Merge pull request #555 from Omoaholo/patch-8

Reference Alignment for Living in a-⿻ World

contents/english/03-01-living-in-a-⿻-world.md

@@ -104,20 +104,19 @@ In the libertarian vision, the sovereignty of the atomistic individual (or in so
 But these cannot be the only paths forward.  ⿻ science has shown us the power of harnessing a ⿻ understanding of the world to build physical technology.  We have to ask what a society and information technology built on an analogous understanding of human societies would look like.  Luckily, the twentieth century saw the systematic development of such a vision, from philosophical and social scientific foundations to the beginnings of technological expression.  While that path (dao) of development is today somewhat forgotten, we will rediscover it in the next chapter.
 
 
-[^LifeAsJoy]: “Life as Joy, Duty, End”
-[^RelationalReality]: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/sep/05/the-big-idea-why-relationships-are-the-key-to-existence
-[^MultilevelSelection]: Wilson, David Sloan et al. “Multilevel Selection Theory and Major Evolutionary Transitions.” Current Directions in Psychological Science 17 (2008): 6 - 9.
+[^LifeAsJoy]: Harper’s Magazine. “Holmes – Life as Art,” May 2, 2009. https://harpers.org/2009/05/holmes-life-as-art/.
+[^RelationalReality]: Carlo Rovelli, “The Big Idea: Why Relationships Are the Key to Existence.” The Guardian, September 5, 2022, sec. Books. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/sep/05/the-big-idea-why-relationships-are-the-key-to-existence.
+[^MultilevelSelection]: David Wilson, Mark Vugt, and Rick O’Gorman, “Multilevel Selection Theory and Major Evolutionary Transitions.” _Current Directions in Psychological Science_ 17, no. 1 (February 2008): 6–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00538.x.
 [^NeuroscienceComplexity]: Here are some examples of these properties in neuroscience: **Sensitivity**: In neuroscience, sensitivity refers to the ability of the brain to detect and respond to small changes in its environment. One example of sensitivity in the brain is the phenomenon of synaptic plasticity, which is the ability of synapses (connections between neurons) to change in strength in response to activity. This sensitivity allows the brain to adapt and learn from experience. **Chaos**: Chaos is a property of complex systems that exhibit unpredictable behavior even though they are deterministic. In neuroscience, chaos has been observed in the activity of neurons in the brain. For example, studies have shown that the firing patterns of individual neurons can be highly irregular and chaotic, with no discernible pattern or rhythm. This chaotic activity may play a role in information processing and communication within the brain. **Sensitivity and chaos together:** Sensitivity and chaos can also interact in the brain to produce complex and adaptive behavior. For example, studies have shown that the brain can exhibit sensitivity to small changes in sensory input, but this sensitivity can also lead to chaotic activity in neural networks. However, this chaotic activity can be controlled and harnessed to produce adaptive behavior, such as in the case of motor control and coordination. The brain's ability to integrate sensitivity and chaos in this way is a hallmark of its remarkable complexity and adaptability. 
 [^AssemblageTheory]: In assemblage theory, as articulated by Manuel DeLanda, entities are understood as complex structures formed from the symbiotic relationship between heterogeneous components, rather than being reducible to their individual parts. Its central thesis is that people do not act exclusively by themselves, and instead human action requires complex socio-material interdependencies. DeLanda's perspective shifts the focus from inherent qualities of entities to the dynamic processes and interactions that give rise to emergent properties within networks of relations.  His book "A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity" (2006) is a good starting point. 
-[^SocialDynamics]: Page, S. E. (2007). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton University Press.; Hidalgo, C. A. (2015). Why information grows: The evolution of order, from atoms to economies. Basic Books.; Acemoglu, D., & Linn, J. (2004). Market size in innovation: Theory and evidence from the pharmaceutical industry. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(3), 1049-1090.; Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2017). The enigma of reason. Harvard University Press.; Pentland, A. (2014). Social physics: How good ideas spread—the lessons from a new science. Penguin. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon and Schuster. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35-67.; Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press.; McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415-444.
