Conceptual Thinking

From Dualism to Double Dialectical Approaches

The dualism of neural functionality makes dualistic logical approaches become the natural way to deal with reality. This dualism is functional in operational environments, ruled by cause-effect relationships where the actors dominate the consequences of their actions.

Fallacy Dualistic DialecticsCommon sense is the consequence of having found recipes using dualistic logic. Common sense rules are pre-concepts that work as recipes for the one who uses them.

At an abstract level, truth tables are also the consequence of the use of dualism. In the field of dualistic approaches things are true or false, good or bad, etc.

The disjunction “OR” is the basic rule when dealing with dualistic approaches in operational environments. This makes people feel powerful because they establish the “OR” they need.

But when dealing with adaptive aspects of reality there is no possibility to define actions using a dualistic approach because the triadic structure of reality cannot be apprehended with a binary model.

The Triadic Structure of Nature

The triadic structure of reality is defined by a purpose, an active function and an energy conservation function. To apprehend this triadic structure with a binary mind it is necessary to be able to build a double dialectical approach in mind that emulates a specific reality.

The Unicist Paradigm Shift in ScienceThis approach was named unicist double dialectical logic because it allows defining the unified field of adaptive systems in order to diagnose and influence them. It is based on the fact that in complex systems all the elements are integrated by the conjunction “AND”.

The Unicist double dialectical approach leaves behind the truth tables (True “OR” False) and replaces them with functional tables evaluating the functionality based on predefined purposes.

The unicist reflection process: action-reflection-action is the technology to be used to transform dualistic logical approaches into unicist double dialectical approaches in order to define complex adaptive systems.

This technology allows starting with the use of disjunctions “OR” and ending with the use of conjunctions “AND”.

This process requires that those who have decided to deal with complex problems need to be fully focused on producing results, have sound knowledge of the problem and have decided to influence it in an adapted way.

The paradox is that at the end the diagnoses and solutions found need to be transformed into operational “recipes” in order to make them manageable by ordinary people.

But it has to be considered that without being able to manage the triadic structure of complex adaptive systems, the diagnoses and solutions developed are either palliatives or fallacies that cannot produce meaningful results.

How does human double dialectical behavior work?

The Unicist Dialectics allows dealing with human adaptive systems managing the integration of their double dialectical behavior.

Unicist Double Dialectical ThinkingWith this double dialectical approach (purpose – active function, purpose – energy conservation function) one can understand the structure of an adaptive system and its evolution.

Unicist Dialectics is based on the emulation of adaptive systems, emulating the ontogenetic intelligence of nature (purpose, active principle, energy conservation principle).

Its application to human adaptive systems made the emulation of individual, institutional and social evolution possible.

To approach a reality integrated by three elements with a dualistic mind it is necessary to consider it as a dualistic integration of binary elements. To perceive dialectics it is necessary to have a high abstraction capacity.

Those who do not have the abstraction capacity consider the dialectical behavior based on observable facts of reality. They cannot differentiate essential correlations from cause-effect relations.

Individuals who have the necessary functional intelligence and the will to add value to an environment, and are able to see the double dialectics, develop two different actions to ensure results: on the one hand, they impulse action and on the other hand, they develop actions to inhibit entropy.

Click on the image to access

Individuals who approach reality using unicist thinking define strategies based on taxonomies and planed actions to influence the environment.

The Unicist Double Dialectical Thinking

Unicist thinking integrates the different types of thoughts (operational, analytical, scientific/systemic, and conceptual) in order to influence apprehending a complex reality in its oneness. This requires a double dialectical thinking to approach reality in its nature.

The unicist thinking approach is very simple, but this simplicity requires a strict methodological approach to be achieved.

Complexity is the unique environment where the use of unicist thinking is necessary.

But most people use rationalistic dissection of reality, religious beliefs, ideological solutions, commonsense, subjectivism and fundamentalism to face complexity.

The unicist thinking process is basic to influence complex realities.

The access to double dialectical thinking implies both a change in the paradigms to approach reality and exert influence on it and a consistent learning process.

The Ontogenesis of Double Dialectical Thinking

Extrinsic concepts are those deposited by humans on their deeds and on the elements of nature they use.

The understanding of a reality begins with the discovery of its purpose. After the purpose has been approached it is possible to build the first dialectic pair.

The verbal function is the antithesis (active and entropic function) that puts the purpose into action while its implicit utopia tries to change it.

If there was no entropy inhibiting element, this situation would evolve into a dysfunctional result regarding the original purpose.

