Country Archetypes


Cultural confrontation: the clash between adaptive and over-adaptive cultures

The root cause of the clash between cultures is in fact the confrontation between over-adaptive and adaptive cultures. Over-adaptive cultures are naturally driven by a dualistic approach which drives them to consider enemies all those that are different or have a superior level of adaptiveness.

Cultural Confrontation

The reach of one’s globalization is defined
by the limit of the pronoun “WE”…

On the other hand, adaptive cultures are driven by integrative approaches that allow them influencing the environment while being influenced by it.

The apparent paradox is that while adaptive cultures include over-adaptive behaviors in order to accept the influence of the environment, over-adaptive cultures are dualistic and cannot accept adaptive behaviors within their boundaries.

That is why adaptive cultures are able to generate added value while over-adaptive cultures need to survive based on the appropriation of value.

Obviously, the confrontation is generated by the over-adapted cultures that need to transform the adapted ones into enemies in order to justify their attitude towards the appropriation of value.

This confrontation is in fact the battle between evolution and involution, which generates opposite and incompatible positions that can only be overcome by the acceptance that adaptiveness is a goal to be achieved.

Adaptiveness requires necessarily a double dialectical equilibrium that fosters change on the one hand while it provides an energy conservation function to establish a stable equilibrium.

Evolution – About adapted cultures

Cultural adaptiveness is the central gravitational force that fosters expansion. It is homologous to institutional expansion processes. The core of the adaptive behavior is to make growth in an environment possible.

Cultural AdaptivenessThe unicist ontological structure of adaptiveness includes counterintuitive elements that make it difficult to apprehend because of the pre-concepts people have. The final purpose of cultural adaptiveness is to achieve growth using influence on the environment to produce it.

Over-adaptation works as a driver for cultural degradation but also as an energy conservation function in adaptive environments, a fact that can be considered counterintuitive. That is why over-adaptation can only be apprehended if it is experienced.

The final objective of adaptive behavior is to grow. It is self-evident that if a system grows it is because it appropriates more energy than the energy the system consumes.

This concept of growth needs to be understood in order to be able to differentiate the cost of things from their value. Value judgments need to be left aside in order to apprehend the concept of growth.

It is necessary to be adapted to an environment in order to manage the growth equation in an equilibrated way making an institution grow based on the added value and not only on the appropriated value.

Value adding differentiation requires the use of technology and innovation. That is why cultural adaptiveness drives naturally towards the development of technologies and the fostering of innovations.

It implies necessarily going beyond existing boundaries which is a basic characteristic of the actions that drive towards growth.

This requires necessarily knowing the scenario where the expansion is taking place, the possibilities the environment offers and their evolution. Adaptive growth requires having a future scenario of the context and not only being driven by reactive actions.

The educational system of a culture defines if the future generations are being prepared to adapt to the environment.

Dynamic Equilibrium: Learning to adapt

Dynamic equilibrium implies adapting to reality which implies a permanent accommodation process in order to generate the necessary complementation or supplementation with the environment.

Dinamic Learning ObjectsDynamic equilibrium 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.

See more: www.unicist.net/clipboard

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 the unicist double dialectical thinking. This approach allows apprehending 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.

Adaptiveness has naturally a high level of entropy. The level of entropy is high because it needs to work within a complex adaptive system where the needs of the institution or culture and its environment need to be integrated.

Institutions and cultures need to establish the system that defines their structure. It can be said that the basics of countries considered as adaptive systems are given by their constitutions and the basics of institutions are given by their visions.

Constitutions and visions are functional when they are consistent with their real archetypes. They produce the conditions for a structural over-adaptation when they are not consistent.

 

Involution avoidance – About over-adapted cultures

Involution is driven by the over-adaptation of a culture. Over-adaptive behavior hinders the possibility of the members of influencing an environment in an adaptive way.

Cultural AdaptivenessInvolutionary cultures are put into action by a survivors’ ethics that allows its members to survive within an environment they consider hostile. Over-adaptation is, by definition, a conflictive approach with the environment.

The cultures that are in an involution process need to deny it and transform the context into an enemy in order to be able to profit from the environment without needing to influence it by adding value.

The driver of over-adaptiveness is the submission to the myths and fallacious myths of a culture. While myths establish non-conscious rules for human behavior, fallacious myths are fallacies and utopias that are built to cover the weaknesses of a group or culture.

