Unicist Logical Approach


Unicist Conceptual Design

Text to Speech avaiable at the bottom

 The Structure of Unicist Conceptual Design.

The development of projects, systems or any kind of solutions in adaptive environments requires managing the concepts involved in order to ensure the results to be obtained. The conceptual design ensures the functionality of a solution.

Thus, unicist conceptual design becomes necessary to ensure results in adaptive environments by managing the fundamentals of the solutions, defining the necessary functions that are integrated as a unified field and ending with the definition of a dynamic process architecture.

This process includes the definition of roles, business objects and maximal and minimum synchronic actions to ensure the achievement of results.

Unicist Conceptual Design

The unicist approach to human behavior is based on the fact that human actions are driven by the concepts they have. Therefore, any time an individual becomes influenced, the “Conceptual Short-Term Memory” becomes activated to apprehend the “gist” of the message.

The purpose of conceptual design is to define the process architecture of the solution. To make this solution possible, it is necessary to be able to emulate it in mind.

Emulating in mind requires envisioning the final picture of the process and the results that will be achieved. This requires having the knowledge of the fundamentals of the process and a solution thinking approach that allows building the solution.

The emulation of the solution becomes possible if the conceptual knowledge of the solution is available.

The conceptual knowledge requires managing the ontogenetic map that defines the functionality of the concept that drives the solution.

Thus conceptual design implies integrating the emulation of the solution and the conceptual knowledge of the process to build the process architecture.

The Ontogenetic Algorithm of Conceptual Design.

The Guiding Idea.

The driver of conceptual design is the need of a functional solution. The existence of this driver requires having an empathic relationship with the solution. The empathic relationship with the solution is the essential driver of conceptual design while the functional solution is the “functional driver”.

When the driver is given, it is necessary to be able to manage the ambiguity of complex systems integrating processes and objects to fulfill the objective of developing a solution.

This requires integrating the triadic structure that is implicit in the operational dualistic approach of building processes and objects. For this purpose, it is necessary to manage ambiguous language to integrate the apparent contradiction between processes and objects.

Evident examples of the need of ambiguous language is the integration of the concept of yin and yang, maximal and minimum strategies, active principles and energy conservation principles, processes and objects.

It has to be considered that ambiguous language is necessary to apprehend the integration of the triadic approach of nature and concepts.

To ensure the functionality of the definitions of the processes and objects it is necessary to define which will be the destructive tests that need to be done.

The Basics of Conceptual Design.

The empathic capacity and the use of ambiguous language are basic to approach conceptual design. An individual can only develop conceptual design processes of entities where s/he has the necessary capacity to deal with the triadic structure of the concept of a solution.

Unicist Conceptual DesignThe approach to concepts requires managing the operational contradiction between maximal and minimum strategies by managing the ambiguity of their integration.

The Maximal Strategy.

The purpose of the maximal strategies is driven by solution thinking. Solution thinking is an approach to reality based on a conceptual solution an individual has in the specific field of the problem that is being solved or in a homologous field that can be used as a benchmark.

This approach can work as a pre-conceptual approach to reality that is driven by stagnated prejudices or can work as an adaptive conceptual approach driven by the capacity of adapting to the environment and the solution that is being built. Pre-conceptual approaches build utopias, while adaptive approaches expand the boundaries of a given activity.

The adaptive approach to conceptual design requires approaching reality using a backward chaining thinking process. This process requires emulating the final solution in mind and building the process from the end to the beginning. The backward chaining thinking process is necessary to manage the PERT (project evaluation and review technique) of C.P.M. (Critical Path Method) processes.

On the other hand, it has to be considered that the GANTT method is based on a forward chaining thinking process, which builds the solution based on the addition of tasks. The backward chaining thinking requires having the “unified field” of the solution in mind in order to have always an alternative action that ensures the achievement of the results.

The backward chaining thinking process requires using an adaptive project management process that includes the use of plans A, B, C and D in order to ensure the achievement of results.

When this backward chaining thinking approach has been integrated with the adaptive project management model, there is a need to confirm the knowledge of the fundamentals of the specific environment.

The fundamental knowledge requires having sound knowledge and successful experiences in the specific field of action or in homologous fields.

The knowledge of the fundamentals is the catalyst of the process of ensuring the functionality of the conceptual solution of the problem.

The paradox is that it is a catalyst when there is a true valid knowledge but an inhibitor if the fundamentals are approached using rationalistic, subjective or any other fallacious approaches.

The maximal strategy expands the boundaries when the solution thinking allows emulating a solution in mind integrating the backward chaining thinking with the knowledge of the fundamentals.

