The Unicist Research Institute


Unicist Corporation

Translate this page

Unicist Corporation

Translate this page

The Difference between Unicist Binary Actions (UBAs) and Manipulative Binary Actions (MBAs)

The Unicist Strategy is a value adding strategy while manipulation is its anti-concept that is driven by the need to control the environment to obtain benefits. Therefore, manipulative actions are the anticoncept of unicist binary actions. While the manipulative binary actions aim at controlling the environment, the unicist binary actions aim at generating added value. This is the difference between MBAs and UBAs.

Unicist Binary Actions

Double Dialectical Behavior is natural and “automatic” in any complex adaptive system. Perhaps it needs to be clarified that adaptive systems are those that are dominantly feedback dependent.

The discovery of the structure of the concepts that underlies these systems allowed understanding how these binary actions drive the evolution of such systems.  The use of unicist logic allowed defining, designing and using unicist binary actions to implement adaptive strategies.

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. The value generated by these binary actions demonstrates their functionality.

Binary actions are not such, but manipulations, when they are used to profit from the environment. Generating value and profiting from the counterpart is the pathway of unicist binary actions.

Manipulative Binary Actions

Manipulations are non-conscious actions to control the environment and obtain benefits at the expense of others. The manipulations of children are a paradigmatic example.

While the purpose of manipulations is to profit from the environment, the purpose of unicist binary actions is to add value to the environment. That is why manipulations are the anti-concept of unicist strategy and its binary actions. .

Manipulations are sustained by the needs of the environment and are catalyzed by exposing the weaknesses that are implicit in the strengths of the counterpart.

The binary actions developed by manipulators are:

Manipulative Binary Action 1

MBA Type 1a) – Exposing the implicit weaknesses of the counterpart as real weaknesses.

MBA Type 1b) – Making an implicit or explicit ambiguous promise of satisfying the needs of the counterpart.

Manipulative Binary Action 2

MBA Type 2a) – Trying to appropriate value based on fallacious justifications.

MBA Type 2b) – Exerting power by attacking the implicit weaknesses of the counterpart until the value is appropriated.

The manipulation process doesn’t fail when the intuition of the manipulator allowed discovering the needs and the implicit weaknesses of the counterpart and the manipulator has the necessary energy to pursue until the benefit has been obtained.

There are adults who have the habit of manipulating and others who have the addiction of doing so. None of these people can use a strategic approach or use unicist binary actions to add value to the environment, because they understand that the value is added at their expense. The origin of the habits and addictions can be found in their early education.

Manipulators build all the fallacies that are needed to justify their actions. Therefore, exposing manipulators is meaningless. They just need to be ignored or left aside. Nevertheless, they generate conflicts in the environments in which they participate.

It has to be considered that manipulations are extremely effective in the social field and might become installed in the fallacious myths of a culture, diminishing the capacity for generating value in an environment.

Conclusion

Manipulative Binary Actions are dysfunctional because they don’t generate added value and therefore are not adaptive actions but over-adaptive actions of individuals to take advantage of the environment.

Working with adaptive systems and environments requires developing synchronized Unicist Binary Actions that include maximal strategy actions to grow and minimum strategy actions to ensure results.

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

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

Conceptual Reasoning and Analogical Reasoning for Solution Building

Unicist abductive reasoning is necessary to build solutions in adaptive environments. Abductive reasoning, as defined by C. S. Peirce, is a process based on analogical reasoning. The unicist abductive reasoning is based on the integration of conceptual reasoning and analogical reasoning.

Unicist abductive reasoning was discovered and developed, based on the unicist double dialectical logic, by Peter Belohlavek at The Unicist Research Institute.

Unicist abduction consists in inferring solutions based on experiencing, not observing, the actions of the active and energy conservation functions of any adaptive environment. It implies emulating the double dialectical actions implicit in the behavior of any adaptive system or environment.

This abductive process is based on using conceptual reasoning to apprehend the fundamentals that underlie these actions and analogical reasoning to manage the analytical and operational aspects of the solutions.