A culture becomes stagnated when it behaves in a fully submissive way. Involution is generated because the context evolves and the society stands still.

Dominating in order to profit from the environment is a natural behavior in stagnated cultures. Over-adaptation also requires eliminating all those who are different because they make the involution evident.

Conjunctural domination makes the societies feel that they are evolving. Domination is an attitude that is praised in these cultures.

The maximal strategy in involutionary cultures is to survive. Surviving is an extreme effort when a culture involves. That is why involution generates survivors. The paradox is that survivors cannot influence the environment to change the trend towards evolution.

The catalyst for cultural involving processes is given by the capacity of survivors to accumulate wealth and hold it.

That is why wealth in involving cultures needs to be tangible and controllable. Involving cultures do not believe in science and technology because they are abstract and cannot be held. Intellectual property is disregarded.

The educational system of a culture defines if the next generations are being limited in their adaptiveness or not.

Static Equilibrium: Teaching to over-adapt

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.

Static Learning ProcessDualistic 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 dialectics 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.

Growing from Over-adaptiveness to Adaptiveness

The change of a culture from an involutionary trend towards an evolutionary trend is generated by the upgrade of the level of ethics in a culture.

This requires the installation of a heroic leader in the society. This heroic leader is a sort of messiah and that is why involving cultures are always seeking for a messiah.

Because of their need to change the trend, the members of these societies buy from psychopathic leaders the promise that they will introduce the change. The result is the next degradation.

If a hero appears and makes the turnaround of an involution trend, s/he has to “disappear” after his/her work is finished in order to make the stabilization of the trend possible.

Involution is maintained when heroes remain in power and are only “the other side of the coin”.

The confrontation with adaptive cultures is the natural alternative when the way to expand towards an adaptive behavior is perceived as impossible.

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


A New Era of Egypt: The option between freedom and security

This is the synthesis of a unicist anthropological study on the Egyptian conflicts developed by Peter Belohlavek at The Unicist Research Institute.

Democratic Consensus

The reach of one’s globalization is defined
by the limit of the pronoun “WE”…

Considering the nature of cultures, the conflicts in Egypt are the consequence of an extreme confrontation between those who seek security and those who seek freedom.

Democracy implies consensus but consensus is only possible if the people share the same vital space and cooperate to build the community and there is a possibility for democratic alternation.

When positions become extreme there is no possibility of democratic alternation and democracy degrades into an anarchy which drives necessarily towards authoritarian solutions.

Understanding how the entropy of democratic processes is produced, what democracy is about and the cultural invariables will help to put the conflicts into perspective.

The entropy of democratic processes

Political extremisms are fostered when politicians need their role as a “profession”. In this case, in each “election”, whatever the system, politicians´ survival is at risk.

Social anarchic-individualistic answers of the members of a culture are fostered when their survival is endangered.

Societies become extremely influenced by their religious beliefs when the values of the culture are endangered.

Societies use armed forces when their vital space is endangered. Having a country’s vital space endangered does not necessarily imply being invaded. Shared beliefs of a vital space threat provoke military solutions.

About Democracy

Democracy can be described as the authoritative leadership of a group or community achieving consensus and efficiency, and making the necessary trade-offs in a context of evolution conflicts.

The concept of democracy can also be described from a participant’s point of view. In this case, the purpose to be achieved is efficiency, and consensus is a procedure to be used to make it possible.

The ethic of democracy – extreme democracy

Consensus is the purpose of democracy. Consensus can be achieved in many ways. Considering extreme-democracy, where consensus is achieved “spuriously”, the Stockholm syndrome can be defined as a type of democracy. It is what we call the anti-democracy. It achieves the same purpose, consensus, but based on the destruction of the free-will of participants.

DemocracyFour types of democracy can be conceptually defined:

Individualistic democracy – interest-based submissive model

The goal is to foster individual evolution based on a materialistic submissive behavior of the members of the community.

Belonging group-based democracy

This is grounded on the adherence of people to a group. The goal is to evolve within the rules of a group. Consensus is given by the acceptance of the rules.

Elite-based democracy

It is based on the possibility, open to everyone, to debate the problems of a society. The existence of elites ensures the necessary stability given by an accepted establishment.

