I've been thinking a lot lately about the poor development of certain areas of science, technology, applied solutions, medicine -- even society itself. Even in areas of thought that attract scorching levels of human brainpower, creativity can be low, common-sense can be non-existent, stagnation can rule the day.
I've also been thinking about how much these "thought zones" or "mental nexuses (nexi?)" parallel the individual human mind. Both the "multimind" and the "unimind" can suffer from identical problems; ranging from simple writer's block to pure schizophrenia.
So my thinking is this; there needs to be a psychology of the "multimind" -- not sociology or mob psychology, but rather a distinct science that analyzes, evaluates, identifies and solves issues related to the "multimind" using the "unimind" as a model.
Big expensive problems can be solved. e.g. How do you increase creativity? Well, it's almost certainly no different than increasing creativity in an individual, except that you scale it up, and can benefit from certain aspects of the multimind if you can harness them properly.
First off we'd need a distinctive vocabulary. The zones themselves... something like unimind and multimind could suffice.
Terms which relate to the unimind, like "mood", "aptitude", "intelligence", "attitude", "happy", "sad", "indifferent"... these probably need distinction when discussing the multimind as well.
A model of the multimind needs to be developed, as does an objective analysis of "health".
Almost certainly, the same frightfully accurate aptitude tests can be applied to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the multimind.
The key here is, the unimind is quite difficult to change, whereas the multimind can be continually strengthened to leverage the model. Intelligence or creativity can be boosted simply by adding more of those resources. This is immensely powerful.