When the emulation of the solution has been achieved, it is time to develop the minimum strategy, which requires confirming the conceptual knowledge that underlies.

The Minimum Strategy.

The minimum strategy of a conceptual design process is to ensure the conceptual solution of the problem that is being managed. The conceptual solution is given by the functionality of the conceptual structure of the entity that is being designed. The first step is to know the essential structure of the concept, which defines the “unified field” of the entity.

With the unified field in mind, it is necessary to access the ontogenetic map of the essential concept. The ontogenetic map implies the description of the essential fundamentals following the laws of complementation and supplementation following the evolution cycle.

The ontogenetic map defines the ontogenetic algorithm to develop the conceptual design of the solution. Each of the fundamentals that integrates the ontogenetic map works as an extrinsic object when it deals with the attributes of the entity or as a behavioral object when it deals with the approach to the external entity.

This ontogenetic map is in fact a knowledge object that defines the structure of the “unified field” that needs to be managed when developing the conceptual design. The risk of this knowledge is that it might be fallacious.

Therefore, the next step is to develop the necessary destructive tests to prove the limits of the validity of the knowledge.

The Minimum Strategy is sustained by a Learning Process.

Unless the ontogenetic map is already installed in the long-term memory of an individual, the use of destructive tests of knowledge unavoidably drive to a learning process. These learning processes require following the stages of the learning of complexity management.

These destructive tests of knowledge are the entropy inhibitor of conceptual design. It avoids accessing a complex problem with hypothetical ideas that generate no results. This stage finishes when the knowledge demonstrates its functionality to apprehend the unified field of the solution that is being designed.

Thus a conceptual solution can be built in order to provide the necessary complement to complete the process architecture.

The Conceptual Design of the Functional Solution.

The conceptual design of the functional solution is based on the integration of the emulation of the solution in the mind of the designer that drives the maximal strategy and the conceptual solution that drives the minimum strategy.

It has to be considered that the final purpose of the conceptual design is to build a solution in a complex environment.

This requires defining the processes and objects that will be used, making the necessary destructive tests of the processes to achieve a functional solution, which is used as the input for the design of the complex system.

Complex system building requires necessarily having a strategy to manage the feedback from the environment and the bi-univocal relationship among its components.

Therefore, the context of conceptual design is given by its integration with the purpose, which is the building of a complex system and the strategy that is needed to organize growth.

It needs to be clarified that a complex system cannot be transformed into an operational system with univocal cause-effect relationships. It remains complex.

What needs to be done is to develop simple tasks that can be managed by anyone in order to develop the necessary actions to produce results while the complexity is managed at a superior level.

Levels of Conceptual Design.

Four levels of conceptual design have been discovered:

Level 1. – Guiding Idea: that has the generic guiding idea of what is being designed.

Level 2. – Logical Design: that has the logical design of the process.

Level 3. – Objects Design: that deals with the design of specific objects.

Level 4. – Process Design: that manages the unified field of the solution.

Level 1: Guiding Idea.

Unicist Conceptual DesignThis level of conceptual design is based on the rational knowledge of the conceptual solution and the understanding of the ontogenetic map that allows apprehending the metaphors that are used to categorize the design of the solution.

This level of knowledge requires having operational experience in the field of action of the solution without having the knowledge of the unified field that is being managed.

Level 2: Logical Design.

This level includes the preceding level and includes the capacity of managing the complete structure of the conceptual knowledge of the unified field of the solution.

It is based on having the capacity to manage the unified field of knowledge based on integrating it in reasonable and understandable terms as a sort of “semantic network” of interrelated concepts that need to produce a predefined result.

This level of design provides conceptual solutions that are controlled making the destructive tests of these solutions. It requires being able to apprehend the triadic structure of concepts.

This implies being able to manage the ambiguity of the conceptual structure, which includes, on the one hand, a maxima strategy and, on the other hand, an operational contradictory minimum strategy.

Level 3: Objects Design.

This level includes the preceding level and includes the capacity of emulating in mind some of the objects that integrate the final solution.

On the one hand, Objects design requires having the necessary empathy with the functions that need to be built as objects and with the users of these objects.

On the other hand, the design of objects deals with the functional solutions, which requires emulating the solution in mind and developing a backward-chaining process to define the problem that needs to be solved.

This process has to be recycled until the final solution has been achieved or has been replaced by a solution of a superior level.

The contradictions that will be found in these processes need to be approached by upgrading to a superior level where these contradictions are integrating in a unified field.