Integration-based democracy

The integration-based democracy implies an institutionalization that structures the integration. Institutions filter the incompatibilities and permit a smooth evolution towards efficient consensus. Fundamentalism is incompatible with democracy.

The Cross Cultural Invariables drive cultural evolution

The discovery of the unicist cross-cultural invariables was necessary to understand humanity in its oneness in order to develop reliable global scenarios.

Unicist Cross-cultural InvariablesThe invariables discovered were Expansion and Contraction which work as alternatives at an operational level and Security and Freedom that work as trade-offs. The gain of freedom implies losing security and vice-versa.

The myths of societies, being they functional of fallacious, provide the security framework of a culture while the utopias foster actions and establish the structure of cultural freedom.

The expansion of societies is driven by the allowances (permissions) of the collective unconscious and contraction is sustained by the collective unconscious mandates. Both aspects are taboos in a society.

These invariables, integrated following the logic of the unicist ontogenetic intelligence of nature, define the essential structure that defines the archetype of a culture.

Every culture has its own myths, utopias and taboos that define its archetype that underlies its ideological and economic models. The archetype of a culture cannot be judged. It needs to be respected.

Conclusion

Egypt is an extremely young country, based on an ancient culture, which suffered several institutional breakthroughs in its history.

This time, there will probably be extreme conflicts in Egypt until the different parts are able to upgrade their positions to achieve an adequate level of compatibility that allows for democratic alternation.

The conflicts will become more violent if fundamentalist approaches prevail and will drive to solutions when all the parts agree that trade-offs need to be made.

This process is homologous to the process of dealing with incompatible solutions at a personal level. It might help to understand the conflicts in Egypt. http://www.unicist.org/deb_uqm.php

If you want to access more information about this study please contact n.i.brown@unicist.org

Unicist Press Committee

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


The problem of leading cultures and surviving cultures

The problem of the new generations of leading cultures is naturally the feeling of inferiority complexes to overcome the existing culture if they are in a leading environment.

Generational-EvolutionIndividuals have two alternatives: build upon the existing establishment or compete with it. Competition drives adolescents to guilt and the response requires needing to hate the situation and the individuals involved in it.

The paradox is that building upon an existing environment is also a competition. Building upon an establishment implies modifying the structure of the implicit weaknesses of a culture. This is something feasible for the next generation unless it was educated in an individualistic environment.

It has to be considered that individualism is the most degraded state of a culture. It implies that the interests of individuals prevail over the interests of the group.

A culture involves when individualism prevails. Surviving cultures include necessarily a dominant individualism. This is not the case of subsistent cultures where the group prevails over individuals. Surviving cultures produce survivors who necessarily are multi-addictive and need to behave as fundamentalists.

Evolution implies paying prices

Accepting the validity of the establishment is a condition for evolution.

Over-adaptation to the establishment implies its sanctification, and drives to the avoidance of the responsibility of improving the environment.

Cultures that foster rebel individualistic behaviors necessarily generate involution. Both over-adaptation and individualistic rebellion drive to involution.

Evolution implies competing with the establishment improving what has been received in order to ensure evolution and create an own place in order to satisfy the personal needs.

The first part, the improvement of what has been received is a work with a social responsibility, the second part deals with the ego of the person who has assumed the responsibility.

A culture is in involution if individuals begin with their own egocentric desires. In both extremes, leading cultures and surviving cultures, addictions of any kind become a natural response.

Guilt liberators produce paradoxical results when they sustain their clients by “insufflating air” into their clients’ ego.

It is up to you. The prices to be paid are never low. You must believe in your capacity and see the implicit weaknesses of what you inherited.

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


Brazilian Archetype: describing the power of a global leader

Brazil is a world in itself. There is no other country in the world following the rules of the game that Brazil uses, nor portraying its results in the social, economic and political field.

The Unicist Archetype of BrazilIts orientation towards the future, the added value work as a way to assert people’s identity, its innovation and nationalism are components that integrate in light of a national project inserted in the culture, executed by the State and managed by politicians.

Consensus as a model

Brazil has a culture that operates on the basis of consensus. This generates, within the social, institutional and individual field a need to understand a reality before taking up a position regarding it.

Likewise, in Brazilian-Portuguese language there are several expressions that help avoid the usage of the first person singular in a conversation.

