Human Fallacies


Unicist Functionalist Approach

Translate this page

Search & Compare

Unicist Functionalist Approach

Translate this page

Search & Compare

Dualism in Adaptive Environments: Aprioristic Fallacies

Working with adaptive systems and environments requires developing synchronized actions that include maximal strategy actions to grow and minimum strategy actions to ensure results. Perhaps it needs to be clarified that adaptive systems are those that are dominantly feedback dependent.

When the results of a system depend on biunivocal relationships with the environment, the system is open and it is necessary to manage the concepts of what is being done and developing what we have named unicist binary actions (also called DDAs) to develop actions with a maximal strategy to grow and a minimum strategy to ensure survival.

Dualistic Actions vs. Unicist Binary Actions

  • Dualistic actions are functional in controlled environments. (1 actor, 1 action)
  • Unicist binary actions are necessary in adaptive environments (1 actor, 2 synchronized actions)

Dualistic actions are “solitaire” actions to influence the environment to produce results. They are functionally valid in controlled environments where the cause-effect relationships are being managed.

Dualistic actions are such because they integrate the actor and the action. These dualistic solitaire actions in adaptive environments generate spontaneous reactions that inhibit their functionality. These reactions adopt different shapes according to the environment.

Unicist binary actions integrate the actor with two synchronized actions including, on the one hand, the maximal strategy to foster growth and, on the other hand, the minimum strategy to ensure survival.

Unicist binary actions respond to the needs of the nature of what is being managed and therefore generate no reactions.

“Half a table is an expensive heap of wood”. Dualistic actions in adaptive environments are half a table, they generate costs and do not generate results.

It has to be considered that dualistic solitaire actions are installed in the fallacious myths of many cultures and environments. The saying “you didn’t try hard enough” implicitly fosters univocal dualistic actions to generate results, which is valid in controlled systems but fallacious in adaptive environments.

Dualistic actions are unavoidable in over-adapted environments, when the concepts of what is being done are unknown or when the individuals who develop these actions are marginals.

Dualistic fallacies ensure the comfort zone

Unicist binary actions (DDAs) can only be managed in adaptive environments when dualism does not prevail. Dualism is the most energy saving approach of the brain, which necessarily implies, at the end, the use of exclusive disjunctions that ensure the validity of what one is thinking or doing.

Fallacies are a palliative that allows building a comfort zone without considering the actual functionality of the environment. The building of fallacies becomes necessary when someone approaches the real world using a dualistic approach.

The paradox is that, at the end of a solution building process, a set of univocal actions needs to be developed to install the double dialectical process.

Aprioristic Fallacies

Aprioristic fallacies are fallacies of the collective intelligence of an individual. They are the consequence of using dualism to deal with adaptive environments. 
www.unicist.net/economics/unicist-anthropology-discovery-of-collective-intelligence/

This dualism generates spontaneous projections that are considered as valid knowledge. They provide information to build an “immediate” parallel reality that allows manipulating the environment one is acting on. As fallacies are unconscious lies, there is no feeling of guilt.

Aprioristic fallacies are extremely destructive and require using manipulation to “force” people into a parallel world where this manipulator is in control. Marginals, sociopaths and psychopaths are examples of compulsive users of aprioristic fallacies.

Truth Driven Fallacies

These fallacies are driven by a compulsive need for being right. In triadic terms, truth has no active function that endangers its validity. That is why projections are the drivers used to “convert” people to this truth. The Icarus syndrome is a natural consequence of this fallacy. Truth fallacies are the basic tool to build sects or groups with “absolute” ideologies. Truth driven fallacies are a palliative for “inferiority feelings”.

Self-perception Driven Fallacies

Self-perception fallacies are driven by a compulsive need for self-confirming ideas or needs. It implies dealing with the “here and now” that has no room for energy conservation. The Sisyphus syndrome is a natural consequence of this fallacy. In this context, the projects drive to manipulation to build and sustain this fallacy and enjoy the role of hero. Self-perception fallacies are a palliative for “superiority feelings”.

Recognition Driven Fallacies

These fallacies are driven by a compulsive need for recognition. This implies that the purpose of actions is left aside and replaced by the recognition of actions. These fallacies transform “means into ends” to obtain recognition that do not depend on the generation of results. The Aphrodite syndrome is a natural consequence of this fallacy. The projections that are generated sustain the comfort zone and imply empowering the role of operation disregarding functionality. Recognition driven fallacies are a palliative for “authority conflicts”.

Unicist Pilot Test Driven Reflection: the Antidote to Fallacies

Aprioristic fallacies can only happen in dysfunctional environments. An environment is dysfunctional when the participating members need to build a parallel reality in order to have a place.

Each aprioristic fallacy has its own nature: While self-perception fallacies are sustained by “heroic” actions, recognition fallacies are based on “subjectification” and truth fallacies are driven by “messianic” beliefs.