The objects design is based on the knowledge of the fundamentals of the objects and the knowledge of the purpose to be achieved by the entire system.

Level 4: Process Design.

This level includes the preceding level and requires being able to integrate the interdependent objects that have bi-univocal influence using a double dialectical approach.

This level allows integrating the maximal and minimum strategy of each object in order to ensure the achievement of the results.

The process is based on emulating the dynamics of the solution in mind in order to be able to develop adaptive solutions and manage the influence of the environment.

The process requires being able to manage the unified field of the entire system and its dynamics, which requires developing the necessary destructive tests of the processes in order to ensure the functionality.

The final functional solution needs to have a maximal strategy to expand the boundaries of the system and a minimum strategy to ensure its survival.

There has to exist an extreme level of empathy and ambiguity management, because a complex system is a composite object itself where all the ambiguous aspects of the objects and processes that integrate it need to be structured as functional conjunctions.

 

Generating Value in Adaptive Environments.

The unicist conceptual design is necessary to ensure the production of results in adaptive environments. This conceptual design implies having the knowledge of the concepts of reality.

FREE DOWNLOAD - Click on the image to download

The discovery that human actions are driven by the concepts people have, established a new stage in the understanding and influence of individual, institutional and social behavior. The paradigm shift in sciences that was introduced by the Unicist Theory, which is applied to individual, institutional and social behavior, is based on the discovery that human actions are driven by the concepts that individuals have.

It is necessary to acknowledge that concepts define the nature of things. These concepts are built in “mind” using the “ontointelligence”, which is the intelligence to apprehend the nature of things and is integrated by the ethical intelligence, the strategic intelligence and the type of logical thought.

People who intend to assume the responsibility for the results of their actions need to be aware of the concepts of what they are doing. The unicist conceptual design is the methodology that allows transforming the knowledge of the nature of things into processes to make things happen.

It is necessary to be aware of the concept of a given reality in order to be able to assume the responsibility for producing results in adaptive environments. Those who cannot emulate the structure of concepts can only assume the responsibility of operational tasks or use their preconcepts to develop an activity.

The discovery of the behavioral objects explained how concepts guide conscious actions. They integrate the available data in the long-term memory, which includes the semantic, episodic and procedural memory. This explained that the capacity to emulate in “mind” the external reality depends on the level of conceptualization of an individual.

Academic Committee.

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm.