Brazilan ArchetypeThe Brazilian consensus model presupposes the development of a singular negotiating capacity regulated by negotiation rules that obviously include consensus as a goal, though not as a path.

The development of this negotiating capacity, based on a culture that came over to colonize rather than predate, generated what today is a world power, real to many, incipient to others.

This implied the end of economic, military or narco-terrorism. The end as far as social legitimacy goes, though not in real terms, for there will always be terrorists who, being marginal, would rather have destruction than acceptance of their own marginality.

This social behavior is based on expansion as a main objective. The creativity to accomplish this allows Brazil a dosage of “marginal” behavior, basis of both academic and technological innovation which is felt today and which was dreamed of 50 years ago.

Social Capital

A country’s development is set by its social capital, political consistency or stability and economic growth.

Out of these three elements, the one that bears most weight is social capital, then comes political stability and last, the necessary, though of least relative weight, economic growth.

Brazil is characterized by its immense social capital if compared with that of other countries in the region, and if compared with those other countries Brazil competes with.

Its difference is outstanding in the region; Brazil has a slightly smaller social capital than the one in developed countries. Society conceives itself as a community.

This community feeling makes the notorious synergy there is among institutions and people possible, while it works as a significant support to political stability and economic growth.

Orientation towards the future

What characterizes Brazil is its orientation toward the future and its great capacity to pay for the price of mistakes.

There are many study centers in this country that are devoted to developing projects, action plans and forecasts of what lies ahead.

This is completely atypical in Latin America, that is why one can say that Brazil is a continent in itself, with own values and a path different from that of the region.

It grows because of its consistent investment in an academic technology model of its own, an acceptance of diversity and an “expansion compulsion”. There is room for everyone in Brazil as long as the rules of the game are abided.

One of the best diplomacies in the world

Brazil is a power with a very strong collective unconsciousness that consolidates in an identity that goes beyond political ideologies.

Consensus to grow is their primary objective, their second objective is to grow, and their third as well. Brazilian culture does not conceive the idea of being worse today than it was the day before.

That is why Brazilians “go crazy” in light of their defeats. Diplomacy, the mechanism to influence outside Brazil in order to uphold such a growth, is settled, and carries a political, commercial and social sense comparable to those of the best diplomacies in the world.

Diplomacy is its main tool to create, almost imperceptibly, a legitimated hegemony in its capacities.

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using a logical approach to deal with evolution and became a private global decentralized world-class research organization in the field of human adaptive systems.  http://www.unicist.org


Elections 2012: Analogy between the US and the Roman Empire

It is known and accepted that the Roman Empire and the USA are homologous in many aspects. The 2012 election process brought about some of the homologies between both cultures.

It is evident that the Roman Empire declined when the democracy weakened and it became ruled by military power.

Was it that way? Or did the democracy lose its efficiency and transformed the culture into an extreme individualistic and anarchic society that generated militarization as an antidote?

The answer to this question is very important to apprehend the evolution of influential cultures.

The 2012 election in the US established a new starting point that is, at the same time, a turning point. A battle between archetypes is taking place. There are two extreme possibilities:

  1. Whether the society splits into two incompatible positions with the consequent extreme individualism.
  2. Or the society accepts that this is a new starting point where a new “New Deal” is defined.

Nowadays there are too many members who consider that dividing is better than multiplying.

“President Obama won re-election against rival Mitt Romney. That’s the big news, but the other story is how Americans voted. That part is still being reviewed and final statistics are not yet finished, but exit polling shows a confused picture.

The big talking point is that President Obama won Blacks, Hispanics, and women. Mitt Romney won men, particularly White men. The margin of victory based on race is extreme. Blacks voted for President Obama some 93%, Hispanics fell in line with 71% support, and women provided 55%. Asians also had high support numbers for President Obama with 73% of the vote.

This brings up an interesting thought. Race is the taboo subject of politics. It can’t be brought up (as least not by Republicans or Conservatives) but it was a defining force in 2008.”
http://www.examiner.com/article/early-2012-national-election-vote-breakdown

If we consider that the US archetype is extremely strong, it survived the secession war, a new “New Deal” can be expected.

The price to be paid is a transition in the context of a global change that is happening.