-[^SciSciField]: See a summary in Fortunato et al. (2018)
-[^TopicBiasInScience]: Rzhetsky, Andrey, et al. "Choosing experiments to accelerate collective discovery." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112.47 (2015): 14569-14574.
-[^CentralizedScientificCommunity]: Danchev, Valentin, Andrey Rzhetsky, and James A. Evans. "Centralized scientific communities are less likely to generate replicable results." Elife 8 (2019): e43094.
-[^PredictRobustScience]: Belikov, Alexander V., Andrey Rzhetsky, and James Evans. "Prediction of robust scientific facts from literature." Nature Machine Intelligence 4.5 (2022): 445-454.
-[^TeamScience]: Wu, Lingfei, Dashun Wang, and James A. Evans. "Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology." Nature 566.7744 (2019): 378-382.
-[^DisconnectionDiscordInnovation]: Lin, Yiling, James A. Evans, and Lingfei Wu. "New directions in science emerge from disconnection and discord." Journal of Informetrics 16.1 (2022): 101234.
-[^SurpriseInnovation]: Shi, Feng, and James Evans. "Surprising combinations of research contents and contexts are related to impact and emerge with scientific outsiders from distant disciplines." Nature Communications 14.1 (2023): 1641.
-[^ScientificInnovation]: Foster, Jacob G., Andrey Rzhetsky, and James A. Evans. "Tradition and innovation in scientists’ research strategies." American sociological review 80.5 (2015): 875-908.
-[^ScienceMetrics]: Clauset, Aaron, Daniel B. Larremore, and Roberta Sinatra. "Data-driven predictions in the science of science." Science 355.6324 (2017): 477-480.
-[^AccelerateScienceAI]: Sourati, Jamshid, and James A. Evans. "Accelerating science with human-aware artificial intelligence." Nature Human Behaviour 7.10 (2023): 1682-1696.
+[^SocialDynamics]: Scott Page, _The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies_, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007; César Hidalgo, _Why Information Grows: The Evolution of Order, from Atoms to Economies_, (New York: Basic Books, 2015); Daron Acemoglu, and Joshua Linn, “Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry,” _Library Union Catalog of Bavaria_, (Berlin and Brandenburg: B3Kat Repository, October 1, 2003), https://doi.org/10.3386/w10038;  Mark Granovetter, “The Strength of Weak Ties,” _American Journal of Sociology_ 78, no. 6 (May 1973): 1360–80; Brian Uzzi, “Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness,” Administrative Science Quarterly 42, no. 1 (March 1997): 35–67. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393808; Jonathan Michie, and Ronald S. Burt, “Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition,” _The Economic Journal_ 104, no. 424 (May 1994): 685. https://doi.org/10.2307/2234645; McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and James M Cook. “Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks.” Annual Review of Sociology 27, no. 1 (August 2001): 415–44.
+[^TopicBiasInScience]: Andrey Rzhetsky, Jacob Foster, Ian Foster, and James Evans, “Choosing Experiments to Accelerate Collective Discovery,” _Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences_ 112, no. 47 (November 9, 2015): 14569–74. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1509757112.
+[^CentralizedScientificCommunity]: Valentin Danchev, Andrey Rzhetsky, and James A Evans, “Centralized Scientific Communities Are Less Likely to Generate Replicable Results.” _ELife_ 8 (July 2, 2019), https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.43094.
+[^PredictRobustScience]: Alexander Belikov, Andrey Rzhetsky, and James Evans, "Prediction of robust scientific facts from literature," _Nature Machine Intelligence_ 4.5 (2022): 445-454.
+[^TeamScience]: Lingfei Wu, Dashun Wang, and James Evans, "Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology," _Nature_ 566.7744 (2019): 378-382.
+[^DisconnectionDiscordInnovation]: Yiling Lin, James Evans, and Lingfei Wu, "New directions in science emerge from disconnection and discord," _Journal of Informetrics_ 16.1 (2022): 101234.
+[^SurpriseInnovation]: Feng Shi, and James Evans, "Surprising combinations of research contents and contexts are related to impact and emerge with scientific outsiders from distant disciplines," Nature Communications 14.1 (2023): 1641.
+[^ScientificInnovation]: Jacob Foster, Andrey Rzhetsky, and James A. Evans, "Tradition and Innovation in Scientists’ Research Strategies," _American Sociological Review_ 80.5 (2015): 875-908.
+[^ScienceMetrics]: Aaron Clauset, Daniel Larremore, and Roberta Sinatra, "Data-driven predictions in the science of science," _Science_ 355.6324 (2017): 477-480.
+[^AccelerateScienceAI]: Jamshid Sourati, and James Evans, "Accelerating science with human-aware artificial intelligence," _Nature Human Behaviour_ 7.10 (2023): 1682-1696.