  Click to listen highlighted text!  The Structure of Unicist Conceptual Design. The development of projects, systems or any kind of solutions in adaptive environments requires managing the concepts involved in order to ensure the results to be obtained. The conceptual design ensures the functionality of a solution. Thus, unicist conceptual design becomes necessary to ensure results in adaptive environments by managing the fundamentals of the solutions, defining the necessary functions that are integrated as a unified field and ending with the definition of a dynamic process architecture. This process includes the definition of roles, business objects and maximal and minimum synchronic actions to ensure the achievement of results. The unicist approach to human behavior is based on the fact that human actions are driven by the concepts they have. Therefore, any time an individual becomes influenced, the “Conceptual Short-Term Memory” becomes activated to apprehend the “gist” of the message. The purpose of conceptual design is to define the process architecture of the solution. To make this solution possible, it is necessary to be able to emulate it in mind. Emulating in mind requires envisioning the final picture of the process and the results that will be achieved. This requires having the knowledge of the fundamentals of the process and a solution thinking approach that allows building the solution. The emulation of the solution becomes possible if the conceptual knowledge of the solution is available. The conceptual knowledge requires managing the ontogenetic map that defines the functionality of the concept that drives the solution. Thus conceptual design implies integrating the emulation of the solution and the conceptual knowledge of the process to build the process architecture. The Ontogenetic Algorithm of Conceptual Design. The Guiding Idea. The driver of conceptual design is the need of a functional solution. The existence of this driver requires having an empathic relationship with the solution. The empathic relationship with the solution is the essential driver of conceptual design while the functional solution is the “functional driver”. When the driver is given, it is necessary to be able to manage the ambiguity of complex systems integrating processes and objects to fulfill the objective of developing a solution. This requires integrating the triadic structure that is implicit in the operational dualistic approach of building processes and objects. For this purpose, it is necessary to manage ambiguous language to integrate the apparent contradiction between processes and objects. Evident examples of the need of ambiguous language is the integration of the concept of yin and yang, maximal and minimum strategies, active principles and energy conservation principles, processes and objects. It has to be considered that ambiguous language is necessary to apprehend the integration of the triadic approach of nature and concepts. To ensure the functionality of the definitions of the processes and objects it is necessary to define which will be the destructive tests that need to be done. The Basics of Conceptual Design. The empathic capacity and the use of ambiguous language are basic to approach conceptual design. An individual can only develop conceptual design processes of entities where s/he has the necessary capacity to deal with the triadic structure of the concept of a solution. The approach to concepts requires managing the operational contradiction between maximal and minimum strategies by managing the ambiguity of their integration. The Maximal Strategy. The purpose of the maximal strategies is driven by solution thinking. Solution thinking is an approach to reality based on a conceptual solution an individual has in the specific field of the problem that is being solved or in a homologous field that can be used as a benchmark. This approach can work as a pre-conceptual approach to reality that is driven by stagnated prejudices or can work as an adaptive conceptual approach driven by the capacity of adapting to the environment and the solution that is being built. Pre-conceptual approaches build utopias, while adaptive approaches expand the boundaries of a given activity. The adaptive approach to conceptual design requires approaching reality using a backward chaining thinking process. This process requires emulating the final solution in mind and building the process from the end to the beginning. The backward chaining thinking process is necessary to manage the PERT (project evaluation and review technique) of C.P.M. (Critical Path Method) processes. On the other hand, it has to be considered that the GANTT method is based on a forward chaining thinking process, which builds the solution based on the addition of tasks. The backward chaining thinking requires having the “unified field” of the solution in mind in order to have always an alternative action that ensures the achievement of the results. The backward chaining thinking process requires using an adaptive project management process that includes the use of plans A, B, C and D in order to ensure the achievement of results. When this backward chaining thinking approach has been integrated with the adaptive project management model, there is a need to confirm the knowledge of the fundamentals of the specific environment. The fundamental knowledge requires having sound knowledge and successful experiences in the specific field of action or in homologous fields. The knowledge of the fundamentals is the catalyst of the process of ensuring the functionality of the conceptual solution of the problem. The paradox is that it is a catalyst when there is a true valid knowledge but an inhibitor if the fundamentals are approached using rationalistic, subjective or any other fallacious approaches. The maximal strategy expands the boundaries when the solution thinking allows emulating a solution in mind integrating the backward chaining thinking with the knowledge of the fundamentals. When the emulation of the solution has been achieved, it is time to develop the minimum strategy, which requires confirming the conceptual knowledge that underlies. The Minimum Strategy. The minimum strategy of a conceptual design process is to ensure the conceptual solution of the problem that is being managed. The conceptual solution is given by the functionality of the conceptual structure of the entity that is being designed. The first step is to know the essential structure of the concept, which defines the “unified field” of the entity. With the unified field in mind, it is necessary to access the ontogenetic map of the essential concept. The ontogenetic map implies the description of the essential fundamentals following the laws of complementation and supplementation following the evolution cycle. The ontogenetic map defines the ontogenetic algorithm to develop the conceptual design of the solution. Each of the fundamentals that integrates the ontogenetic map works as an extrinsic object when it deals with the attributes of the entity or as a behavioral object when it deals with the approach to the external entity. This ontogenetic map is in fact a knowledge object that defines the structure of the “unified field” that needs to be managed when developing the conceptual design. The risk of this knowledge is that it might be fallacious. Therefore, the next step is to develop the necessary destructive tests to prove the limits of the validity of the knowledge. The Minimum Strategy is sustained by a Learning Process. Unless the ontogenetic map is already installed in the long-term memory of an