Dealing with Static or Dynamic Equilibrium to Adapt
The object driven learning process is based on the empowerment of the adaptive capacity of individuals. There are two different attitudes towards the environment:
- Dealing with reality based on a static equilibrium
- Dealing with reality based on a dynamic equilibrium
The use of dualistic logic, based on the confrontation of positions, using the disjunction “or” to deal with reality, drives individuals to a static equilibrium where their opinions prevail.
Dualistic thinking, following the natural behavior of neurons, is the less energy consuming thinking process.
This drives naturally towards an over-adaptive behavior which implies submitting, dominating or opposing to the environment.
Dualistic logic generates naturally aprioristic fallacies to deal with the environment which allows individuals to build a parallel reality that works as a comfort zone where they have no need of adapting. Domination, submission and oppositions are the alternatives they manage to feel safe.
Dualistic dialectic is the justification of the actions of individuals when they need to remain in a static equilibrium.
The positive aspect is that static equilibrium allows managing reality as a systemic model based on cause-effect relationships although complexity cannot be apprehended.
Static equilibrium is necessary to deal with methods and supernatural and religious thinking. That is why the basic educational system is based on teaching static processes in order to allow people to access the world of work.
2) Dynamic Equilibrium
Dynamic equilibrium implies adapting to reality which implies a permanent accommodation process in order to generate the necessary complementation or supplementation with the environment.
It requires using the double dialectical logic to approach reality which is based on the conjunction “and” without the existence of disjunctions. This allows individuals to influence the environment while they are being influenced by it.
It requires having a structural approach in order to be able to apprehend the fundamentals of reality and a functional approach in order to measure them in terms of results. In a dynamic equilibrium environment things are not true or false, but functional or dysfunctional.
Dynamic equilibrium requires dealing with reality as a complex adaptive system. This implies that the structure of the complex adaptive system, defined by a purpose, an active function and an energy conservation function, needs to be apprehended.
This apprehension requires the use of the double dialectical logic which demands using double dialectical thinking.
It allows apprehending the complex adaptive systems in their nature and transforming them into systemic systems making the necessary compromises without leaving aside their essential structure while measuring the results that are being achieved.
Dealing with Dynamic Learning Processes
Reliable knowledge has been achieved when it has the necessary adaptiveness so the individual can deal with reality in a dynamic equilibrium. The knowledge is adaptive when it allows apprehending reality as a complex adaptive system and the individual is able to transform the knowledge into actions, understanding the consequences based on its foundations.
The development of actions requires knowing the fundamentals of what someone is doing. The knowledge of the fundamentals is required to do things. Technical analytical knowledge allows controlling the cause-effect relationships after the actions were implemented.
Reliability is based on the integration of the knowledge of the fundamentals, the technical-analytical aspects and the possibility to adapt to the environment.
The Unicist Ontological Structure of Learning Objects
The purpose of a learning object is to install an adaptive knowledge object in the mind of the learner. This implies that the learning objects drive the accommodation process to accept new aspects that were not managed before and integrate these new aspects in mind through an assimilation process which requires storing this integration in the long term memory of individuals.
Learning objects are complex adaptive systems that have been designed to drive the learning processes of the learner without needing external support when working within functional learning environments.
A functional learning environment exists when there is a need of a specific knowledge to do something, the necessary capacities of an individual are available and accessible and the objects have the necessary authoritative role to be accepted.
Learning objects cannot work when these conditions are exceeded and then the participation of a counselor becomes necessary to substitute these objects by personal action.
This is homologous to the autopilot of an airplane which needs to be substituted by the pilot when the conditions of the external environment exceed the possibilities of the object.
The Ontogenetic Map of Dynamic Learning Objects
The final purpose of the use of dynamic learning objects is to generate adaptive knowledge in the mind of the learner.
Adaptive knowledge is what allows managing an adaptive equilibrium which is fully necessary to manage complex adaptive systems. As they have open boundaries they are continuously adapting to the environment in order to fulfill their purpose. The paradox is that a static position is required to evaluate a situation.
On the one hand, there is the possibility of managing reality in a dualistic way which transforms the operational level into static while it destroys the complex adaptive system as such.
There is another possibility of establishing a static position that is based on the concept of a complex system which behaves within the functionality or credibility zone defined by the purpose, the active function and the entropy inhibiting function. This defines a stable, measurable, although not static position.
A dynamic equilibrium requires finding a stable zone in order to deal with a system that is in permanent evolution.
After the necessary adaptive knowledge needed to adapt to an environment is defined it becomes necessary to define the actions that have to be done in order to influence the system. These actions need to be defined in a universal way in order to be able to adapt to situations that are changing.
This becomes possible if the conceptual foundations are known. Based on the integration of the necessary universal actions and their essential foundations it is possible to define the knowledge that needs to be stored in the long term memory as an object in order to be accessible when it is necessary to produce something.
