Dear all,
I am like Bruno : this initiative and the related discussion make me feel good, so of course I’m ok to be associated to the statement.
Thank you all.
Christophe Le Page
De : News and discussion about computer simulation in the social sciences [mailto:[log in to unmask]] De la part de Bonte Bruno
Envoyé : lundi 16 novembre 2015 12:03
À : [log in to unmask]
Objet : Re: [SIMSOC] Statement on behalf of our community on the Paris attacks
Hi to all,
I would be glad to be associated to this statement and I thank all of you for the initiative and comments.
Warm regards,
Bruno Bonté
De: "Wander Jager" <[log in to unmask]>
À: [log in to unmask]
Envoyé: Lundi 16 Novembre 2015 14:14:35
Objet: Re: [SIMSOC] Statement on behalf of our community on the Paris attacks
Dear friends
Thanks for the mail bombardment! Thanks to your positive comments I rewrote the statement. Please read, and if you are not yet on the list of people subscribing this statement (or if you want to be removed) let me know as soon as possible.
A statement on behalf of scientists and scholars cooperating in the global SIMSOC network.
A flourishing global culture is based on the human values of love, respect and tolerance. It requires an eagerness to embrace diversity, and when values conflict, informed tolerance as important principles. Terrorist attacks have destroyed the lives of thousands of innocent citizens around the world, undermining a tolerant culture by fuelling a polarization process, setting up groups of people against each other. Responding with fear and violence would undermine these values and ultimately lead to repressive governance structures. Instead, we want to support the development of critical thinking worldwide, particularly in areas of the world that are dominated by dogmatic and repressive powers. We believe that we should support investments in education and critical thinking, food, health, technology, research, work, peace, and social justice rather than invested in violence and death. We prefer drones offering Internet access to drones packed with explosives. Better dropping laptops than bombs. Mind that lead is better used for printing than for bullets!
Alexis Drogoul
Alison Heppenstall
Andreas Ernst
Antonella Ianni
Arend Ligtenberg
Borit Melania
Cesar Garcia-Diaz
Cesareo Hernandez
Chih-Chun Chen
Christophe Sibertin-Blanc
Cinzia Tegoni
Corinna Eisenbroich
Diana Mangalagiu
Fabio Correa
Frederik Schaff
Geeske Scholz
Gert Jan Hofstede
Helder Coelho
Julie Dugdale
Klaus G. Troitzsch
Klaus Jaffe
Leonardo G. Rodríguez Zoya
Mario Paolucci
Matteo Morini
Mauricio Salgado
Michael MÖhring
Norman Johnson
Olivier Barreteau
Oswaldo Téran
Patrick Seidler
Pietro Terna
Rocco Paolillo
Robert Marks
Rosaria Conte
Ruben Flores
Scott Moss
Sylvie Huet
Sjoukje Osinga
Torsten Heinrich
Tuncer Ören
Virginia Dignum
Wander Jager
Wilfred Geerlings
I plan to post this on the Facebook page of the Groningen center for Social Complexity Studies, but to have some impact I rely on us all to share wherever we can...
Warm regards
Wander Jager
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Scott Moss <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Dear all,
Revulsion as a response to terrorist attacks is in large measure personal but also reinforced and deepened by sharing our feelings. I believe that the importance of this sort of socially enhanced response is a lesson from agent-based social modelling of various kinds. Perhaps the very long and growing thread initiated by Wander’s posting is further evidence of the empirical importance this sort of social process.
Adding our own expressions of moral outrage can certainly be seen as a moral obligation. A common statement, or even individual statements, will add to the volume of such expressions but do not seem to me to be likely to change the tactics of IS or other terrorists. I would not be surprised if our statement failed to attract any special notice. Perhaps there is an analogy here with voting: no one much notices how each of us votes but the strength of the polity is more sound as more of us do vote. But in addition to voting, we are also able to apply our skills to the analysis and perhaps the improvement of society.
If we want to make a contribution based on our scientific skills, I suggest that an appropriate way forward is to apply those skills to a problem where we have some chance of making a direct impact by informing public policies — whether tactical, strategic or both. Perhaps a coordinated attack on specific issues where our understanding is unclear would be more useful. Some issues suggest themselves readily: recruitment to terrorist organisations or the social context in which radicalism thrives are two that come immediately to mind.
I suggest that, in addition to any statement of the sort suggested by Wander, that we agree on a small working party to receive suggestions for issues where we can make a contribution and to refine those questions to a few clear challenges to be presented to the wider social simulation community. We could both suggest to funding bodies that these challenges become the basis of funding calls and also devote our own resources to addressing these challenges. Indeed, by devoting our own resources to such activities we would be (and be seen to be) less self-serving because we would be willing to make some sacrifices for the public good. The whole process would also then avoid the lengthy delays involved in normal funding processes.
Workshops and webinars are fine but they need to be structured. The challenges suggested by such a working party would provide the basis for such structuring.
As Wander started this discussion and has considerable experience in projects and organisation, I suggest specifically that he be asked to put together an appropriate working party and to organise such a constructive process.
Regards,
Scott