individual, the use of destructive tests of knowledge unavoidably drive to a learning process. These learning processes require following the stages of the learning of complexity management. These destructive tests of knowledge are the entropy inhibitor of conceptual design. It avoids accessing a complex problem with hypothetical ideas that generate no results. This stage finishes when the knowledge demonstrates its functionality to apprehend the unified field of the solution that is being designed. Thus a conceptual solution can be built in order to provide the necessary complement to complete the process architecture. The Conceptual Design of the Functional Solution. The conceptual design of the functional solution is based on the integration of the emulation of the solution in the mind of the designer that drives the maximal strategy and the conceptual solution that drives the minimum strategy. It has to be considered that the final purpose of the conceptual design is to build a solution in a complex environment. This requires defining the processes and objects that will be used, making the necessary destructive tests of the processes to achieve a functional solution, which is used as the input for the design of the complex system. Complex system building requires necessarily having a strategy to manage the feedback from the environment and the bi-univocal relationship among its components. Therefore, the context of conceptual design is given by its integration with the purpose, which is the building of a complex system and the strategy that is needed to organize growth. It needs to be clarified that a complex system cannot be transformed into an operational system with univocal cause-effect relationships. It remains complex. What needs to be done is to develop simple tasks that can be managed by anyone in order to develop the necessary actions to produce results while the complexity is managed at a superior level. Levels of Conceptual Design. Four levels of conceptual design have been discovered: Level 1. – Guiding Idea: that has the generic guiding idea of what is being designed. Level 2. – Logical Design: that has the logical design of the process. Level 3. – Objects Design: that deals with the design of specific objects. Level 4. – Process Design: that manages the unified field of the solution. Level 1: Guiding Idea. This level of conceptual design is based on the rational knowledge of the conceptual solution and the understanding of the ontogenetic map that allows apprehending the metaphors that are used to categorize the design of the solution. This level of knowledge requires having operational experience in the field of action of the solution without having the knowledge of the unified field that is being managed. Level 2: Logical Design. This level includes the preceding level and includes the capacity of managing the complete structure of the conceptual knowledge of the unified field of the solution. It is based on having the capacity to manage the unified field of knowledge based on integrating it in reasonable and understandable terms as a sort of “semantic network” of interrelated concepts that need to produce a predefined result. This level of design provides conceptual solutions that are controlled making the destructive tests of these solutions. It requires being able to apprehend the triadic structure of concepts. This implies being able to manage the ambiguity of the conceptual structure, which includes, on the one hand, a maxima strategy and, on the other hand, an operational contradictory minimum strategy. Level 3: Objects Design. This level includes the preceding level and includes the capacity of emulating in mind some of the objects that integrate the final solution. On the one hand, Objects design requires having the necessary empathy with the functions that need to be built as objects and with the users of these objects. On the other hand, the design of objects deals with the functional solutions, which requires emulating the solution in mind and developing a backward-chaining process to define the problem that needs to be solved. This process has to be recycled until the final solution has been achieved or has been replaced by a solution of a superior level. The contradictions that will be found in these processes need to be approached by upgrading to a superior level where these contradictions are integrating in a unified field. The objects design is based on the knowledge of the fundamentals of the objects and the knowledge of the purpose to be achieved by the entire system. Level 4: Process Design. This level includes the preceding level and requires being able to integrate the interdependent objects that have bi-univocal influence using a double dialectical approach. This level allows integrating the maximal and minimum strategy of each object in order to ensure the achievement of the results. The process is based on emulating the dynamics of the solution in mind in order to be able to develop adaptive solutions and manage the influence of the environment. The process requires being able to manage the unified field of the entire system and its dynamics, which requires developing the necessary destructive tests of the processes in order to ensure the functionality. The final functional solution needs to have a maximal strategy to expand the boundaries of the system and a minimum strategy to ensure its survival. There has to exist an extreme level of empathy and ambiguity management, because a complex system is a composite object itself where all the ambiguous aspects of the objects and processes that integrate it need to be structured as functional conjunctions.   Generating Value in Adaptive Environments. The unicist conceptual design is necessary to ensure the production of results in adaptive environments. This conceptual design implies having the knowledge of the concepts of reality. The discovery that human actions are driven by the concepts people have, established a new stage in the understanding and influence of individual, institutional and social behavior. The paradigm shift in sciences that was introduced by the Unicist Theory, which is applied to individual, institutional and social behavior, is based on the discovery that human actions are driven by the concepts that individuals have. It is necessary to acknowledge that concepts define the nature of things. These concepts are built in “mind” using the “ontointelligence”, which is the intelligence to apprehend the nature of things and is integrated by the ethical intelligence, the strategic intelligence and the type of logical thought. People who intend to assume the responsibility for the results of their actions need to be aware of the concepts of what they are doing. The unicist conceptual design is the methodology that allows transforming the knowledge of the nature of things into processes to make things happen. It is necessary to be aware of the concept of a given reality in order to be able to assume the responsibility for producing results in adaptive environments. Those who cannot emulate the structure of concepts can only assume the responsibility of operational tasks or use their preconcepts to develop an activity. The discovery of the behavioral objects explained how concepts guide conscious actions. They integrate the available data in the long-term memory, which includes the semantic, episodic and procedural memory. This explained that the capacity to emulate in “mind” the external reality depends on the level of conceptualization of an individual. Academic Committee. NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm.


