Subjectivism: the anti-concept of adaptiveness

Print Friendly

[responsivevoice_button voice=”UK English Female” buttontext=”Listen to Post”]

The research on what destroys adaptiveness was triggered by the problems that are generated when innovations are being introduced at a social or institutional level. This research was led by Peter Belohlavek at The Unicist Research Institute.

The research showed that innovations themselves generate a subjectivist response in the environment, since people try to avoid being left aside by the innovation and look for a place without having the necessary knowledge of the new aspects introduced by the innovation.  On the other hand, in those environments that inhibit learning, for doctrine or any other reason, innovations are destroyed by subjectivism.

The field of research expanded and led to the research of subjectivism as the anti-concept of adaptive behavior, in order to find ways to hinder subjectivism in social and institutional environments.

Introduction

Subjectivism is the anti-concept of adaptive behavior that destroys the possibility of dealing with adaptive environments.  That is why subjectivism is a functional behavior in authoritarian and anarchic environments where it provides an over-adaptive participation that mitigates the perception of authoritarianism and individualism.

Its driver is the justification of the unfulfilled goals that generates a parallel reality where the environment is responsible for the dysfunctional actions that produce the unfulfillment of the goals that were established. These justifications are sustained by the use of fallacious myths and the establishment of dysfunctional utopias.

The social fallacious myths that sustain social subjectivism are those that question the roles of authoritative leaders and those that allow “buying time” to avoid responsibilities. The guilt avoidance actions are sustained by the use of dysfunctional utopias that avoid the discussion of the functional aspects of a given reality.

Once installed, it destroys any possibility for adaptive behavior and generates internal power conflicts and annulment conflicts that hinder functional actions.

The context of subjectivism

Social subjectivism is sustained by the lack of reliable knowledge in a field of adaptive actions and is catalyzed by the need of participating. These two aspects ensure the creation of subjectivism as an anti-concept.

The lack of knowledge is produced when people do not have the fundamental and technical knowledge to develop solutions in a specific field. The need of participation is given when people need to find a place in an environment where they have no added value.

Learning while working is the natural proposal of subjectivists in order to “earn” a place while they say that they are learning. As people learn from mistakes and work has to be flawless, they do not learn and cannot do.

The participation of subjectivists is necessarily over-adaptive and utopia driven. It is over-adaptive because it avoids assuming responsibilities and it is dysfunctional utopias driven because through the utopias they “simulate” an active participation while they hinder functional actions. “Opinators” are paradigmatic examples of subjectivists.

Subjectivism as an anti-strategy

Subjective strategies are driven by justified actions and the exertion of power in order to avoid assuming the responsibility for strategy building.

At a personal level, individuals who cannot envision the future of the activity they are doing cannot assume the responsibility for having a conscious approach to it. They need to install subjective strategies in order to feel no guilt for their lack of responsibility.

The Subjective Strategy Segments

The maximal strategy of subjective strategies is driven by the avoidance of species/social responsibility and is based on justified actions developing a monopolistic behavior to maximize the benefits of the individual or organization.

The minimum strategy is driven by the avoidance of personal responsibility, which is based on exerting power by attacking competitors and annulling all aspects that avoid entering the parallel reality that is sought for.

There are four levels of subjective strategies:

  1. Independence Strategies
  2. Dependent Strategies
  3. Intuitive Strategies
  4. Subjectivist Strategies

1) Independence Strategies

These strategies are based on developing a business based on the “as is” of its leaders. It implies developing businesses based on beliefs seeking for independence as the core value.  They are based on attacking competitors in order to feel superior. They include a sense of superiority where every action is justified. On the surface they appear to be survivor strategies.

2) Dependent Strategies

They include the preceding level. They are based on developing an asymmetric complementation with a positive slope and annulling all the aspects of reality that bother and on a sense of inferiority, which requires exerting power in order to avoid this feeling. On the surface they appear to be defensive strategies.

3) Intuitive Strategies

They include the preceding level. Intuitive strategies are based on developing relationships using common sense. They are based on the use of smartness maximizing the benefits from the environment and on the abuse of complementary relationships exerting the necessary power to do so. On the surface they appear to be dominant strategies.

4) Subjectivist Strategies

They include the preceding level. Subjective strategies are sustained by the establishment of subjective relationships that include a minimum level of functional complementation. They are based on establishing the rules that allow the development of a monopolistic behavior and on the confrontation with the establishment. Individuals developing these strategies use any justification to confirm that they are right. On the surface they appear to be influential strategies.