Access a synthesis on the “Discovery of the Unicist Ontology of Institutional and Cultural Adaptiveness” that is available at the Scientific Dissemination Program. You will find there other syntheses that might be of your interest: http://www.unicist-school.org/future-research/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/ontology_cultural_adaptiveness-1.pdf

Peter Belohlavek

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


Unicist Anthropology for Country Future Research

The R&D e-book on Unicist Anthropology by Peter Belohlavek has been published and is included in the Unicist Standard – Country Future Research Search Engine. It provides the necessary information to develop both global and local strategies dealing with Countries and their Markets.

Unicist Anthropology is the description of human social behavior and evolution based on the implicit rules of the ontogenetic intelligence of nature that rule human social action. Unicist anthropology describes the ontology of human social behavior.

Social behavior establishes the context of individual behavior. Therefore it limits, catalyzes and inhibits actions and works as a dominant gravitational force in individual behavior. Those who do not respect the rules implicit in a society are marginalized, expelled or eliminated by the society.

The research on the ontology of human behavior drove to the discovery of the cultural invariables. These invariables were identified as a double dialectical behavior between polarities. These polarities are freedom vs. security and expansion vs. contraction.

Unicist anthropology approaches human behavior based on its essential drivers which are the taboos of a society that “hide” the expansion and contraction of cultures, the myths that provide the security framework and the utopias that provide the drivers for action and, therefore, for evolution.

Access the unicist standard contained in the Unicist Standard Search Engine: http://www.unicist.com/

Request more information: n.i.brown@unicist.org

Unicist Press Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,000 researches in complexity science applied to individual, institutional and social evolution. The applicative researches are based on the discovery of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature and the consequent Unicist Theory of Evolution.


Unicist Future Research: The Archetype of Germany

We invite you to apprehend the nature of German’s archetype. But consider that it is necessary to avoid comparisons with other cultures.

“The reach of one’s globalization is defined
by the limit of the pronoun WE.”

If you are interested in understanding the German archetype we recommend watching the following videos.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aDJpE_GAgA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npNnme68nKI

Access the information on the unicist ontology of economic behavior at: http://www.unicist-school.org/future-research/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/ontology_economy_en-1.pdf

Only if the culture is within the limits of your “WE” you will be able to perceive aspects of the German archetype.

Next week you will have access to the essential aspects of the German culture on this blog.

Access the unicist standard contained in the Unicist Business Search Engine: http://www.unicist.com/

Request more information: n.i.brown@unicist.org

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,000 researches in complexity science applied to individual, institutional and social evolution. The applicative researches are based on the discovery of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature and the consequent Unicist Theory of Evolution.

Unicist Strategy

If you would like to receive monthly information on this blog, please register here.

Follow us on twitter


The Power of Nations is defined by their Unicist Archetypes

Country archetypes emulate the functionality of the ontogenetic intelligence of nature and evolve following the rules of the unicist theory of evolution.

Cultural archetypes define the power of a culture and the ethics and gravitational forces the culture uses to sustain that power. Power is defined in physics as the amount of work done or energy converted per unit of time. Cultural power is the capacity a country has to make things happen. Power implies a measure of speed.

The purpose of a unicista country archetype is to sustain and build power to influence the environment its active function is the ethics of the culture and its energy conservation function is the gravitational force the culture uses to ensure the minimum strategies.

This explains the different influences of countries and the difference in the development of countries. We have defined 4 different functional levels of archetypes that produce different amount of power for their countries.

  1. Surviving
  2. Subsistent
  3. Expansive
  4. Influential

The Unicist Archetypes are used to understand cultures in order to deal with them.

See a synthetic description of some Unicist Archetypes:

Japan: http://www.theoryofevolution.net/blog/the-unicist-archetype-of-japan/

USA: http://www.theoryofevolution.net/blog/unicist-future-research-the-archetype-of-the-usa/

China: http://www.theoryofevolution.net/blog/understanding-cultures-the-archetype-of-china

Soon there will be published a book named: The Power of Nations that allows categorizing the different structural segments in order to deal with them properly. This knowledge is necessary to work within the limits of Sustainable Globalization.

Access the unicist standard contained in the Unicist Business Search Engine: http://www.unicist.com/

Request more information: n.i.brown@unicist.org

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,000 researches in complexity science applied to individual, institutional and social evolution. The applicative researches are based on the discovery of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature and the consequent Unicist Theory of Evolution.

Unicist Strategy

If you would like to receive monthly information on this blog, please register here.

Follow us on twitter