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:
The lack of the necessary understanding
of the functionality of what is being done (knowledge).
The functional requirement of a
superior level of ethical intelligence than the one the participants of a
process have.
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.
Ethical intelligence defines the true intentions of individuals and establishes the framework and limits of their efficacy. It is the intelligence that structures stable and dynamic rules that determine the action of individuals in their environment. The research on ethical intelligence was led by Peter Belohlavek at The Unicist Research Institute. Ethical intelligence determines the capacity of individuals to add value, their influence on the environment and on others and their time management.
On the one hand, the rules are stable since they respond to a purpose that is defined by the level of ethics within which the individual acts.
On the other hand, the rules are dynamic, because despite the fact that individuals are at a certain level, they are capable of determining alternative strategies that satisfy the objective they are seeking within that level.
Ethics is defined as a set of rules that are functional to a situation and to a certain perception of an accepted moral, and are supported by a complementary ideology.
Five levels of ethics have been found that sustain the behavior of the individuals:
Ethics of survival
Ethics of the earned value
Ethics of added value
Ethics of foundations
Conceptual ethics
The higher the level of ethical intelligence, the higher the level of consciousness an individual needs to have.
Functionality of Ethical Intelligence
The Levels of Ethical Intelligence are Inclusive: the Following includes the Precedents
LEVEL OF ETHICS:
1) Survivors Ethics
2) Earned Value Ethics
3) Added Value Ethics
4) Foundations Ethics
5) Conceptual Ethics
APPLICATIONS:
Strategic Planning
Reactive approach
Tactical approach
Growth strategies
Expansive strategies
Timeless strategies
Added Value Generation
Transferring cost and risks to others
Maximization of benefits
Generation of added value
Generation of structured value
Dynamic value generation
Influential Power
Survivors pact
Influence on survivors
Influence within specific limits
Influence in the
restricted context
Influence in the wide context
Focusing
On risk-avoidance
On cost-avoidance
On value generation
On the system
On the environment
Time Management
Here and now
Short-term planning
Medium-term planning
Long-term planning
Evolutionary planning
Language Mask
Analogical
Operational
Factual
Ambiguous
Figurative
Therefore the evolution of individuals’ ethical intelligence implies the increase of maturity which is based on higher levels of consciousness.
Ethical intelligence is the unique intelligence that has a structural evolution or involution process based on the maturity of individuals.
The exception is the stagnant survivors ethics which is the case of individuals who have built a parallel reality to stay.
Ethics of Survival
The ethics of survival is the type of ethics prevailing within the marginal areas of a culture or the marginal cultures.
Individuals that act according to this type of ethics exercises influence upon others who are in the same situation, based on survivor-pacts. Their time management is based on “the moment”, sustained by reactions based on intuition. They have a reactive tactical approach to reality. They focus on surviving and avoiding risks.
The Ethics of the Earned Value
This type of ethics seeks to add the minimal value possible to generate an earned value and to minimize costs in order to assure the subsistence level.
They are able to manage short-term problems. Short-term is the lapse between adding value and generating the corresponding earned value. They have a tactical active approach to reality. They focus on maximizing their benefits.
The Ethics of Added Value
This is the type of ethics that maximizes the added value to the environment seeking to optimize the relationship between added value and cost.
Such individuals manage the medium-term, which is the time to transform knowledge into added value. They develop medium-term strategies. They focus on the value they are adding.
The Ethics of Foundation
The ethics of foundation is used by individuals that consider that added value is secured by knowledge.
Such individuals manage the long-term, which is the time span between discovering a concept and transforming it into useful knowledge. They develop long-term strategies. They focus on the knowledge they are acquiring.
The Conceptual Ethics
This is the intelligence used to maximize the added value by using a high level of energy to materialize the need to give.
Individuals behaving according to this type of ethics exert influence on the entire environment because of their energy. They manage universal time that is the time of the cycles, with no time limitations.
They do not take into account their own existence. They develop strategies using the available, possible and expected forces. They focus on achieving the truth.
The Stagnant Survivors Ethics
Stagnant Survivors are individuals with a complex driven behavior that sustains the parallel reality they live in and the responsibility avoidance they need to exert to be in a comfort zone.The paradox is that their comfort zone is a conflict zone for those who surround them.
The stagnated status is based on a fallacious utopia that justifies their actions and forces them to exert power while they appropriate the value they need to feel comfortable. The justifications are built upon fallacies to sustain their actions, beliefs and needs.
Business Functionality of Ethical Intelligence
The discovery of
ethical intelligence opened new possibilities to influence individuals’
evolution. Ethical intelligence in business defines the value adding
possibilities, the influence on the environment, time management, strategic
planning and focusing.
The apparent paradox
is that it is the deepest intelligence of the human mind, but at the same time
it is the intelligence that evolves with the maturity of individuals and can be
influenced.