Unicist reflection is the methodology to deal with adaptive environments and the antidote to fallacies. It is driven by destructive and non-destructive tests in the real world that define the validity of knowledge. Its use hinders any kind of fallacies and the consolidation of dualistic fallacies. https://www.unicist.org/conceptual-thinking/unicist-reflection/

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute has been, since 1976, the pioneer in complexity science research where the Unicist Evolutionary Approach was developed

Share

Greed Triggers Fallacies

The objective in the research on fallacies was to find the inhibitors and antidotes to fallacies that hinder or avoid the evolution of adaptive systems and environments.

Fallacies are unconscious actions with apparent conscious outputs. For this reason, the discussion of fallacies is a taboo. People cannot accept being interpreted by others unless they demand it in a counseling environment.

This research demonstrated that greed, as a universally recognized “sin”, triggers fallacies and makes their discussion fully unacceptable. Greed legitimates shortcuts to appropriate “things”.

These shortcuts are in fact fallacies that are built sustained by the “fears” an individual has. These fallacies are triggered by greed and, in the case of teamwork, are motivated by the envy the apparent success of others’ greedy actions generates.

There are three types of greed that influence human behavior:

  1. The emotional greed
  2. The materialistic greed
  3. The intellectual greed

The purpose of emotional greed is to obtain love and recognition; the purpose of materialistic greed is to accumulate and the purpose of intellectual greed is to be right and recognized.

The purpose of greed is acted out by the exertion of power and sustained by manipulation to ensure the achievement of results.

“Greeders” tend to accuse others for their greedy actions while they deny their own greed.

This is the paradigmatic case of greedy intellectuals who accuse greedy businessmen/women for their greedy doings.

The discovery of the inhibitors and antidotes of fallacies provided the necessary tools to ensure professional work in adaptive environments.

Excerpt of the book “The Origin of Fallacies” by Peter Belohlavek

Unicist Executive Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute has been, since 1976, the pioneer in complexity science research where the Unicist Evolutionary Approach was developed. 


Share

Discovery of the Ontogenesis and Functionality of Human Fallacies

The research on fallacies began in 1985/86 based on those fallacies that had notorious negative social and institutional consequences. The research was developed at The Unicist Research Institute and was led by Peter Belohlavek.

The discovery of perception, reasoning and conceptual fallacies demanded almost 17 years (2003), which contributed to the research on the roots of fallacies and their ontogenesis that developed their conceptualization after hundreds of “fallacious” hypotheses, until their final validation in 2019.

The research showed that all fallacies have the same purpose, which is to maintain the comfort zone of an individual. As fallacies are non-conscious processes, the people involved are not aware that they are trying to maintain a comfort zone. This process can be detected after a fallacy has been installed and the consequences became evident.

This research began based on a set of fallacies that the researcher experienced in the 1980s. The main ones were:

  • The paradoxical effect brought about by a set of drugs related to birth control.
  • The cyclical behavior in the evolution of four developing countries.
  • The decision of a French automotive industry to unify assembly lines, not automated at that moment, for all its range of products, which led to a production debacle.
  • A dysfunctional universal solution made by the International Monetary Fund.
  • The systematic destruction or nullification of information on reality that contradicted the fallacies which were functional to cultures.

Actions in adaptive environments, which have open boundaries, establish a framework of complexity that requires having a strict method to avoid fallacious decisions. Participants need to have the necessary knowledge of the issues that are being managed in order to avoid fallacious decisions.

Developing solutions in these environments requires simultaneously a competitive approach to expand the boundaries of knowledge and a cooperative approach to ensure the adaptation process.

On the one hand, this competition is what expands the quality of the solutions and allows going towards a superior level of functionality. The competitive approach is natural for human beings who are working on the solution of problems or developing new solutions.

On the other hand, cooperation is necessary to ensure that the adaptive process remains functional. This cooperation requires that the participants need to be internally complemented in order to be able to emulate a complementary cooperation in mind.

The generation of fallacies in adaptive processes is based on three core aspects:

Fallacy Avoidance
  1. The lack of the necessary understanding of the functionality of what is being done (knowledge).
  2. The functional requirement of a superior level of ethical intelligence than the one the participants of a process have.
  3. The lack of complementation of the logical type of thought, the conceptual intelligence and the strategic intelligence.

The definition of what is possible to be achieved is the first step to avoid fallacies. It makes fears unnecessary and guides the action processes.

The universal inhibitor of fallacy-building is the use of unicist conceptual engineering that integrates the fundamentals of “things” with the necessary technical knowledge to ensure the functionality of solutions.

The universal antidote for fallacies in the development of solutions in adaptive environments is the use of unicist destructive pilot tests to evaluate solutions.

Excerpt of the book “The Origin of Fallacies” by Peter Belohlavek

Unicist Executive Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute has been, since 1976, the pioneer in complexity science research where the Unicist Evolutionary Approach was developed. 

Share