compared to playing against a virtual (i.e. computer controlled) or distant co-player. These results could be explained by introducing the concept of social presence, which is defined as the feeling of being together with another individual. Results demonstrated that social presence mediated the enjoyment in social play. In the second and third lab experiment the possibilities for verbal and non-verbal interaction were manipulated between coplayers in co-located co-play. One experiment investigated this for competitive play; a the other for collaborative play. Self-reports showed that interactions through auditory cues positively influenced player experience. Interestingly, the presence of visual cues of one’s co-player had no significant influence on play. Observation data of players confirmed that audio cues (e.g., talking, laughing) were far more often used than visual cues (e.g., eye contact, making gestures); visual cues were only used before and after play. Furthermore, we demonstrated that social presence – due to interaction by audio cues – mediates the enjoyment in social play. A final lab experiment was conducted to investigate the importance of the connection between players through the game for our results in the previous chapters. In this experiment players were colocated, but not always played together and/or were not always able to see each other’s scores. Results showed that a subjective shared experience increases the strength of the social connection between players, and positively affects feelings of social presence, enjoyment and involvement. Similar to the previous findings, social presence mediated the increase in feelings of enjoyment and involvement. In sum, our set of studies offered empirical support for when, why and how social interaction influences players’ experience in co-play settings. Furthermore, the results indicate the importance of social presence as a mediating factor of enjoyment and involvement in social play. This provides new theoretical insights for communication experiences in other media, and social presence in general. Furthermore, findings may be useful to game designers who may want to enhance players’ experiences in during digital play

Competition in World Politics: Knowledge, Strategies and Institutions

The "return of great power competition" between (among others) the US, China, Russia and the EU is a major topic in contemporary public debate. But why do we think of world politics in terms of "competition"? Which information and which rules enable states and other actors in world politics to "compete" with one another? Which competitive strategies do they pursue in the complex environment of modern world politics? This cutting-edge edited collection discusses these questions from a unique interdisciplinary perspective. It offers a fresh account of competition in world politics, looking beyond its military dimensions to questions of economics, technology and prestige

Além da legitimidade : as condições da estabilidade do corpo político frente à ameaça das emoções disruptivas