It has to be considered that in the business world different activities require different ethical approaches in order to be successful. For example:
A business is consistent when the individuals dealing with it have the ethics required by the activity.
When the ethics is inferior to what is needed, it necessarily inhibits growth installing a “business growth virus” in the organization.
If the ethics used by individuals is superior to what is needed, they install a “business profit virus” in the organization that increases costs and affects profitability.
Ethics is implicit in everyday actions, including language. Therefore, it can be defined, measured and fostered.
The rational knowledge of ethical intelligence has an enormous benefit for individuals in organizations in order to ensure consistency for growth and profitability.
Personal Efficacy and Ethical Intelligence
Efficacy is the capacity of individuals to produce results in a responsible way. This implies that efficacy requires awareness of what one is doing. That is why we do not talk of efficacy when evaluating individual art. The fundamentals of efficacy can by defined as:
The identification with the role: Efficacy requires that individuals are identified with the role they are fulfilling when they work. The role can be defined as the social identity of the individual.
The identification with the task: Efficacy requires having the necessary competencies to develop a task that allows enjoying the work.
Knowledge: Knowledge implies having the functional “knowledge objects” to do the work stored in the long term memory.
The efficacy of individuals can be calculated using the mathematics of
the Unicist Logic:
Unicist Efficacy = I(R) * I(T) * K
Individuals need to
assume the responsibility of working in the field of their efficacy which
defines the limits of the possibilities for assuming responsibilities to
produce results.
The unicist double
dialectical logic is the integrator of all logical reasoning patterns. It is
homologous with the “category theory”, which is the mathematics that integrates
the different mathematics by using a superior level of abstraction.
The Unicist Double Dialectical Logic is an emulation of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature discovered by Peter Belohlavek. It emulates the intelligence and organization of nature and allows understanding the root causes and the unified field of processes, evolution and behavior.
This logic, which is based on human ontointelligence, allows dealing with the dynamics, evolution and nature of adaptive systems and environments. Non-adaptive environments are considered a “particular case” of adaptive systems.
Logic can be defined
as the formalization of a fallacy-free reasoning process to solve specific
categories of problems. There are as many logical reasoning patterns as there
are different categories of problems that have been solved using a conscious
reasoning process.
Ontointelligence is
the human intelligence that allows discovering the concepts and fundamentals of
things. It is integrated by an ethical intelligence, a strategic intelligence
and the logical type of thought that allow managing a high level of abstraction
and simultaneously a high level of concretion.
There are multiple logical patterns available to solve their homologous problems.
They can be classified based on the following categories: Propositional-logic approaches, Dualistic-logic approaches, Set-logic approaches, Fuzzy-logic approaches, Predicate-logic approaches and Integrative-logic approaches. The unicist double dialectical logic approach integrates them to deal with the dynamics, evolution and nature of adaptive systems and environments.
The unicist double
dialectical logic was created by Peter Belohlavek in 1986. Its application
allowed its author to develop the structure of complexity sciences to study and
deal with adaptive systems and environments.
It drove to the
development of the unicist theory and to the discovery of the ontogenesis of
evolution and established the basics to develop the unicist artificial
intelligence. This logic provided the structure to develop the applied
researches on social, individual and business evolution developed at The
Unicist Research Institute.
Paradoxically, this
unicist double dialectical logic requires both a superior level of abstraction to
apprehend its structure and a superior level of operational thinking to
apprehend the operation.
The use of the conclusions of this logical approach requires no abstractions, because they are self-evident. It only requires having experience in a specific action field.
Unicist Press Committee
NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute has been, since 1976, the pioneer in complexity science research where the Unicist Evolutionary Approach was developed.
A new research on the functionality of human intelligence, was finished at the beginning of January 2016, after more than 30 years since the beginning of the research, which started in 1986. The conclusion of the research was based on the applications that were made in Austria, Germany, India and USA, which had a 100% of accuracy.
Click to access the description of this approach. You will notice the upgrade if you already have the preceding presentation.
The objective of this research, that was triggered by the discovery of the “logical type of thinking”, was to find the final purpose of the thinking processes of individuals. The research was developed at The Unicist Research Institute and was led by Peter Belohlavek.
The functionality of thinking processes had been discovered and could be modeled; but this knowledge was still a static approach to the thinking processes and needed to become associated with the functionality of the thinking process in real life.
The previous research demonstrated that the depth of thinking was associated to the capacity of individuals to deal with ambiguity and complexity.
But the new research went further. The new finding demonstrates the functionality of the type of thought to deal with real actions and the level of responsibilities for results an individual can assume when acting in the environment.
The conclusions can be synthesized as follows:
The purpose of the thinking process of humans is to generate results, whatever their kind. The depth of the thinking process defines the capacity for assuming responsibilities.
