Co-intelligence
Co-intelligence is a term coined by social theorist Tom Atlee to refer to a shared, integrated form of intelligence. The concept of co-intelligence is an evolving one, attempting to embrace all forms of intelligence that arise out of and/or serve wholeness, (inclusiveness, interconnectedness, co-creativity, health, synergy, self-organizing living systems, etc.). It is not an entirely new concept, however. Synergy in groups ("synergistics") has been observed and written about since the 1970s. Some cultures (e.g. Native American/First Nations peoples such as the Haudenosaunee) have drawn on similar principles for hundreds of years.
Six basic premises of co-intelligence have been identified to date:
- Multi-modal intelligence: integration of head intelligence (rationality), heart intelligence, intuition, and other forms of knowing and engaging successfully with life (e.g., various theories of multiple intelligences).
- Collaborative intelligence, based on ideas of cooperation.
- Collective intelligence, i.e., intelligence of groups, organizations, communities, societies, etc.
- Wisdom.
- Resonant intelligence, i.e., intelligence which grows stronger or fuller as it resonates with other sources or forms of intelligence.
- Universal intelligence, i.e., intelligence that resides within or beyond nature -- from ecological wisdom to the Tao and "God's will". Includes concepts like self-organization and co-evolution.
Co-intelligence theory is grounded in theories of wholeness or holism, since co-intelligence embraces any form of intelligence that includes and transcends—i.e., is more whole than—individual analytic rationality.
Co-intelligence theory has been applied to thinking on democracy, politics, diversity, polarization, community, leadership, morality, ethics and spirituality.
Group, Organizational, and Political Applications
Perhaps the primary application of the co-intelligence frame of reference is in the field of social theory concerning the potential collective intelligence and wisdom of groups, organizations, communities and societies. Under the right conditions, evidence suggests that greater intelligence and wisdom are possible from a group or community than from any individual member of that group or community.
Creative use of human differences and conflicts is a major factor in this, if groupthink and polarization -- which usually indicate an absence of co-intelligence -- are to be avoided. If differences are treated either as pieces of a larger picture being explored by the group, or as a source of creative tension through which the group can transcend self-limiting assumptions, beliefs and skewed information, they tend to move the group toward broader, deeper, more useful understandings. Competition and conflict can thus be valuable, if carried on in a context of shared exploration towards greater truth.
The idea that human differences are resources to access greater insight, creativity and capacity, rather than positions striving for predominance, suggests that democracy may be best understood and practiced as a dialogic exploration for collective solutions that benefit the common good and the vast majority of stakeholders. Traditional democratic values of freedom, initiative, and balancing of social power become resources for the nurturing, inclusion, and creative use of diversity.
Co-intelligent activism and citizenship, then, focus on engaging citizens and stakeholders in dialogues and deliberations designed to generate collective intelligence and wisdom, and advocating the widespread use and institutionalized empowerment of such powerful conversations as a legitimate, inclusive, trustworthy "voice of the people." From the co-intelligence perspective, activist nonviolence is best used not to force partisan solutions on a reluctant public or power structure, but to equalize power relationships enough that peer dialogue can take place, making it possible to create or discover broadly viable solutions.
The free flow, quality, accessibility and evolution of full-spectrum information are among other major factors in political and organizational applications of co-intelligence.
Much of co-intelligence political theory rests on extensive theory and practice developed around group process and learning organizations, centered on advanced forms of dialogue, deliberation, and whole system interventions as explored, for example, by the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation.
Spiritual and Metaphysical Implications
While most applications of co-intelligence theory require no special spiritual perspectives, their holistic nature has spiritual implications that attract many people involved in holistic spiritual movements, such as the New Age, Buddhist, Quaker and Taoist traditions and mystical, evolutionary, or ecological movements within other religious traditions, as well as those interested in consciousness studies.
From a co-intelligence metaphysics, all phenomena interact, co-evolve, define each other, and together call forth whatever is next. This is similar to the Buddhist concept of "interdependent co-arising," as well as ecological understandings and several interpretations of quantum theory. We live in what Tom Atlee calls "a deeply participatory universe" and David Spangler calls "a co-incarnational universe." Co-intelligent spiritual awareness, practices, and ethics tend to arise out of and support interconnectedness, inclusiveness, dialogue, co-creativity and partnership -- with each other and with Life.
Many co-intelligence-oriented spiritual people ground themselves in the sense of a larger intelligence (see "universal intelligence", above) operating through them and the world around them. Some engage in meditative practices through which they attune to each other and/or this higher intelligence as part of generating or accessing collective intelligence. See, for example, the issue of What Is Enlightenment magazine about Collective Intelligence.