INTRODUCTION
It is abundantly clear that human reality is beginning to catch up with our self-generated creative science fiction. Does that in and of itself doom us to a totalitarian Orwellian Dystopia? One would think not, but the possibilities do exist for that occurrence given time and near future technological advancements.
But what is apparent is a psychological/socio-economic transformation, technologically based, that is happening now. The developing 'hive mind' is a transformational divergence of a collective awareness displacing individualistic thought. Groupthink replacing individualism.
Now, is this transformation something to fear and dread? This answer depends on what view of societal organization you subscribe to. But before reaching this point it is first necessary to understand what the 'hive mind' is and how it is presently being created.
UNDERSTANDING 'HIVE MIND' (HIVE MENTALITY)
In the disciplines of psychology and sociology, 'hive mind' is defined as: "a collective consciousness, analogous to the behavior of social insects, in which a group of people become aware of their commonality and think and act as a community, sharing their knowledge, thoughts, and resources..." [Dictionary.com. Hive Mind. (Accessed August 30, 2021)]. Typical characteristics exhibited in a 'hive mind' environment include: the absence of responsibility for personal actions, uncritical conformity to the collective awareness, and repeated performance of an action for the common good of the group without regard for personal suffering.
GREATER COOPERATION THROUGH COMMUNICATION AS A REQUIREMENT FOR THE 'HIVE MIND'
The development of a 'hive mind' is an evolutionary phenomenon, as is the belief with respect to honeybees. In a honeybee colony, an individual bee performs a very specialized task for maintenance of the collective, yet the bees possess an integrated information sharing mechanism when there is something to be communicated to the entire hive.
Applying this evolutionary approach to humans would first require greater group cooperation . Human actions would have to mimic an integrated neural network which is already taking place thanks to technological developments in the areas of cell phone usage and the internet [See e.g. Toker, D. The emergence of a hive mind: Should we worry?. (Accessed August 30, 2021)]. We share almost all the information we receive and process in virtually every context utilizing our technology - we use our cell phones, email, SMS, video conferences, and social networks on the internet to disseminate this information. By linking information in this way we are setting the stage for greater cooperation when a call to action arises.
As this communicative technology advances, barriers to its usage (cost, ease of use, access) approach zero. Add in scalability and you begin to speak of a technology set on permitting world change. As more and more people become 'connected', there is a corresponding expansion in the ways communicative technologies may be used to coordinate action on a large scale. It is from this we are witnessing the growth of the "social nervous system" required for the evolution of the 'hive mind' [See Ross, J. The Rise Of The Social Nervous System. (Accessed August 29, 2021)].
Systemic time limitations are present in this evolutionary process. First, the formation of a common 'mind' as to what is relevant to all of mankind is not an instantaneous process. And second, despite our present technology, it still takes a long time to communicate the 'mind' to the world.
However, near-future technologies may remove these limitations permitting the formation of the 'hive mind'. Advanced research in the areas of human brain to computer connection [Cuthbertson, A. SCIENTISTS CONNECT HUMAN BRAIN TO COMPUTER WIRELESSLY FOR FIRST TIME EVER. (Accessed August 30, 2021)] and human brain to human brain connection [Martone, R. Scientists Demonstrate Direct Brain-to-Brain Communication in Humans. (Accessed August 30, 2021)] are making in-roads to removing these limitations. And this is not science fiction my friends.
DIVISION OF LABOR AS A REQUIREMENT OF THE 'HIVE MIND'
The concept of Division of Labor is well established in the field of Economics. The most simple understanding of what the division of labor entails may be found in the 1776 publication "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations".
To provide an example of the workings of this concept, Adam Smith used the example of an individual pin maker versus a business that employed 10 pin makers performing different subtasks:
"One man draws out the wire; another straights it; a third cuts it; a fourth points it; a fifth grinds it at the top for receiving the head; to make the head requires two or three distinct operations; to put it on is a peculiar business; to whiten the pins is another; it is even a trade by itself to put them into the paper; and the important business of making a pin is, in this manner, divided into about eighteen distinct operations, which, in some manufactories, are all performed by distinct hands, though in others the same man will sometimes perform two or three of them. I have seen a small manufactory of this kind, where ten men only were employed, and where some of them consequently performed two or three distinct operations. But though they were very poor, and therefore but indifferently accommodated with the necessary machinery, they could, when they exerted themselves, make among them about twelve pounds of pins in a day. There are in a pound upwards of four thousand pins of a middling size. Those ten persons, therefore, could make among them upwards of forty-eight thousand pins in a day. Each person, therefore, making a tenth part of forty-eight thousand pins, might be considered as making four thousand eight hundred pins in a day. But if they had all wrought separately and independently, and without any of them having been educated to this peculiar business, they certainly could not each of them have made twenty, perhaps not one pin in a day." [Smith, A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. (Accessed August 29, 2021)].