Conclusion

It has to be considered that people only assume a subjectivist role when they do not have the necessary functional knowledge to develop solutions and need to find a place in the environment that fulfills their emotional needs.

By including in a project or work only people who have the necessary knowledge there is no risk of becoming destroyed by subjectivists. The problem is solved by the use of two unicist approaches:

  1. The use of Unicist Client Centered Management hinders the generation of subjectivists because it demands the measurable delivery of concrete value.
  2. The application of the Teamwork Agreement based on the Ethic of Foundations eliminates the possibilities of subjectivists. That is why it should be used in all those meetings where there is a need for developing solutions in adaptive environments.

Unicist Teamwork Agreement
Ethics of Foundations

All members of a group agree to:

  1. Explain the foundations of what is stated in an understandable, reasonable and provable way for the rest of the group.
  2. Count on the “paperwork” supporting their proposals, and explain it clearly to the rest of the group.
  3. Invite to participate in working groups only those individuals that have the capacity to understand the groundings of a problem.
  4. Whenever the problem is complex give members the necessary time to be prepared to deal with such problem, and to understand the groundings of the rest of the group.
  5. Have the necessary knowledge, beyond common sense, for solving the problems they are dealing with.
  6. Explain the groundings when analyzing problems.
  7. When evaluating actions, explain the synthesis but not the foundations that underlay them. However, upon request of the rest of the group, provide them with the groundings of the synthesis.
  8. Take others’ groundings into consideration, and integrate them into yours, disregarding whom they come from.
  9. Do not give an opinion when there is a lack of knowledge.
  10. When working in uncertain environments, approach the problem explicitly starting with a “groundless opinion”, but be responsible for obtaining the necessary knowledge to achieve a grounded one.

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. https://www.unicist.org/turi.pdf

Share

Invitation to participate in research projects

Print Friendly

We invite young professionals and academics to contact us to participate in the research projects of The Unicist Research Institute: n.i.brown@unicist.org More than 200 researches were finished in 2016 and five major scientific breakthroughs were finished in 2017. They introduce a structural change in scientific research:

  1. The unicist ontology of the integration of the restricted and wide contexts that explains the failures in political decisions and allows ensuring strategies. It is being published after 10 years of use and testing. (Complexity Sciences)
  2. The structure of unicist tactics that ensures the functionality of strategies. It is being published after 20 years of applications. (Future Research and Strategy)
  3. The unicist semiotic research methodology that allows researching virtual communication and ensuring its functionality. It is being published after 7 years of application and testing implicit weaknesses and their effects. (Semiology)
  4. The context of social dysfunctional utopias that allows forecasting the evolution of cultures. It is being published after 10 years of application in future scenario building. (Anthropology)
  5. The context of personal dysfunctional utopias that allow influencing personal evolution. It is being published after 15 years of application in the educational field. (Psychology)

More than 5,000 unicist ontological researches were developed since 1976 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution. The main countries that originated these researches were: US, DE, UK, FR, JP, SE, CA, CH, IN, BR, AR, CAT, RU, CN, AU. TURI’s Future Research Laboratory completed the research of 70 countries’ archetypes.

Scientific applications of the Unicist Theory that expanded the boundaries of existing sciences by solving their complex aspects:

In Scientific Research – 1980: Development of a unicist ontological methodology for complex systems research, substituting the systemic approach to research adaptive systems. 2014: The integration of the unified field of macro and micro behavior. 2015: Development of the destructive and non-destructive tests to research adaptive environments.

In Life Sciences – 1988: Discovery of the functional structure that regulates evolution and the unicist ontological structure of living beings as a unified field. 2006: Discovery of the unicist ontological algorithm of evolution and involution. 2008: Discovery of the two types of integration, complementation and supplementation, of elements in complex adaptive systems. 2012: Discovery of the unicist ontology of biological entities. 2013: Confirmation of the unicist ontology of viruses. 2014: Discovery of the ontological structure of chronic diseases. 2014: Discovery of the structure of therapeutics. 2015: Discovery of the ontological structure of health. 2016: Development of the Scientific Foundations of Medicine.