When the first dialectic pair functions, the second dialectic is born. The purpose is sustained by the energy conservation function.

This conservation function is a complementary element that limits the effects of the verbal function to secure the maintenance of the objectives implicit in the purpose.

Finally the integration of these two dialectics is possible when they are integrated in a unified field.

The Conceptual Approach

Conceptual Thinking

The conceptual approach requires that people need to know “why” something is happening. This is unnecessary at an operational level, but is a basic question when dealing with strategic approaches. The “know why” is driven by a logical approach to reality that allows managing its concept making it reasonable, understandable and provable.

When the boundaries of an activity are being expanded in order to influence a new environment, individuals need to know the concept that underlies the operational aspects. This implies understanding the ontology (nature) of its concept and its dynamics.

On the one hand, the conceptual approach to reality became possible based on the discovery of the structure of concepts, defined by a purpose, an active and entropic function and an energy conservation function, which allowed apprehending the nature of facts and actions.

On the other hand it was discovered that concepts work as behavioral objects, that drive the behavior of people.

Assuming the responsibility for results

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.

He discovered that such concepts have three elements:

  1. A purpose that is homologous to the “purpose” in nature.
  2. An active function that is homologous to the active principle in nature.
  3. An energy conservation function that is homologous to the energy conservation principle in nature.

He also discovered the complementation and supplementation laws that are implicit within each conceptual structure and the concept of anti-concepts that is homologous to the concept of anti-matter.

The Unicist Approach to Epistemology developed by Peter Belohlavek went beyond the use of falsification processes (Karl Popper and others) to confirm the validity of the knowledge of complex adaptive environments.

It introduced an upgrade in epistemology based on the use of destructive tests and non-destructive tests approaches that allow building secure knowledge.

With the unicist approach, Peter Belohlavek integrated the Western and the Eastern approaches but focused on a different purpose.

This approach is based on adapting to the environment by generating value in order to foster a sustainable evolution.

The Use of Concepts to Deal with Complexity

Conceptualization is necessary to deal with complex problems. The level of complexity of a problem depends on the quantity of interdependent autonomous entities that integrate the “unified field” of the solution of the problem. The larger the number of entities, the wider the unified field is, and the more complex it is.

Conceptual ThinkingConcepts are not imagined they are discovered following an action-reflection-action process based on acting in the real world.

It has to be clarified that conceptual knowledge implies having the abstract emulation of the concept in mind but also the operational procedures.

The more complex a problem is, the higher the level of conceptualization that is required.

As complex problems cannot be divided into parts without changing their nature, this is a limit to solve complex problems.


Personal Freedom is needed to Apprehend Concepts

To discover or apprehend a new concept an individual needs to have the necessary external and inner freedom to open the mind in order to be able to learn about it without “transforming” it into a preconcept s/has.

That is why personal freedom is the psychological driver to apprehend concepts. Freedom, by definition, is associated to the assumption of a responsibility.

Personal FreedomPersonal freedom requires having assumed the responsibility to adapt to an environment, which implies being able to influence the environment while being influenced by it. It implies that individuals are not observers but participants.

The external freedom drives the maximal strategy of the development of personal freedom. The expansion of freedom is a step by step process that begins by developing the freedom to do, being aware of the actions one is doing and ensuring that they are adapted and add value to the environment.

When external freedom begins to be earned, it is necessary to expand inner freedom which requires reinforcing the “responsibility to be” which includes assuming a transcendent responsibility, a social responsibility and an individual responsibility.

Inner freedom also requires being able to make adapted decisions, which imply having the courage to do, the need to do and the true will of paying the necessary prices to expand this inner freedom.

It has to be considered that each “inch” of freedom that is gained requires abandoning solutions that were subjectively functional before.

The last step towards inner freedom is to have the necessary consciousness to integrate the outside with the inside but knowing the fuzzy limits that separate beliefs from external facts.

The individual needs to be able to discriminate the perceptions in order to go beyond analogical comparisons and be able to integrate them with homological comprehension. This allows individuals to “introject” new elements based on the discovery of homological patters that allow recognizing an external reality.

Finally, the use of ontointelligence, meaning the integration of ethical intelligence, strategic intelligence and the logical type of thought, allows transforming abstract consciousness into functional knowledge that closes the circle of the expansion of inner freedom.