Operational Thinking allows assuming the responsibility for tasks
Analytical Thinking allows assuming the responsibility for rational decisions
Systemic (Scientific) Thinking allows assuming the responsibility for managing variables
Conceptual Thinking allows assuming the responsibility for generating results
Unicist Thinking allows generating results in the short and long run
There also exists an analogical thinking process which uses analogical benchmarks to avoid assuming responsibilities. This level of thinking is basically “preconscious”.
On the one hand, due to this research widened the possibilities to build groups, develop team work, manage social participation and build relationships.
On the other hand, the results of this research provided basic information for personal talent development in order to allow people to take advantage of their gifts avoiding misleading utopias.
This knowledge increased the accuracy of the knowledge to manage complex adaptive environments as a unified field (click on the image).
We hope you can profit from the conclusions.
Executive 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. https://www.unicist.org/conceptual-thinking/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/turi.pdf
The unicist paradigm shift in science opened the possibility of emulating the organization of nature in the real world. It is based on the integration of complexity sciences, which deal with complex adaptive systems with systemic sciences that deal with systemic systems where univocal cause-effect relationships prevail.
This implies using a pragmatic, structuralist and functionalist framework to approach complexity using the unicist double dialectical logic that allows apprehending the concepts that underlie facts and integrating it with the traditional empirical approach to manage the operational aspects.
Thomas S. Kuhn explains in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions:
Examining the record of past research from the vantage of contemporary historiography, the historian of science may be tempted to exclaim that when paradigms change, the world itself changes with them. Led by a new paradigm, scientists adopt new instruments and look in new places. Even more important, during revolutions scientists see new and different things when looking with familiar instruments in places they have looked before.
The new world view
The paradigm shift in science, based on the Unicist Theory and sustained by the Unicist Epistemology, allows dealing with the nature of things which allows simplifying the building and management of complex adaptive systems and dealing with complex adaptive environments. It implies a conceptual approach to reality. This drove to the development of Conceptual Anthropology, Conceptual Economy, Conceptual Psychology and Conceptual Management.
This simplifies processes by defining what is possible to be achieved. This simplification requires being able to apprehend the concepts that underlie facts. Unfortunately this is not the easiest way to face reality. Fallacies were, are and will be the easy way to perceive what needs to be perceived and blame reality when the results are not the expected ones.
The emulation of nature in business implies organizing by objects that has been adopted by multiple organizations in the world: Airbus, Amazon, Apple, BBC, Boeing, Dassault Systemes, Dupont, Ericsson, Facebook, General Electric, Google, Hilton, Honda, Hyundai, LinkedIn, Lufthansa, Mapfre, Mayo Clinic, Michelin, Novartis, Open Text, P&G, Pfizer, SAP, Siemens, Tata Motors, Toyota, Unilever, Walmart, Walt Disney World and Youtube.
The Unicist Object driven Technologies allow installing this approach in all the organizations that have achieved the necessary level or organizational maturity.
The Unicist Research Institute
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/conceptual-thinking/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/turi-1.pdf
Integrating Observable Facts with the Nature of Things
The unicist paradigm shift in sciences drove from an empirical approach to a pragmatic, structuralist and functionalist approach to deal with complex environments, integrating observable facts with the “nature of things”. It implies the integration of epistemological justifications with foundations. It made complex adaptive systems reasonable, understandable and predictable. It allowed managing the world of possibilities going beyond probabilities. The objective of this development was to manage the unified field of complex adaptive systems in order to simplify their management.
Access the Unicist Paradigm Shift in Sciences
This is an upgrade in sciences that integrated complexity sciences with systemic sciences and allowed emulating the organization of nature by developing a logic based and object driven approach to manage the adaptive aspects of complex environments.
The Unicist Theory
The Unicist Theory, developed by Peter Belohlavek, is a paradigm shift of the scientific approach to complex adaptive systems. It substituted empiricism by a pragmatic, structuralist and functionalist approach and replaced knowledge falsification processes with destructive testing processes.
This theory provides an approach to complexity based on the use of the unicist logic that emulates the intelligence that underlies nature. It integrated complexity sciences with systemic sciences in a unified field.
The Unicist Theory allowed understanding and influencing the evolution of living beings and artificial complex adaptive systems. This influence is exerted by using unicist logic based and object driven technologies, which is now a worldwide trend.
The paradigm shift applied to Sustainable Development
The Unicist Future Research Lab developed the archetypes of 70 countries to provide a basic framework for sustainable development and economic and business solutions.
The Unicist Epistemology is based on the development of logical foundations and empirical justifications to sustain human knowledge.
This epistemology is a pragmatic, structuralist and functionalist approach to knowledge.
The pragmatism deals with the goal of this epistemology, which is to provide reliable knowledge in order to generate added value. At the same time, structuralism is required to integrate the knowledge of an entity and its restricted and wide contexts. Finally, functionalism makes results be a core aspect of the validity of knowledge.
