2. Plan Introducing the SINTELNET white paper The background: agent-based models, social simulations, logical analysis, and mirror-neuron system... Where do wide cognition explanations excel?

3. SINTELNET The aim of the network is to understand the radically new forms of Information Technology- enabled social environments by critically examining the basic concepts used to described them, and to propose new approaches to understand future IT- enabled social situations.

4. SINTELNET The manifesto of the network is Cristiano Castelfranchi’s position paper “Minds as social institutions” (Phenomenology & Cognitive Science 2013) social interactions as requiring mind reading and mental content ascription “Our social minds for social interactions are coordination artifacts and social institutions.” I proposed to review what new approaches in cognitive science have to say about social phenomena such as this.

5. SINTELNET Structure of the white paper: Introduce five different approaches, jointly dubbed ‘wide cognition’: extended, embodied, enacted, situated, and distributed cognition. Describe case studies that give more insight than agent- based modeling into social intelligence (in particular, but not limited to, in IT-enabled contexts).

6. The background Some relevant research for SINTELNET is based on agent-based models, various social simulations, game-theoretic things, and mirror neuron speculations... But there are interesting wide approaches as well...

7. Game-theoretic models and mirror-neurons With mirror-neuron speculations, it’s obvious that they are usually empirically underdetermined But neural basis of sociality does not screen off the wide cognition models. Game-theoretic explanations are usually heavily idealized but might screen off wide cognition. More details is not always better. If we only understand why a game-theoretic model applies, it may be treated as an abstract mechanistic model.

8. Why not agent-based models? ABMs are ‘computational method that enables a researcher to create, analyze, and experiment with models composed of agents that interact within an environment’ The models are not just equation- based but mimic agents Artificial societies, non-linear interactions Not explanatory in themselves but help run virtual experiments

9. Challenge! Is there anything that these virtual models cannot cover? If not: Do they omit something essential for social intelligence that wide cognition does account for?

10. Where, exactly, is wide cognition relevant? Embodied joint action Mind-reading Social memory and social knowledge Social emotions Self Embodied semantics and distributed language studies Pretence play, virtual identities Collective intentionality Non-individual aspects of cultural background

11. Dangers Duplication of effort Social intelligence can be explained and modeled in various approaches. There is a danger of duplicating effort. Isolation Empirical evidence in various theories may rather constrain other theories rather than screen them off. We should strive for integration (via truth- constraints).

12. What next? I want to include selected case studies in the white paper. We will discuss this on Friday. Dangers and challenges are important. Thank you!