In Complexity Sciences – 1998: Development of the unicist ontology emulating the ontogenetic intelligence of nature. 2003: Discovery of the anti-concepts that work as antimatter. 2006: Development of objects to manage human adaptive systems emulating the structure of nature. 2011: Discovery of the unicist ontology of complex adaptive systems. 2014: Discovery of the behavior of objects in complex adaptive systems. 2015: Discovery of the essential opposition but operational complementation between the active function and the energy conservation function of concepts. 2017: Discovery of the unicist ontology that integrates the wide and restricted contexts.

In Information Sciences – 2002: Development of unicist ontogenetic based ontologies replacing the empirically structured ontologies. 2014: Development of unicist adaptive robotics. 2015: Development of prototypers. 2016: Discovery of the nature of conceptual design.

In Future Research and Strategy – 1984: Modeling of the ontological structures that allow inferring the evolution developing the ontogenetic maps of human adaptive systems. 2014: Confirmation of the functionality of ethical intelligence in future research. 2015: Discovery of the unicist ontology of personal strategies. 2016: Discovery of the nature of entrepreneurial strategies. 2017: Discovery of the double dialectical tactics.

In Logic – 1986: Development and formalization of the integrative and the unicist logic. 2013: Functionality of Dualistic Logic in complex environments. 2013: Discovery of the structure of aprioristic fallacies.

In Anthropology – 1986: Discovery of the “invariables” of human behavior. 1997: Discovery of the double dialectical behavior. 2008: Discovery of the anthropological lifestyles. 2010: Discovery of the institutional and social viruses. 2012: Discovery of the integration of ontogeny and phylogeny. 2012: Discovery of the stagnant survivors’ role in societies. 2012: Discovery of the unicist ontological structure of aptitudes, attitudes and intentions. 2013: Development of the unicist ontology of cultural adaptiveness & over-adaptiveness. 2014: Synthesis of Conceptual Anthropology.2014: Discovery of the Cultural, Institutional, Individual and Social Archetypes. 2015: Discovery of the functionality of rationalism and subjectivism as social and individual addictions. 2016: Discovery of the nature of innovation processes. 2017: Discovery of the context of social dysfunctional utopias.

In Economic Science – 1989: Discovery of the unicist ontological structure of Economics. 1998: Discovery of the unicist ontological algorithm of the price elasticity of demand. 2004: Discovery of the ontogenetic structure of economic models and their functionality. 2011: Discovery of the ontology of currency and inflation. 2012: Discovery of the ontology of the industrialization level. 2012: Discovery of the unicist ontology of the overcoming of scarcity. 2012: Pricing of Futures and Options. 2012: Discovery of the unicist ontology of speculative manipulation. 2014: Synthesis of Conceptual Economy. 2015: Discovery of the unicist ontology of economic freedom.

In Political Science – 1990: Development of the ontological algorithm and the ontogenesis and phylogeny of ideologies and their functionality. 2013: Development of the unicist ontology of Social, Economic and Political Democracy.

In Social Sciences – 1993: Discovery of the collective unconscious and the unicist archetypes of cultures. 2012: Discovery of the role of stagnant survivor elites in the stagnation of segments or cultures. 2016: Discovery of the nature of social networks.

In Linguistics – 2004: Discovery of the unicist ontological algorithms of natural, ambiguous and figurative languages and the unicist ontology of words. 2014: Development of semantic objects. 2015: Discovery of the ontological structure of subliminal communication.

In Mathematics – 1996: Development of the conceptual basis of interdependent, dependent and independent variables. 2014: Development of the mathematical foundations of reality indicators.

In Philosophy – 1994: Development of the unicist ontology integrating philosophy, science and action in a unified field. 1997: Refutation of Hegel’s and Marx’s dialectics and the formulation of the laws of the double dialectics.

In History – 2000: Development of a historical analysis methodology based on the unicist double dialectics.

In Cognitive Science – 2001: Development of a methodology to construct knowledge with existing information through an integrative logic. 2002: Development of the unicist reflection methodology to deal with the nature of reality. 2006: Discovery of the object driven organization of mental processes and the development of cognitive objects. 2008: Development of the ontological algorithms of fundamental analysis. 2013: Development of the unicist ontology of erudition and wisdom (observers vs. participants). 2014: Discovery of the structure of the emulation of reality. 2015: Discovery of the unicist ontology of conceptualization.

In Education – 1979: Discovery of the ontogenetic algorithms of learning which has given scientific sustainability, amongst others, to Piaget. 2014: Discovery and development of learning objects. 2015: Development of Reflection Driven Education. 2016: Discovery of the nature of learning by teaching.