These conceptual and analogical reasoning processes imply using the deductive reasoning to define actions and inductive reasoning to validate their functionality. These processes need to be developed following synchronic and integrated steps:

Conceptual Reasoning

1) Abducing the fundamentals that underlie the actions of the adaptive environment to make them reasonable, understandable and provable. It requires transforming them into double dialectical actions. Conceptual reasoning uses the unicist double dialectical logic to explain the functionality of “things”.

Analogical Reasoning

2) Defining the specific univocal actions to achieve results.
3) Developing the necessary destructive and non-destructive tests to confirm the functionality.
4) Implementing the actions following the necessary synchronicity.

Aprioristic fallacies are unavoidable if both conceptual and analogical reasoning processes are not integrated.
Learn more: www.unicist.org/conceptual-thinking/the-roots-of-intelligence

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

Ethical Intelligence in Business

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.

The Unicist Ontology of Ethical Intelligence

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 Ethics2) Earned Value Ethics3) Added Value Ethics4) Foundations Ethics5) Conceptual Ethics  
APPLICATIONS:
Strategic PlanningReactive approachTactical approachGrowth strategiesExpansive strategiesTimeless strategies
Added Value GenerationTransferring cost and risks to othersMaximization of benefitsGeneration of added valueGeneration of structured valueDynamic value generation
Influential PowerSurvivors pactInfluence on survivorsInfluence within specific limitsInfluence in the
restricted context
Influence in the wide context
FocusingOn risk-avoidanceOn cost-avoidanceOn value generationOn the systemOn the environment
Time ManagementHere and nowShort-term planningMedium-term planningLong-term planningEvolutionary planning
Language MaskAnalogicalOperationalFactualAmbiguousFigurative

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.

Learn more: https://www.unicist.org/conceptual-thinking/the-roots-of-intelligence/

Unicist Press Committee

Share

Integrating Abductive, Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Unicist cognitive systems were developed to manage the root causes of processes, the root causes of their evolution and the root causes of the behavior of the participants. The unicist cognitive systems emulate processes to provide solutions using the unicist evolutionary approach. The unicist evolutionary approach is based on the discovery that human actions are driven by the concepts they have in their minds, which are triggered by the conceptual short-term memory (CSTM).

Unicist ReasoningThis approach manages the concepts and fundamentals of processes and is synthesized in the unicist strategy and the unicist conceptual management that emulate the intelligence, organization and evolution of nature to develop maximal strategies to grow and minimum strategies to ensure results.

It uses abductive, inductive and deductive reasoning to forecast, produce and ensure results. Abductive reasoning is used to access the concepts of things and define the possibilities of what can be achieved, inductive reasoning is used to develop destructive tests to confirm the limits of the validity of knowledge and deductive reasoning is used to develop validation tests and manage the operation.

The unicist artificial intelligence was developed to empower cognitive systems, integrating abductive, inductive and deductive reasoning to develop logical inferences based on the ontogenetic maps of the unified field of the concepts and fundamentals of adaptive functions while learning from the environment through pilot tests.

The unicist cognitive systems emulate processes in adaptive environments based on the definition of the unified field of their fundamentals to confirm what is possible to be achieved, how to make it happen and manage their evolution.

Peter 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.

Share

Human Superiority Complex

Superiority complexes are based on superior functional intelligence implying a structural different attitude. Their feeling of superiority is transformed into a complex when they begin to use their superior functional intelligence in fields that cannot be managed with that approach. But their need of sustaining their superiority forces to try to do so. The result implies blaming the environment for the paradoxical outcomes.

While inferiority complex drive toward inaction in order to deny the reality that affects self-esteem, superiority complexes drive toward aggressive active action to destroy the bothering object.

Superiority complexes are implicit in the decisions taken by anti-intuition in a fearful environment using the anti-intelligence to destroy the object that is threatening the self-perception of superiority.

Extremely talented individuals develop this complex while they live immersed in a mediocre environment. Mediocre environment are those that not include respect and admiration to the members of the group that have the capacity to add higher value.

When the relation with authority doesn’t include respect and admiration talented individuals become marginal. “Nerds” are some of the names that degrade the talent of an individual and transform a factual superiority into a personal complex.

On the other hand, talented individuals who perceive that their skill has no social value develop an inferiority complex if they are socially rejected.