Degrees of Personal Freedom

The levels of personal freedom are fully associated with the levels of conceptualization an individual has. The concept of “Degrees of Personal Freedom” is homologous with the concepts of Degrees of Freedom in Statistics, Physics and Mechanics. It is recommended to learn about them.

Personal FreedomDegree of Freedom 1 – Preconceptual Approach

Preconcepts are dynamic or stagnated knowledge objects that individuals have in mind that are used intuitively, without being aware of their existence, when reacting to the needs generated by the environment. When they are stagnated, they are called prejudices.

Preconcepts hinder the exertion of personal freedom, which is replaced by a freewill action that does not include assuming the responsibility for adapting.

Freewill provides a perception of freedom which is sustained by the use of subjectivism and rationalism. In this case, the foundations of actions are inexistent; but instead, actions are confirmed by empirical justifications that build a pseudo-freedom driven environment.

When foundations begin to be used the individual begins to access a superior level of freedom.

Degree of Freedom 2 – Idea of the Concepts

The idea of the concept an individual apprehends establishes the operational patterns that allow discriminating the actions that fit into the idea and those that appear to be dysfunctional. This idea of the concept is based on having an operational focus on what needs to be achieved.

Individuals are able to decide what contributes to the achievement of the operational results in which they are focused on and what does not.

This degree of freedom suffices to manage situations that have a low level of complexity.

This level of freedom uses empirical foundations that allow sharing with others who have the same experiences. Therefore, this level of freedom is functional in the restricted operational environment of equals.

Degree of Freedom 3 – Operational Concepts

Managing operational concepts allows individuals to exert the freedom to decide among structurally segmented actions. This freedom is functional to use a segmented adaptive process that increases the influence of individuals in the environment based on the patterns they use to define actions. It is based on having a logical/rational focus on what needs to be achieved.

Their decision field includes the segment they belong to and also the adjacent operational segments that can be apprehended. It gives them the possibility for expanding their use of language to adapt to the segments they do not belong to.

This degree of freedom is necessary to manage segmented environments that have a low level of complexity.

This degree of freedom uses logical foundations which require having a sound knowledge of the problems and the solutions. This degree of freedom is functional when dealing with operational aspects of reality.

Degree of Freedom 4 – Functional Concepts

Functional concepts allow individuals to manage the dynamics of complex problems. The functional concept regulates basically the activities that deal with going beyond the boundaries of an individual to build a solution to solve a problem. In this case, the focus is driven by the cause-effect relationships of the elements that integrate the solution.

This degree of freedom allows apprehending the action and the energy conservation function that are implicit in any functional entity. It allows defining what is possible to be achieved and the actions that need to be done and how the energy needs to be saved to obtain results.

This degree of freedom allows individuals to develop maximal strategies to expand the boundaries of what needs to be done and minimum strategies to survive.

This degree of freedom uses causative foundations which require having a reliable knowledge of the situation and its environment. It is functional when dealing with complex functional problems.

Degree of Freedom 5 – Essential Concepts

Essential concepts allow individual to manage the nature of complex problems. As essential concepts are cross-cultural and timeless, this degree of freedom allows managing cross-cultural solutions and their timing. This degree permits focusing on the nature of the solution and thus on the problems.

This degree of freedom makes the management of entities and their restricted environment possible. It allows developing present and future scenarios of the evolution of the concepts involved in order to better adapt to the environment.

It uses both maximal and minimum strategies and allows developing catalysts to influence the environment.

This degree of freedom uses conceptual foundations which require having the knowledge of the functional and essential concepts of the entities involved in the solution of a problem. This degree of freedom is functional when dealing with problems that have a high level of complexity.


Conceptualizing to achieve personal freedom and using personal freedom to discover or apprehend concepts are necessary for any adaptive behavior in complex environments. This applies to all the roles an individual has in life, including fields such as: family, friendship, work, pastime, etc.

ConceptualizationConceptualizing implies being able to have an adaptive behavior driven by the capacity of apprehending the nature of what one is doing while being able to apprehend the operational aspects of the actions.

The objective of any thinking process is to be able to emulate in mind the models that underlie the tangible aspects of the world that can be accessed through sensory experiences. The objective of conceptual thinking is to emulate the nature that underlies specific aspects of reality in order to influence the environment.

Functional concepts are cross-cultural and timeless. They remain unchanged as long as a function exists.

Having the concepts of what one is doing allows to be extremely effective and flexible. That is what is made possible by the degree of freedom an individual has.

This degree of freedom can be expanded by upgrading the level of conceptualization of the environment where the individual can, wants and needs to adapt.