"The specialisation and concentration of the workers on their single subtasks often leads to greater skill and greater productivity on their particular subtasks than would be achieved by the same number of workers each carrying out the original broad task." [Wikipedia. Division of Labor. (Accessed August 29, 2021).
In preparing to write this article, a temporary lack of understanding as to how such an established economic concept was necessary for the creation of the 'hive mind'. However, after two days of personal mental exercise and quite a bit of additional research, clarity in this regard emerged. The division of labor required for creation of the 'hive mind' refers to a socio-economic division of labor.
"Social division of labor greatly increases productivity, because individuals can work on whichever product provides them a comparative advantage, and then trade it to the individuals who cannot efficiently produce it. The social division of labor also creates exchange markets and prices, which operate in part by comparing the cost and time required to make each product." [Wikipedia. Social division of labor. (Accessed August 31, 2021)].
The emergence of the 'hive mind' flows from the transition of human individualism to human colonization. This colonization effect is resultant from the interdependence and reliance of the various markets for one another's goods and services. Large neural networks function in this manner.
One theory of consciousness, advanced by Giulio Tononi, a neuroscientist, is known as 'information integration theory'. It holds that: "consciousness emerges wherever you have a system that is simultaneously functionally specialized and integrated, so that specific modules process specific kinds of information, but the output of those modules gets integrated across the entire network. According to Tononi, consciousness is the information that gets integrated across the system." [Toker, supra.]
SHOULD FEAR EMANATE FROM THE POTENTIAL EMERGENCE OF THE 'HIVE MIND?
Science fiction plays a great role in equating fear with the 'hive mind'. The Borg, notorious beings from Star Trek - Next Generation (who "assimilate" other intelligent species into their 'collective' thereby depriving them of their individuality) as well as Doctor Who's Cybermen (who capture and upgrade humans depriving them of individual thought) are prime examples of fear creators.
But is this science fiction or in the near future science fact? Ethical considerations aside, brain to brain wireless connectivity and brain to computer wireless connectivity should cause the hair on the back of your neck rise. With this technology on the horizon, and it's accessibility not far behind, should we fear becoming the Borg? Probably not. As humans we are given the power of conflict, and as such, should a deprivation of individuality, independent thought, and deprivation of basic human rights of the magnitude of a Borg/Cyberman scenario arise, human instinct will emerge to defeat the 'hive mind' at this level.
However, can the same be said on the lesser scale of a collective consciousness flowing from society's use of cell phones, the internet, and the like? Is this any less of a surrender of human individualism and independent thought?
Clearly, this too should scare you, based upon an initial 'gut' reaction. In losing our individual consciousness to the 'hive mind', humanity sacrifices it's intelligence and mind set on an individual basis. We all think alike, have the same desires, same aspirations, same goals. wired by our communication technologies to strive for the common good and collective benefit - even if it runs contrary to our individual well-being. We may live in a free society, but absent independent thought what good is freedom anyway?
Yet to some, the concept of a 'hive mind' is palatable. Consider for a moment the scenario where the hive mind in its collaborative collective nature could achieve greater utility than it's counterpart individual minds combined. Philosopher Robert Nozick raised the idea of a 'utility monster' in a critique of utilitarianism to address this occurrence. Nozick proposed:
"[a]ccording to utilitarianism, we would be morally obligated to sacrifice our own utility in the service of the utility monster, whose utility in being served outweighs our suffering in serving it. Some philosophers see this as a great example why utility is not the metric to be thinking about when it comes to morality. Utilitarians, on the other hand, bite the bullet and say that we should in fact suffer for this being if the utility it gains is greater than our suffering. In terms of the 'hive mind', utilitarians might say that we should allow ourselves to be subsumed into a collective consciousness if that consciousness can reap greater utility than all of us as individuals combined." [Toker, supra.]
As tolerance for fear is subjective, the fear assessment associated with the hive mind collective conscious must be left up to each individual reader to decide for him/herself.
CONCLUSION
As a society that has been based on individualism for so long, the 'hive mind' truly represents a disruptive potential to our current way of life. Depending on your personal assessment of the degree of the threat 'hive mind' poses, you provide yourself with the answer as to whether or not fear it. In concluding this article, the closing words of an article by Annalee Newitz are presented:
"So what prevents us from crossing the threshold into forming superorganisms? Maybe we just haven't evolved beyond our primitive group differences enough. Or maybe part of what makes us humans, at least right now, is constantly navigating between colony consciousness and conflict. Either way, we're not likely to merge into hive minds any time soon." [Newitz, A. Could Humans Evolve into a Giant Hive Mind?. (Accessed August 31, 2021).