Building the Guiding Idea in Adults´ Learning Process

The Research on the Ontology of Human Learning developed at The Unicist Research Institute showed that the development of the guiding idea in the learning process of adults is the decisive step to begin the learning process. If there is no clear guiding idea, the learning process does not even start.

The Unicist Ontology of the Guiding Idea of Adults' Learning

The guiding idea of what is being learned is defined by providing an essential answer to the following questions in relation to the object of learning:

What is it?

The definition of the category of the “thing” that needs to be apprehended is the first step to apprehend its nature.

What is it for?

The “What for” of a concept that an adult aims to learn sets the functionality of what is being learned. If the learner truly understands the “what for” of something, the information on this functionality could be used in the future as it would be stored in the long-term memory associated with a concrete use and added value.

What is the differentiation within the category?

Once the essence of an object of learning is apprehended (what is it?) and the functionality of this concept is known (what is it for?), then the individual needs to approach the differentiation of this object of learning with other objects within the same category. Adults are only willing to learn if they know that the solution is “the best of the class”.

 

The Building of the Guiding Idea: The Key to Learning

The building of the guiding idea is the starting point for any learning process. Learning is one of the most freedom oriented actions. No one can truly force anyone to learn, no one can truly stop anyone from learning. For this learning process to take place, the learner makes an individual decision.

When the guiding idea is not defined, the learning does not begin, when the 3 questions are not validated, and are taken as truths, preconcepts and fallacies prevail, but when they are answered and taken in functional terms, a new door opens for the learning of adults.

And as Sun Tzu stated: Every battle is won or lost before it is even fought. The answer given to the essential questions of “What is it?”, “What is for?” and “What is the difference with others in the same category?” define the success or failure of the learning process.   Click to listen highlighted text! The Research on the Ontology of Human Learning developed at The Unicist Research Institute showed that the development of the guiding idea in the learning process of adults is the decisive step to begin the learning process. If there is no clear guiding idea, the learning process does not even start. The guiding idea of what is being learned is defined by providing an essential answer to the following questions in relation to the object of learning: What is it? The definition of the category of the “thing” that needs to be apprehended is the first step to apprehend its nature. What is it for? The “What for” of a concept that an adult aims to learn sets the functionality of what is being learned. If the learner truly understands the “what for” of something, the information on this functionality could be used in the future as it would be stored in the long-term memory associated with a concrete use and added value. What is the differentiation within the category? Once the essence of an object of learning is apprehended (what is it?) and the functionality of this concept is known (what is it for?), then the individual needs to approach the differentiation of this object of learning with other objects within the same category. Adults are only willing to learn if they know that the solution is “the best of the class”.   The Building of the Guiding Idea: The Key to Learning The building of the guiding idea is the starting point for any learning process. Learning is one of the most freedom oriented actions. No one can truly force anyone to learn, no one can truly stop anyone from learning. For this learning process to take place, the learner makes an individual decision. When the guiding idea is not defined, the learning does not begin, when the 3 questions are not validated, and are taken as truths, preconcepts and fallacies prevail, but when they are answered and taken in functional terms, a new door opens for the learning of adults. And as Sun Tzu stated: Every battle is won or lost before it is even fought. The answer given to the essential questions of “What is it?”, “What is for?” and “What is the difference with others in the same category?” define the success or failure of the learning process.


Business Hackers: The agents who introduce Business Viruses

Business Hackers are individuals who need to implant business viruses in institutions in order to demonstrate that they are able to dominate them.

They tend to do everything in their way disregarding the use of established methods, procedures and taxonomies to achieve goals.

To introduce viruses they propose short-cuts to achieve profit. Their success is achieved when their proposal is accepted by the greed of their counterparts.

Their butterfly behavior is sustained by conjunctural justifications and the exertion of power. They might use active power or the power of inaction.

Their destruction goal is integrated by envy which is driven by greed and jealousy. They use greed to profit from the environment at a materialistic or emotional level while they feel jealous of the power the organization has.

They are fulfilled when the organizational goals become degraded. They justify their actions by believing and saying that the organization is not such because it could not resist their actions. They are homologous to “computer hackers”.

Inhibiting and entropy-inhibiting unicist business objects are the anti-viruses needed to neutralize their actions.

Diana Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. https://www.unicist.org/talents/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/turi.pdf

 


Value adding: the key for learning processes

Learning processes in adults require the existence of a real problem to be solved. When there is no real problem to be solved, the learning process has no substance and the “knowledge” cannot be stored in the long term memory because it is meaningless.

Learning processes are based on the need to increase the value added to the environment so as to gain a better adaptive position for an individual.

But a learning context is required before a learning process begins.

The maximal strategy of a learning process is given by the need of improvement. The existence of a driver and the real need for improvement provides the will the individual “uses” as a catalyst in order to face and solve the problems of his/her learning process.