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/conceptual-thinking/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/turi-2.pdf
By Peter Belohlavek – Superior Education is defined as the activity that deals with the acquisition of knowledge to manage the complex adaptive aspects of the environment. This is a lecture on the Unicist Logical Approach to Strategy applied to superior education and its comparison with professional education. We recommend accessing: http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Education
This clinic provides the guiding idea to design and build IT Architectures. The maturity achieved by the IT technologies allowed making the next step, the integration of hardware and software with peopleware.
The unicist ontology based and object driven IT architecture is based on using the knowledge of the nature of a process, its components and its context to develop a system.
This allows generating the results defined by the business model. This technology uses a structural functionalist architectural approach to define the processes and the business objects that are needed and reliable to achieve the predefined results.
The Mutation of IT Architecture
The evolution of Information Technology generated its own mutation towards an upper level technology that manages hardware and software but allows the integration of peopleware to provide optimal solutions for work processes.
Peopleware is defined by the structure of objects that individuals have in their minds which define the models they use when dealing with hardware and software at work.
The Mutation
This mutation requires changing the way IT Architecture has to be designed. Peopleware is what allows integrating hardware and software providing the true driver of a work/business model. When peopleware has been defined, an adequate design of an aesthetic software architecture with a solid hardware architecture will make business processes operational.
Peopleware is perhaps the most significant development to provide business operational solutions. It allows integrating administrative systems and adaptive systems to upgrade work processes when managing businesses as unified fields.
Peopleware is part of an IT architecture applied to work process design. Therefore, it requires having or achieving a sound knowledge of the business/work processes that are being modeled.
We strongly recommend taking advantage of the mutation generated by the evolution of the information technologies.
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. http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Unicist
This Seminar provides the guiding idea to design and manage adaptive projects. The Unicist Project Management (UPM) was designed to manage adaptive projects in which the dynamic interaction with the environment requires managing feedbacks that change a project significantly.
This is the case, among others, of business processes, commercial processes, research processes and organizational processes.
These projects need to behave simultaneously as systemic projects, producing what depends on them, and as adaptive processes, in order to interact with the environment.
The unicist architecture of adaptive project management can be defined by the use of a business objects based execution that is driven by a solution approach.
The development of adaptive project planning includes the use of plans A, B, C and D to manage the adaptive project.
Adaptive Planning to Manage Adaptive Projects
Plan A
Plan A is the basic plan that follows the ontogenetic map of the solution of a project. It is the most participative project planning and management because it is based on the influence the manager exerts on the project.
Plan B
Plan B is a superior plan that includes plan A plus an entropy inhibiting object for the resistance. It is based on inhibiting the entropy by using expertise driven objects and the management of the peopleware of the project.
Plan C
Plan C is a superior plan that includes plan B plus a catalyzing object to accelerate the change. It is based on the use of a technology that allows establishing a superior, although less participative solution for the project.
Plan D
Plan D is a plan to abort the project if the possibilities of success are not given. It includes the development of a succedaneous solution.
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. http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Unicist
The observation room for the Market Labs has been launched. It allows newcomers to become acquainted with the unicist complexity science research methodology. The Market Lab research is coordinated by Diana Belohlavek.
The methodology
There is a general research methodology that has to be followed to define the validity of a unicist ontological structure that is needed to deal with human adaptive systems.
The basic steps are:
Develop the hypothetical structure of the ontology.
Analyze the ontology and divide it into sub-ontologies following the laws of complementation and supplementation (only when necessary and possible).
Define observable results that need to be considered to validate the ontology.
Define the application fields of the ontology to validate its functionality.
Develop the applications beginning with destructive and non-destructive pilot tests to forecast reality.
Develop at least five experiences in the application field differing completely one from the other.
Develop forecasts of at least three periods with full certainty.
Restart the research process every time a deviation occurs.
Pilot Testing
Unicist Ontologies are omnipotent fantasies unless they have been tested. The testing of ontologies implies testing their functionality and requires a precise design of the tests. The “trial and error” use of objects is not a pilot test.
Pilot tests are the drivers of the unicist reflection processes. Pilot tests have two objectives:
Falsification of knowledge
Validation of knowledge
1) Falsification – Destructive testing
Falsification, in the field of complex problems, implies finding the limits of the validity of a given knowledge. To do so, it is necessary to develop experiences in homologous fields until the limits of validity are found. It defines the unified field that can be apprehended.
The falsification process is a destructive test for knowledge that is applied to realities with incomplete homologies. The destruction occurs when a condition is found to demonstrate the fallacy of the knowledge.
2) Validation – Non-destructive testing
Validation implies the factual confirmation of the validity of knowledge. Validation is achieved when knowledge suffices to exert influence on a reality in a predictable way.
Unicist Press 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. http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Unicist