A relação entre a distribuição de bens e a estabilidade em uma sociedade é um tema recorrente na teoria política. John Rawls, como muitos antes dele, assume corretamente que uma distribuição equitativa de bens primários está no centro de uma sociedade legítima e estável. Ele propõe uma distribuição equitativa em termos liberais, respeitando o pluralismo. Rawls falha, entretanto, em discutir emoções disruptivas conectadas à distribuição: inveja e ciúme. Ele reivindica que os cidadãos em uma sociedade guiada pelos princípios de justiça, uma sociedade bem ordenada, não terão razões para sentir essas emoções. Seu engano está em pensar que, em nome da neutralidade, essas emoções não deveriam concernir diretamente as instituições políticas. As pessoas, entretanto, podem sentir inveja e ciúme mesmo quando a propriedade é bem distribuída, tornando a sociedade instável. Seres humanos nunca param de ser ambiciosos e, dado sua pouca capacidade de julgamento sobre o que merecem, seu sentimento pode se tornar um problema político. O objetivo do artigo é mostrar que essa lacuna previne o liberalismo político de Rawls de atingir seu fim. Valorizar o pluralismo significa não apenas celebrar a liberdade, mas também impedir que ela emerja como intolerância. Pluralismo e liberdade verdadeira, por exemplo, são enfraquecidos pelo discurso que advoga alguma intolerância religiosa. Portanto, se o liberalismo deseja verdadeiramente promover a liberdade, ele precisa tratar de forma séria a questão do desacordo moral e político. Thomas Hobbes não era um liberal; ele era, entretanto, um filósofo político profundamente interessado em como superar o desacordo. A solução de Hobbes, a educação civil dos cidadãos, não envolve o aprimoramento moral das pessoas. Hobbes justifica a educação civil em termos políticos e em uma estrutura de consentimento, na qual a liberdade é limitada com intuito de aprofundar a liberdade – um argumento discutido no artigo e que é de interesse dos liberais contemporâneos, especialmente John Rawls. A teoria do poder política de Thomas Hobbes é mais completa e consistente do que normalmente pensada. A chave para resolver algumas das supostas inconsistências está na percepção de que Hobbes, na verdade, conta com duas concepções distintas de poder que frequente estão fundidas em uma expressão em Inglês: “poder.” A versão latina do Leviatã nos permite ver esses tipos distintos de poder no vocabulário hobbesiano, pois lá ele se utiliza de dois termos: potentia e potestas. Potentia é o meio que alguém possui para um bem aparente – um poder real, de facto. Para Hobbes, potentia é um poder relativo a cada indivíduo e depende de “sinais” de poder para se manter. Por ser um poder relativo, a potentia é também instável: alguém pode ser poderoso apenas se outros possuírem menos poder e, portanto, haverá competição constante por sinais de poder. Em contraste, potestas é um poder normativo com ums obrigação equivalente e é constituído quando os súditos renunciam ao seu direito natural, isto é, à sua liberdade de usar sua potentia. É também um poder absoluto, diferentemente da potentia, que é poder relativo. Potestas é um poder supremos que não depende do reconhecimento de outros. É possível pensar que, quando a República instituída, a potestas absoluta e de iure substitui a potentia relativa, de facto. Para Hobbes, elas são, contudo, complementares. O poder para gerar obrigações e comandos não é suficiente para manter a integridade da República: a potentia é também necessária. Isso levanta algo como uma encruzilhada: como pode o poder da República ser estável se ele não é apenas absoluto (potestas), mas também relativo (potentia)? Naquilo que concerne a potentia, os sinais de poder do Estado são as imagens políticas que ele propaga sobre si, que são poderosas apenas até o ponto que seus súditos as veem com tal. Portanto, a potestas da República pode ser mantida apenas se ela possui também potenta: uma República é tão grande quanto seus súditos acreditam que ela seja.The relationship between distribution of goods and stability in a society is a recurrent theme in political theory. John Rawls, as did many others before him correctly assumes that a fair distribution of primary goods is at the core of a legitimate and stable society. He proposes a fair distribution in liberal terms, respecting pluralism. Rawls fails, however, to address politically disruptive emotions connected to distribution: envy and jealousy. He claims that citizens in a society guided by his principles of justice, a well-ordered society, will have no reason to feel these emotions. His mistake is in thinking that, in the name of neutrality, these emotions should not directly concern political institutions. People, however, may feel envious or jealous of others even when property is well distributed, making society unstable. Human beings never stop being ambitious and, given their poor judgment of what they deserve, their sentiment may become a political problem. My objective in this article is to show how this gap hinders Rawls’s political liberalism from achieving its ends. Valuing pluralism means not only cherishing freedom, but also preventing the last from emerging as intolerance. Pluralism and actual freedom are undermined, for instance, by speech advocating religious intolerance. Thus if liberalism wishes to truly promote freedom, it needs to seriously address the issue of moral and political disagreement. Thomas Hobbes was not a liberal himself; he was, however, a political philosopher deeply interested in how to overcome disagreement. Hobbes’s solution, civil educating citizens, does not involve improving people morally. Hobbes justifies civil education in political terms and within a framework of consent, where freedom is limited in order to further freedom – an argument discussed in the article which is of interest to contemporary liberals, especially John Rawls. Thomas Hobbes’s theory of political power is more complete and consistent than is normally thought. The key to resolving some of the supposed inconsistencies in Hobbes’s theory of power lies in noticing that Hobbes actually relies on two distinct conceptions of power that are often conflated in one English expression, “power.” The Latin version of the Leviathan enables us to see these distinct types of power in the Hobbesian vocabulary, because there he uses two expressions: potentia and potestas. Potentia is the means one has to an apparent good – an actual, de facto power. For Hobbes, potentia is a relative power: it is relative to each individual, and depends upon “signs” of power to maintain itself. Because it is a relative power, it is also unstable: one may be powerful only if others are less powerful, and thus there will be constant competition for signs of power. In contrast, potestas is a normative power with an equivalent obligation, and it is constituted when subjects renounce their natural right, that is, their liberty to use their potentia. It is also an absolute power, unlike potentia, which is a relative power. Potestas is a supreme power that does not depend on its acknowledgment by others. One might think that when the commonwealth is instituted, absolute, de jure potestas completely replaces relative, de facto potentia. To Hobbes, they are however complimentary. The power to generate obligations and commands is not sufficient to maintain the integrity of a commonwealth: it also requires potentia. This raises somewhat of a conundrum: how can a commonwealth be stable if its power is not just absolute (potestas), but also relative (potentia)? In what regards potentia, its signs of power are the political images it propagates about itself, which are powerful only to the extent which its subjects see those images of power as equivalent to power itself. Thus, the potestas of the commonwealth can be maintained only if it also has potentia: a commonwealth is only as great as its subjects believe it to be

Islamic distributive scheme: a concise statement

The present paper highlights the institutional arrange¬ment of Islam for distributive justice. It begins with a note that while Islam gives absolute guiding principles about production and functional distribution, its focus of attention is "re-distribution of income and wealth”. The paper also attempts to provide a comprehensive list of provisions in this regard prescribed by Islam and the main objectives thereof. It concludes with a note that since the primary concern of Indian planners and policy makers is to build a humane prosperous country based on justice and equity, they may benefit from the Islamic measures of distributive justice and can follow the broad outline given by Islam to enhance the social justice.Economics of Distribution, Islam and redistribution, Islamic Economics.

Hate Studies: The Urgency and Its Developments in the Perspective of Religious Studies

This article is a descriptive study of hate. The phenomenon of hatred has prompted many researchers to find out more about hatred, the effects of hatred, and hate management. This research revealed that hatred had become a separate field of study, called the Hate Study, initiated and organized by the Gonzaga University Institute for Hate Studies, in 1997. Hate Studies became an international interdisciplinary field that united scholars, academic researchers, practitioners, human rights activists, policy makers, NGO leaders, and others. This study collects research results from various academic fields, both in the fields of humanities, social sciences, education, politics, economics, and the like so as to produce scientific discussions and practical applications in the academic, legal and policy settings, and counter-hate practices in community organizations civil. The purpose of this study is to illustrate the urgency of multidisciplinary religious studies disciplinary participation in hate studies, to analyze the evolution of hatred, and to find ways in dealing with the spread of hatred and violence that is needed by the plural world today. Therefore, the academic approach to religious studies will provide theoretical guidance and practice that can enrich understanding of hatred as well as dealing with the effects of hatred