Achieving the minimum strategy implies paying the prices to ensure learning. The price to be paid is that the individual needs to leave things aside in order to access the comprehension of a new approach.

Learning implies leaving things aside. If the problem can be solved using the preexisting knowledge there is no need for learning because the problem does not exist. Therefore it is implicit in a learning process for unsolved problems that the individual leaves aside the preexisting approach and enters the comprehension of the new approach without cutting it down to what s/he knew.
Adults only do so when they really need to solve a problem. Improvement is the active function and learning the energy conservation function.

Only people who need to improve will be able to learn. People who enter in a learning process without having a real need to improve in order to solve real problems just enter in self-fulfilling activities.

Diana Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm.
https://www.unicist.org/talents/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/turi.pdf


Open lecture on the Discovery of Human Ontointelligence

This lecture is for the group of the “Organization Committee” and is open for guests. It will take place as a “Hangout On Air” on November 8th at 12:00 pm US-EST.
Access: https://plus.google.com/+UnicistOrg

Peter Belohlavek

It is a 20-minute lecture starting at:

India 10:30 pm
European Central Time 6:00 pm
UK 5:00 pm
Brazil 3:00 pm
US PST 9:00 am
Mexico (DF) 11:00 am

This discovery is a major breakthrough in the research on human behavior that was based on the complexity research methodology.

The discovery of ontointelligence, the intelligence humans use to access the nature of reality in order to adapt to the environment, increased significantly the predictability of human behavior and the possibilities to influence it.

This lecture is the first lecture for the preparation of the cases of the XI International Unicist Conference that will take place in September 2014.

We invite you to participate. It will begin at 12:00 pm (US-EST) sharp.

Unicist Press Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems.
https://www.unicist.org/talents/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/turi.pdf


The Unicist Double Dialectical Approach to Businesses

The unicist logical approach allowed defining the potential possibilities of a business. The discovery of the logical structures (named ontogenetic maps) that underlie the nature of individual, institutional and cultural behavior allowed modeling the adaptive aspects of reality.

Unicist Logical ApproachThe unicist logical approach uses these structures to emulate the dynamics of businesses based on their models.

Models are dead or live structures depending on the mind of the one who uses them.

The double dialectical approach allows emulating dynamic live models in mind. It requires having a rational knowledge of the ontogenetic maps and using the unicist reflection process to make them work by developing actions based on the use of grounded knowledge to assure results.

Empiricism is a dualistic approach to reality that does not suffice to expand the boundaries of businesses because it is necessarily based on past experiences.

The use of the unicist logical approach, that makes the emulation of reality possible, allows taking advantage of potential possibilities and increasing the speed of actions and energy saving, which makes it necessary to expand and upgrade businesses.

Access “The Functionalism of the Unicist Logical Approach” at:
www.unicist.net/clipboard

The emulation of businesses in mind

The unicist approach implies being able to manage the unicist double dialectical logic. It made the emulation of nature possible and thus opened the doors for accurate diagnoses, scenarios, strategies and architectures that allowed defining the possibilities to produce results and make them happen.

It required going beyond the dualistic approach that hinders the emulation of evolution and limits human activities to static environments.

We invite you to enter into this approach at a personal level to empower your personal strategies.

If you are interested in learning about how intelligence deals with adaptiveness and complexity you can access:
https://www.unicist.org/talents/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ontointelligence_en.pdf

Why go Beyond Dualism?

The neural functionality is dualistic. Neurons are “on” or “off”. Dualistic Dialectics vs. Double Dialectics is the battle between the disjunction “OR” and the conjunction “AND”.

The dualistic dialectics of Hegel and Marx transformed this dualistic approach into a social myth that provided an oversimplified perception of reality and a way to influence it. Both dialectics are fallacious because they do not emulate the structure of nature.

The dualistic thinking necessarily fosters a non-adaptive behavior that is driven by idealistic, ideological, materialistic, spiritual or egocentric needs. Dualism is necessary when personal needs prevail over functional adaptation.

The consequence of dualistic thinking is that people believe in a dialectical behavior. Adaptation becomes impossible when using dualistic thinking.

But dualistic dialectics has proven to be fallacious to understand and influence evolution. The unicist double dialectical logic allowed using the dualism of neural functionality but emulating the functionality of nature. In the short run, the benefit of using dualistic dialectics is that it transforms humans in judges of reality instead of responsible participants.

Why use the Unicist Double Dialectical Logic?

The unicist double dialectical logic uses the dualistic operation of neurons to build a mental emulation of the structure of nature that allows dealing with the adaptive aspects of reality, managing the integration of their double dialectical behavior.