In Psychology – 1984: Discovery of human ontointelligence to deal with adaptive systems. 2003: Discovery of the unicist ontological structure of fallacies, the functionality of anti-intelligence and anti-intuition. 2004: Discovery of the double dialectical thinking process. 2005: Discovery of the unicist ontology and evolution laws of human essential complexes. 2011: Discovery of the unicist ontology of conscious behavior. 2012: Discovery of the unicist ontology of complementation of thinking processes. 2012: Discovery of the unicist ontology of psychopathy. 2014: Discovery of the structure of subliminal decision-making. 2014: Synthesis of Conceptual Psychology. 2015: Functionality of concepts as behavioral objects. 2016: Discovery of the nature of human metamorphosis. 2016: Discovery of the functionality of thinking processes. 2017: Discovery of the context of personal dysfunctional utopias.

In Semiology – 2012: Discovery of the unicist ontology of semiosis as a complex adaptive system. 2015: Development of semiotic role objects. 2017: Development of the semiotic research groups.

Unicist Executive Committee

 

Share

Children deal with complexity but adults need to learn it

Print Friendly

Action-reflection-action is the necessary process to deal with the adaptive aspects of reality and with businesses considered as adaptive entities.

Paradoxically, this process is developed naturally, using intuition, by children, but adults need to recover their capacity of facing reality without fears if they want to develop an action-reflection-action learning process.

Children would not grow if they did not have this capacity, because most of the problems they face are complex for them.

The object driven learning technology defined the structure that allowed making adaptive learning processes accessible for all the people who need to deal with complex problems and are willing to make the effort to solve them.

Indoctrination requires the use of a theory-practice approach in order to install a theory to rule actions; adaptive learning, on the other hand, requires an action-reflection-action and a theory-practice approach. Indoctrination is security driven while adaptive learning is freedom driven.

The unicist learning objects provided an approach to adaptive learning for adults.

The object driven learning technology defines the four levels of objects to be used when integrating problematic with thematic learning.

The four levels of learning objects are:

  1. Learning context building objects
  2. Possibilities opening objects
  3. Reflection driving objects
  4. Research driving objects

This is what the unicist approach to learning is about. The use of learning objects simplifies the adaptive process and provides, on the one hand, a logical security framework to learn and, on the other hand, it allows expanding the boundaries of people’s talents.

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

Share

Personal Freedom: Concepts make you Free

Print Friendly

Concepts make you free is not a motto; it is a fact, which is sustained by the functionality of conceptual knowledge to drive human actions. Having the concepts of what one is doing allows one to be extremely effective and flexible. Access the document on Personal Freedom at:
https://www.unicist-school.org/complexity-sciences/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/concepts-make-you-free.pdf

Concepts make you free

That is what is made possible by the “personal freedom” an individual has. Personal freedom cannot exist without having conceptual knowledge and vice-versa.

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

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

Concepts are not imagined they are discovered following an action-reflection-action process based on acting in the real world. It has to be clarified that conceptual knowledge implies having the abstract emulation of the concept in mind but also the operational procedures.

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

This document is part of the fully sponsored programs of the Goodwill Network that foster the upgrade of ethics in leadership.

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.
https://www.unicist-school.org/complexity-sciences/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/turi.pdf

Share

Teamwork: Beware of Smart Alecks

Print Friendly

Smart Alecks cannot add value. Maximal Strategies demand adding value to the environment to go beyond the existing boundaries of a business.

Smart Alecks are advantage takers that have an amoral behavior in order to profit from the environment. This kind of behavior is the natural response of stagnant survivors when managing businesses.

Stagnant survivors are naturally “smarties” in order to live from the environment.

They are driven by anti-intelligence and anti-intuition having no ethical rules in their behavior. They need to degrade the environment in order to justify their appropriation. When they have a high IQ, they become extremely dangerous because their critics are very smart, fallacious and well disguised.

The awareness of their actions is “zero” because they are basically driven by greed that drives them into fallacious behaviors.

One cannot deal with smart alecks because they assume no commitment with what they apparently agreed, and they always find the necessary justification for their non-fulfillment.

Their amoral behavior is sustained by accomplices in order to have the power to impose their rules. They manipulate others based on the generation of urgent needs that hinder the existence of alternative actions.