To avoid destruction they become aggressive to the environment. The aggression might be active when it their complex is not integrated with an inferiority complex or passive if they perceive inferiority when dealing with other fields than the one (or several) they are talented in.

Characteristics of the Superiority Complex

  1. It is based on a physical advantage
  2. It influences all the activities of an individual
  3. It creates a personal fictive environment to solve problems using over-simplifying analogical approaches based on their specific talent.
  4. It is future focused to avoid the responsibility of present actions
  5. It uses omnipotence as a driver to avoid the feeling of inferiority
  6. It produces a selfish, envious and greedy behavior
  7. It produces a dualistic, antagonistic, analogical approach to reality
  8. It looks for the solution exclusively in the future
  9. It produces an obsessive taking, not giving, attitude
  10. It produces the distortion of the perception of threatening aspect of reality

The main difference is given by the fact that Superiority Complex driven individuals toward an active role in the environment. Thus they use to be aggressive using both active aggression and/or passive resistance as a way to attack the environment.

They do not work in teams. They are “solopreneurs”.

Peter 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/turi.pdf

Share

Wisdom vs. Erudition: Wisdom is a pathway with many masters

There is an extreme confrontation of erudition with wisdom (but not vice versa). This was discovered in the research developed during more than 10 years in the field of Talent Development. The research was led by Peter Belohlavek.

Wisdom can be defined as the capacity of an individual to integrate idealism and realism with value adding actions. The characteristic of individuals who achieved wisdom is that they had multiple masters that had an authoritative role in their lives. These roles are still in force and the masters are still admired.

The Unicist Ontology of WisdomAdmiration and functional envy are the concepts that allow achieving wisdom. Individuals who admire others’ achievements and deeds have the opportunity to achieve wisdom, but only if they pursue the objective of adding value in an environment. The functional envy drives individuals to achieve goals.

Individuals with conflictive relations with authority can never achieve wisdom. They might be extremely erudite, extremely efficient workers but they will never be able to integrate idealism and realism with a value-adding attitude in their environment.

The apparent paradox of wisdom is the need of multiple masters. It is said that disciples are those learners who overcome their teachers. But wisdom, defined as the space where an individual has been able to integrate idealism and realism with value adding actions, cannot be overcome. What is the difference between Wisdom and Erudition?

Wisdom

Wisdom is a state that requires focusing on specific aspects of reality using questions to apprehend their nature and having the necessary knowledge of the environment in order to generate value.

Wisdom cannot be overcome because the nature of some aspect of reality has been understood and can be influenced.

But it has to be considered that wise people do not compete with others to have a place in the world. They earned their place in the world. That is why they remain masters in the field in which they are wise.

Erudition

The Unicist Ontology of EruditionErudition is an addiction that drives people to build a parallel hypothetical reality where they consider themselves wise. It is a frequent addiction of rationally gifted individuals.

They are driven by envy which makes them accumulate data they use to judge the originators of the data while they try to demonstrate to others that they are wise.

This allows them confronting with others in their hypothetical reality and feel that their judgments make them wise. They manipulate in order to ensure that their hypothetical reality prevails over actual facts.

Conclusions

Competing with an authority in a field where she/he is wise is a demonstration that the need to gain supersedes the need to add value. The existence of multiple masters make wisdom possible.

Erudition is not analogous to wisdom; it is fallacious version of wisdom. Wisdom implies action while erudition does not.

Achieving wisdom cannot be a goal for a wise person; wisdom is the consequence of the action of an individual but does not cause it. It is unwise to try to achieve wisdom.

That is why wisdom is a pathway with multiple masters. Masters are ordinary or extraordinary people who have achieved wisdom in some field. Look for them while you continue adding value.

To achieve wisdom you need to abandon your modesty and expand your humbleness.  Wise people do not need to be right, they just have to be functional.

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.
https://www.unicist.org/conceptual-thinking/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/turi.pdf

Share

Discovery of the Functional Purpose of Human Thinking

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.

The Unicist Unified Field

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”.

If you are not aware of the functionality of the preceding researches, we recommend accessing the following link: www.unicist.org/conceptual-thinking/the-roots-of-intelligence

Applications

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

Share

Unicist Strategy: The Past and the Future are not symmetric

Future can only be managed knowing the fundamentals that rule it. The Unicist Standard was developed to influence reality in order to make a “future” happen.