Unicist thinking is the name given to the process that allows building the double dialectical logic.

Unicist thinking allows emulating in mind the structure of adaptive aspects of reality in order to manage them. It provides the necessary operating system to manage adaptive systems to expand the boundaries of businesses and infer future scenarios in order to adapt to them.

Unicist thinking allows defining the nature of reality in a reasonable and provable way. It is based on double dialectical thinking in order apprehend nature emulating the ontogenetic intelligence of nature.

It is necessary to diagnose, build strategies and design business architectures. It provides the structure to understand the fundamentals of businesses and integrate the fundamental knowledge with the technical analytical knowledge to make decisions. It is an upgrade that is up to you…

An Example: Unicist Leadership

The unicist approach to leadership is a process that allows leading people minimizing the energy that has to be invested to influence them. It is a role centered approach that uses roles as objects minimizing the necessary power to be exerted.

The unicist double dialectical approach allows managing groups as adaptive systems, forecasting their dynamics to be able to respond to their demand while being one step ahead in order to be able to be followed.

The dualistic approach transforms leadership into an over-adaptive process, where dominance, submission and opposition prevail. As dualistic approaches cannot define group dynamics, they need to “rigidify” the relationships in order to avoid individualistic-anarchic behaviors.

Dualistic leadership tends to transform participation into manipulation or submissiveness and non exerted power into power exertion which destroys group synergy.

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems.
https://www.unicist.org/talents/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/turi-1.pdf


Learning to deal with Unified Fields in Business

When we talk about the ontogenesis of knowledge acquisition we mean the natural steps that need to be considered when learning or when a learning process for other is being designed.

Knowledge can only be acquired when individuals have made a conscious decision to learn something. Knowledge only exists when it is stored in the long term memory which requires being meaningful and useful.

While adapting to reality implies a high level of energy consumption, building parallel realities provides a feeling of comfort, making the individual feel in power of the situation in the short run.

The unified field needs to be approached following the natural steps to apprehend a specific reality and the possibilities the individual has.

We invite you to be our guest at the Unicist Library to learn about “Hyperrealism in Business”: http://www.unicist.com

Diana Belohlavek
VP Global Markets
& Market Labs

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is a pioneer in complexity science research. More than 4,000 ontological researches were developed since 1976 until July 2011 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution, including the development of ontology based and business object driven solutions for businesses.


Personal Counscious Evolution is the driver for Success

The Unicist Standard for Personal Conscious Evolution described by Peter Belohlavek defines the ontological structures and the taxonomies that can be influenced to foster the evolution of individuals. The US is integrated by the taxonomies to approach ontointelligence and the fundamentals of the unicist reflection capacity and of conflict management.

Access or request a Unicist Tweetinar on this subject at:
http://www.academic.unicist.org/unicist_tweetinars.shtml

Learn more about the trend of ontology based solutions for businesses:
http://www.unicist.net/obs.shtml

Press Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the pioneering organization in the field of human adaptive behavior ontological research. More than 3,500 ontological researches were developed since 1976 until September 2010 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution.


Ontological research of personal turnarounds in business

A personal turnaround is a sort of “resurrection” made by an individual who enters in a superior stage.

The ontological research on personal turnarounds in business has been running for 10 years now and has included 23 individuals and the follow up of their evolution. This research is now in its final stage.

The publication of this post has been triggered by the need to foster the turnaround of four individuals, one is extremely young, two are middle aged and one is a senior. The conclusion of the research will be considered valid if the forecast of the four cases is accurate.

Many of the cases of turnarounds in business were triggered by the desire of achieving a superior level in terms of financials.

What became evident is that turnarounds are possible if individuals envision a new stage and their role, have changed the paradigms to deal with their environment and have “faith” (implying complete confidence in an authority).

They require a high level of self-confidence to launch a different stage and the capacity of doing the necessary amendments that allow “guilt free” closing of the previous state.

When these conditions cannot be fulfilled individuals degrade to a lower level. The financial trigger works often as a mind-trap hindering the upgrades.

Turnarounds are sustained by the generational responsibility of individuals. They become extremely difficult when the environment has a high level of individualistic components.

Personal turnarounds are necessary when needing to deal with a superior business ethics.

Personal turnarounds are  extremely rare.

Request more information: n.i.brown@unicist.org

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,500 researches in complexity science, until September 2010,  applied to individual, institutional and social evolution. The applicative researches are based on the discovery of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature and the consequent Unicist Ontology of Evolution.