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-school.org/complexity-sciences/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/turi.pdf

Share

Unicist Micro-Clinics: Learning to manage complex problems

Print Friendly

Unicist-Micro-ClinicsThe Micro Clinics develop solutions of real problems of companies. They use the Conceptual Design Methodology which uses the conceptual structures of the business functions.

These clinics give access to the unicist technology for conceptual design that ensures the functionality, the productivity and the quality assurance of the business processes that are designed.

It needs to be considered that the access to the concepts that underlie business process can only be made by participating in real cases where the participants are involved.

The observation exercises or the case-studies unavoidably drive towards fallacious understanding.

The Structure of a Micro-Clinic

I) Preparation

a) Definition of the problem to be solved
b) Pre-diagnosis of the problem to be managed

II) The Micro-clinic

  1. The Provision of the business technologies in e-book format
  2. A live micro-clinic of 8 hours
  3. Development of the conceptual design of the solution
  4. Development of the corresponding action plan.
  5. A Continuous counseling for 7 days after the micro-clinic
  6. Participants of the group: up to 25.

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-school.org/complexity-sciences/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/turi.pdf

Share

Introduction to Unicist Epistemology

Print Friendly

The unicist approach to Epistemology is based on the development of logical foundations and empirical justifications to sustain human knowledge. This epistemology is a pragmatic, structural and functionalist approach that allows building reliable knowledge that replaced the processes of the falsification of knowledge by destructive testing processes.

Unicist EpistemologyIt is based on the Unicist Theory which is a paradigm shift of the scientific approach to complex adaptive systems. 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 paradigm shift is based on the integration of the “know-how” that underlies the empirical sciences with the “know-why” introduced by the Unicist Theory.  The “know why” is needed to deal with the concepts of complex adaptive environments.

It defines that reliable knowledge implies knowing the concepts that underlie facts, which confirm the “know-why”, and the justifications that confirm the “know-how” of the facts.

The integration of the unicist approach to complexity with the empirical sciences requires changing the Theory-Practice learning approach to an Action-Reflection-Action approach that allows apprehending the concepts that underlie facts and transforms them into value adding actions.

This approach integrates the “know why” required to understand complexity with the “know how” needed to generate value.

The History of Knowledge

A) The first stage of collective knowledge was covered by religions, that provided the “WHAT” was acceptable as necessary knowledge. In the times when the knowledge was based on religious beliefs, the emulation of nature was a heresy.

B) The second stage was provided by the development of empirical sciences that provided the “KNOW HOW” to deal with the environment. In the era of empirical sciences, the emulation of nature was a utopia.

C) The last stage was the inclusion of the “KNOW WHY”, which required the comprehension of the nature of things and was provided by the unicist approach to complexity sciences. The emulation of nature became possible in the era where complexity became manageable by emulating the logic that underlies nature. This is the unicist paradigm shift in sciences.

History of the Evolution of Operational Knowledge

The paradigm shift was triggered by the need to understand complex adaptive systems. The shift implies having changed the empirical approach to sciences replacing it by a pragmatic, structuralist and functionalist approach to deal with complex environments that integrates, at an operational level, the preexisting empiricism.

This is a superior level in sciences that integrates complexity sciences with systemic sciences using the double-dialectical logic to emulate the ontogenetic intelligence of nature and using objects to emulate the organization of nature.

The Paradigm Shift in Sciences

The emulation of nature requires having an adaptive behavior in the environment. Adapting requires:  1) exerting influence in the environment; 2) managing the influence of the environment. It requires using the conjunction “and” without using the disjunction “or”.

Scientific KnowledgeThe unicist paradigm shift is based on the integration of the “KNOW-HOW” that underlies the empirical sciences with the “KNOW-WHY” introduced by the Unicist Theory. It defines that to access reliable knowledge it is necessary to know the concepts that underlie facts, which confirm the “KNOW-WHY”, and the justifications that confirm the “KNOW-HOW” of those facts.

The paradigm shift in sciences made the complex adaptive systems become reasonable, understandable and predictable. This paradigm shift allowed defining what is possible to be achieved and not only approaching reality with a probabilistic approach.

The shift in sciences is a pragmatic, structural and functionalist approach that subordinates the preexisting empirical approaches. It integrates the observable facts with the “nature of things”.

Learn more:
http://www.unicist.org/scientific-collaboration/#Basics

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-school.org/complexity-sciences/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/turi.pdf

Share

The Challenge of using Unicist Adaptive Project Management

Print Friendly

The development of a new approach to manage projects became necessary to deal with adaptive systems. Adaptive systems produce actions and reactions during the development of a project that need to be managed in order to ensure the achievement of the objectives.