The “future” (fundamentals) drives action and the “past” (technical analytical knowledge) sustains the energy conservation.

Maximal strategies are driven by the knowledge of fundamentals and minimum strategies are sustained by the technical analytical knowledge.

Future scenarios, diagnoses, strategies and business organization are typical activities that deal with the future. As past and future are not symmetric, a different result can only be achieved if the fundamentals are managed.

Fundamentals are, by definition, the functional description of the essences (the nature) of a specific reality and require an extreme effort of abstraction in order to “grasp” them.

This abstraction is what we call unicist reflection which is necessary to apprehend the nature of something. The core of the reflection process is the confirmation of the hypothetical fundamentals with the necessary “pilot tests” which are real actions in the environment.

The Unicist Standard implies managing the fundamentals of reality to influence the future and having the necessary technical-analytical knowledge to deal with the present based on the past.

It all begins with the knowledge of the fundamentals to find out if the desired future is possible. This is an extreme abstraction effort to deal with a non-symmetric solution.

Only those who need to influence the future in their environment need to deal with fundamental analysis. This is a precondition to apprehend the Unicist Standard.

Those who are used to working with the “benchmarks” of the past are threatened by this technology. They cannot deal with the innovation that is implicit in the future.

Peter 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/conceptual-thinking/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/turi.pdf

Share

Object driven thinking – Humans use mental “pre-built” structures to approach reality

Object driven thinking is humans’ natural approach to reality. Human mind approaches reality using cognitive objects. A cognitive object is a structure that contains knowledge, the action procedure, the groundings of such object, and the opinion on which it is based.The knowledge is necessary to build an understandable description of a reality. The action procedure structures the usefulness of the knowledge.

Object Driven ThinkingThe foundations sustain the meaningfulness of knowledge. Foundations are the basis for integrating the objects into a structure or net-work of objects.

Opinions are the “doctrine”, or secure knowledge, on which cognitive objects are built.

Long term memory

Cognitive objects are stored in the long term memory and are ac-cessed if the individual approaches reality in an adapted way.

The access of long term memory requires a structural approach.

Intuition is an “automatic” response which includes the information of the objects stored in the long term memory.

Let us consider an example: The way a chess master approaches a multiple-game party.

This case has been studied by different researchers that concluded that a master recalls the multiple objects s/he has in his/her mind to categorize the situation of the opponents. It is said that a chess master has until 100.000 positions in her/his mind and that s/he is able to anticipate 14 moves.

The more situations s/he can recall and relate to diagnose a situation, the more flexible his/her approach to the real game and the more chances s/he has to win.

Long term memory is integrated by:

  1. Episodic memory, to recall personal experiences from our past.
  2. Semantic memory, to store facts, information, concepts, rules, principles, and problem solving skills.
  3. Procedural memory, to remember how to perform or employ a strategy.

These three types of long term memory are integrated. They store the cognitive objects that people need to respond on time to influence an environment.

Objects storage

The objects stored in mind must fulfill several conditions:

  1. They must include the conceptual structure to be meaningful.
  2. They must be secure, to be reliable.
    They must include the individual’s beliefs, to be remembered. When the individual’s beliefs are not included they are forgotten.
  3. They must include knowledge, which includes the possibility of application.
  4. They must include groundings which have to be reasonable, comprehensible and provable.
  5. They must include action procedures to make the objects useful.

A cognitive object is stored in the three types of long term memory:

  1. Episodic memory pictures the object’s functional experiences which permit an analogical approach.
  2. Semantic memory stores the idea of the concept, its structure and mechanics.
  3. Procedural memory contains the taxonomy to implement the ac-tions that are included in the structure of the cognitive objects.

Conclusion

To have the necessary knowledge objects stored in your mind, such objects have to be registered in the long term memory. Reflection requires a smooth natural use of the integration of an individual with the environment. While the knowledge objects are not stored in the long term memory it is impossible to approach complexity but on a rationalist approach.

Without having stored the necessary taxonomy a knowledge cannot be used but in a fallacious way.

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.pdf

Share