The maximal strategy is driven by finding the functional knowledge that is needed to manage the complex problem that has been defined. This becomes possible if an individual begins to act in the environment. Observers cannot learn to deal with a dynamic equilibrium in true reality.
The exposure to reality is possible if the individual has a conscious knowledge of the field in which s/he is acting or has this knowledge in a homologous field. Learning to manage dynamic equilibrium requires dealing with known fields.
The paradox is that while an adolescent has experienced all the fields adults need to manage, the question is if s/he is aware of such experiences or they were the result of an over-adaptation that did not allow awareness.
After an action process has been implemented it is necessary to introject the action in order to emulate reality so as to transform external actions into internal knowledge. This introjection is the catalyst and inhibitor of the learning object.
If the object allows making a valid introjection, it is the catalyst that accelerates the functionality of the learning object. If the introjection happens to be fallacious, the object ceases to work and has to be replaced by human intervention.
The final stage of the maximal strategy is accomplished when its purpose, the access to functional knowledge, has been achieved.
The minimum strategy provides the complement to the adaptive knowledge acquisition process that ensures the achievement of the goals. A learning object needs to define the actions which are included in the procedural long term memory.
To install true action driven knowledge it is necessary to have a picture of functional experiences in the episodic memory that allow an analogical approach and provide the final picture of the actions to be developed.
When this has been achieved it is necessary that the learning object allows storing the idea of the concepts that provides the guiding idea of the actions and the unicist ontological structure and the mechanics to use it in the semantic memory.
Finally, the minimum strategy has been achieved using dynamic learning objects when the procedural memory has the actions that are included in the structure of the cognitive object. These actions need to be adaptive based on the possibilities of the environment.
Types of Dynamic Learning Objects
We have developed four types of dynamic objects to deal with the learning of complexity.
- Homological Benchmarks – WHAT FOR
- Specific Fundamentals – WHAT
- Pilot Tests – HOW
- Specific Reflection – WHY
These objects drive the definition of what is needed to be achieved. They might have different shapes:
- Benchmarks in homologous fields
- Pre-pilot tests (Japanese Parks)
- Pre-established standards because the action field belongs to a superior complex system that has to be managed.
The participants need to find the picture of other experiences they had to work as homological benchmarks. By definition there is no possibility to transfer experiences. An experience is necessarily subjective.
Therefore this object needs to work allowing participants to discover that the field they are entering is manageable because they have a final picture in mind. This object integrates the three aspects that have been mentioned above.
A homological benchmark defines the WHAT FOR of the learning process. This is the purpose of the idea of a concept. Concepts can only be discovered, they cannot be taught; the WHAT FOR allows approaching the idea of the concept and thus beginning with the learning process in a complex field.
Specific Fundamentals – WHAT
After the WHAT FOR has been defined, the approach to the learning objective can begin. This is necessarily focused on specific relevant aspects of a reality.
Relevant aspects of reality are the ones that behave as an object within the unified field of a complex adaptive system. The goal of this object is to provide the fundamentals of the specific relevant aspects of reality.
It defines the WHAT is being learned. It appears to be analogous to a teaching process but in fact it is just a messaging process. It can be done by a “teacher” assuming the role of an informant.
This role is a driving object in itself that fulfills the purpose of providing the information of the fundamentals to the learner. This role can also be developed by a virtual object that needs to be designed as a message.
The role includes recycling information with the participants until the fundamentals have been rationally apprehended. The knowledge of the fundamentals allows designing pilot tests to confirm that the fundamentals have been apprehended.
This stage allows entering the next step of developing pilot tests.
Pilot Test – HOW
The pilot tests are real applications in the specific action field that is being learned or in homologous fields when the full real application is too risky.
Pilot testing allows learning HOW the knowledge works and is transformed into actions. These pilot tests are developed to confirm that the fundamentals have been apprehended in their true application amplitude.
The pilot tests begin with a destructive pilot test to evaluate the limits of their application.
The destructive tests end when the participant has apprehended the limits of the validity of the knowledge s/he has.
The non-destructive pilot tests are real applications in the specific action field or its homologous alternative. They require having predefined the results that will be achieved.
This stage drives towards a reflection process, which is the next step that allows improving the results until they are consistent with the goals established in the learning process.
Reflection Process – WHY
This object is a systemic object that needs to produce improvements in the application process of what is being learned. It requires having a personal value adding approach in order to seek for improvements.
The reflection process begins by exposing the pre-concepts the learner has to achieve the goals of the learning process in order to confront them with the real world and open the possibilities of confirming them, expanding their boundaries or change them.
In the normal case of needing to expand or change their pre-concepts the participants will have opened their minds to use the knowledge in real life. The decision to use knowledge in an adapted way will have empowered the capacity to “listen” to the results achieved.
This reflection object drives towards remaking the pilot tests until the results are the ones that have been defined. This stage allows installing the knowledge in the long term memory of the learner.