Adaptive Project PlanningWhile the traditional approach considers that plan B is an emergency plan to achieve goals, the unicist approach to project management considers that the plan B is superior and includes plan A, the plan C is superior than plan B but includes it, and the plan D is an abortion plan that includes the development of a succedaneum solution.

These alternative plans have to be predefined before the project begins. It is necessary to consider that the most participative alternative is given by plan A and the most “directive” alternatives are given by plan C and D.

That is why the unicist approach to project management is necessary to deal with adaptive systems that are in motion and unnecessary when dealing with systems where the adaptive aspects do not need to be considered.

The stages of the Adaptive Project Management are:

1. Process Control Centered

The process control centered manager is focused on establishing the necessary operational, administrative and control systems to monitor the process using a forward chaining design process that allows having the information on each stage of the process.

2. Authoritative Management Centered

Authoritative management includes having the capacity of controlling the processes. It implies that the manager has the vision of the problem and alternative solutions in order to define the plan C for any central aspect of a project.

3. Objects Management Centered

This level includes having the capacity of developing an authoritative management of the project. It requires that the manager be able to apprehend the complexity of the adaptive aspects of projects.

4. Process Management Centered

This level includes the capacity of developing the object management of projects. It is based on having apprehended the unified field of the project as a solution in the context where it is being developed.

Conclusion

Adaptive Project Management requires integrating project planning and project execution skills to ensure that the solutions be achieved. It is based on approaching projects based on the use of processes and objects that have proven their capacity to provide the necessary solutions. It implies having a sound systemic knowledge and the knowledge of the fundamentals that underlie the solution.

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. http://www.unicist.org

Share

Participation in Unicist Think Tanks to develop Solutions

Print Friendly

The Unicist Research Institute (TURI) is a private global decentralized research center specialized in complexity sciences that is focused on the research of the evolution of adaptive systems. More than 5,000 unicist ontological researches were developed since 1976 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution.

If you are interested in participating please contact: n.i.brown@unicist.org

About the Think Tanks

The Unicist Standard for Adaptive System ResearchThink Tanks are small autonomous organizations, organized by industry, that use the technology provided by The Unicist Research Institute to manage complexity. Unicist is in charge of the quality assurance of the R&D process. Each Think Tank is organized based on the type of industry.

There are four types of Think Tanks

1) For Basic Sciences
2) For Future Research
3) For Social/Economic Long-term Planning
4) For Unicist Spin-off Implementation

Think Tanks are integrated by Doers

The research on human complex adaptive systems cannot be done through artificial experiments or simulations. It has to be developed in an environment of real action. In the unicist approach doing and researching are integrated in a unified field. That is why only “doers” can research the field of complex adaptive processes. Observers can only rationalize them.

Complexity Science Research

Complexity Sciences are defined as the scientific approach to deal with adaptive systems considering them as a unified field. The critical masses of all the interdependent elements included in the unified field of an adaptive system define its functionality. The unicist approach to complexity sciences integrates ontology, science and actions in a unified field.

Adaptive Technologies for Businesses

The available IT technologies made the development of adaptive systems meaningful. The objective of building adaptive systems is to integrate software, hardware and peopleware in adaptive work or business processes to assure the quality of the results produced.

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.
http://www.unicist.org/repo/index.php#Unicist

Share

Adaptive behavior assessment: the Unicist Japanese Park

Print Friendly

The Unicist Japanese Park is a method that has been used since 1976 to evaluate the natural behavior when people are part of adaptive systems. It has been used to validate cultural archetypes, institutional cultures and personal behavior.

The purpose of this method is to find the natural organization that is used by people that demonstrates how they deal with their functionality to add value and to earn value.

It is based on building an emulation of a real adaptive system to integrate people in it and evaluate the functionality of their behavior. The emulation of the adaptive system needs to be defined knowing the operational and fundamental aspects that are included.

The first aspect that needs to be evaluated is how people focus their energy towards the generation of added value and measure how they assure the results. This allows defining the starting point of the value adding actions.

The second aspect to be assessed is how people deal with their efficacy, efficiency and quality assurance. This allows defining how people deal with their minimum strategies to be reliable.

This method provides reliable information of what happens naturally in an environment.

Diego 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.
http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Unicist

Share