Future Research

The Unicist Archetype of Argentina

June 29, 2024 in Uncategorized tagged Countries evolution / Future Research / Peter Belohlavek / The Unicist Research Institute by Unicist-Master

The Argentine Archetype is in Transition

Developed countries are such because they have a dominant, functional, and powerful archetype that defines their culture and drives their actions. New countries are in transition until a functional archetype is installed. Installed implies that this new functional archetype is in the collective unconscious and is managed by the establishment of the culture.

Transitions may last decades or centuries. It depends on the development of the power of the Nation, which necessarily includes the existence of the power of its establishment.

The unicist approach defines an establishment as the elite that assumes responsibility for the evolution of the masses and the middle class.

The middle class of a country sustains the mass providing the possibilities of social mobility. To ascend, the members of the masses need to become elite in their field until they are established as members of the middle class.

About the establishment of cultures

Unicist establishment and social structure

In a transition, the establishment of the culture does not assume the responsibility for the wellbeing of the culture. In this case, the establishment is replaced by the government that assumes the responsibility for the well-being. But this produces a loss of the power of the State. The power of a State is proportional to the power of the establishment.

In democratic countries, Governments represent the evolution and States represent their Archetypes. When there is no dominant, functional, and powerful archetype there is no possibility for a State to be strong. At the same time, the elite is illegitimate for not representing the interests of the population and the culture involved.

When transitions come to an end

Transitions end when a dominant establishment assumes the responsibility of being the “elite”, the State functions within the limits of the archetype and the transition of governments happens without absolute ideological breakthroughs.

We can mention several countries that, more and less recently, overcame a transition: Sweden, Spain, Finland, Chile, and Brazil. We can also mention that most of the countries of the so-called “3^rd World” are still in transition.

The Archetype of Argentina

Argentina is a country with enormous natural resources and an exceptional climate to provide natural goods all over the world. Argentina’s Archetype can only be understood if this condition has been apprehended and read in all its consequences.

The other notorious aspect of the Argentine culture is the intelligence of its citizens. Argentines have perhaps one of the highest levels of individual intelligence in the Western World.

This integration of abundance and individual intelligence within a context of transition are the operational drivers of the Argentine archetype that is, and has been for many years, in transition seeking for an establishment that assumes the responsibility for the Argentine evolution.

Thus naturally the archetype is based on taking advantage of the abundance and this produces a difficulty of sharing the evolution with the whole society. Individual intelligence prevails.

There is a substitute for this lack of establishment which is the government: Governments intend to distribute what the members of the society do not.

Argentine Maximal Strategy

The maximal strategy of the Argentine archetype is to take advantage of its natural resources and generate value for the individuals who live in Argentina. Thus Argentina is naturally positioned in a low cost strategy that allows conquering the world markets based on the competitive advantage of its natural resources.

Natural resources, as the central economic power, sustain the rest of the economy.

Although there is an extremely powerful reservoir of intelligence, this has not been empowered yet in terms of work and is basically focused on aspects where Argentina is a leading country in the world: art, design, music, theatre, literature, etc.

Argentina Minimum strategy

The minimum strategy is that every individual of the country has the possibility of avoiding poverty and being able to survive the periodic crises produced by the transition state.

Minimum strategy allows the development of an extremely powerful “individual entrepreneurial” activity that provides employment to most of the population.

The surviving intelligence developed in Argentina based on the crises produced by the transition provokes an extreme capacity to adapt instantaneously to changes and, but the same time, this inhibits planning.

Synthesis

The Unicist Archetype of Argentina is an interplay of natural abundance, high individual intelligence, and an ongoing state of transitional governance. This archetype reflects a combination of unique cultural, economic, and societal traits that define the nation’s collective behavior and developmental strategy.

Natural Abundance and Intelligence: Argentina is characterized by its significant natural resources and a climate favorable for agricultural production, positioning it as a potential agricultural powerhouse. This abundance, coupled with the high individual intelligence of its citizens, suggests a strong foundation for economic growth and global influence.
Transition and Governance: The concept of Argentina being in a perpetual state of transition with an unstable establishment reflects ongoing challenges in governance. This condition leads to a reliance on government intervention to redistribute resources, potentially stifling individual initiative and long-term planning.
Maximal and Minimal Strategies:
- Maximal Strategy: Leveraging natural resources for global economic integration while fostering value creation within the country aligns with a low-cost competitive strategy.
- Minimum Strategy: Focusing on individual survival and resilience in response to recurrent crises highlights the adaptability of Argentines but also underscores a reactive rather than proactive approach to economic stability.

You can learn how to manage Argentina’s archetype by using the Multilingual Unicist Virtual Researcher

The Unicist Research Institute

Elections in France: The Future of the European Union

April 8, 2022 in The Unicist Research Institute tagged Elections in France 2022 / Future Research / Social Scenario / The Future of the European Union / Unicist Evolutionary Approach by The Unicist Research Institute

The elections in France are a significant proof of the evolution of the European Union. The consolidation of the EU by the “Euro” requires the existence of the concept of European culture, that is still subject to acceptance. It implies the existence of a European archetype, which is still a matter of discussion. Understanding the functionality of ideologies helps to understand the long-term consequences of the elections in France.

Ideologies only exist in the mind of people

Ideologies are sets of beliefs that use a specific technology to satisfy their interests, which in turn confirm such beliefs.

They are ideas and, as such, they are useful and generate a social functionality when they are applied in some way. They are part of the ethics of a culture, group or individual. As ideologies in themselves they do not exist but in the mind of the ideologist.

Ideologies work as the immanent truth that individuals use to have a secure framework for their actions. Ideologies derive from the senses. This means they are not part of a metaphysical approach to reality.

They are influenced by the senses and senses are sensitive to the needs of the individuals.

Therefore, it can be said that the ideologies respond to the needs of individuals. They establish the political framework that allows the development of consensus in a society.

Absolute Ideologies

As it was said, Ideologies are sets of beliefs that use a specific technology to satisfy their interests, which in turn confirm such beliefs.

Ideologies are a homeostatic element, which ensures that the activity carried out by a social group will not deviate from its real purpose. In other words, ideology is what supports a culture’s archetype.

Ideologies are based on specific technologies and, (paradoxically) evolve when technologies change. Thus, the driver of change in ideologies is the change of technologies. Every qualitative change of a technology results in a modification of an ideology.

If we look at the birth of ideologies such as Feudalism or Marxism, we will irrefutably confirm that they are the consequence of the leading technologies of the times. Every observable situation is supported by an underlying ideology. Ideology is the homeostatic element of culture because it balances the ethics ruling the context.

There are absolute and relative ideologies. A social group achieves stability when its democratic spirit is so advanced that many different ideologies can co-exist. If this happens, we are in the presence of “soft ideologies”, which adapt to others without losing their identity.

Absolute ideologies normally perceive relative ideologies as absolute and opposed. As an ideology establishes standards of acceptable behavior for its specific social environment, it is in itself a structure which integrates and shields its advocates.

Peter Belohlavek
The Unicist Research Institute

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute has been, since 1976, the world-leading research organization that introduced the functionalist approach to science to manage the functionality of the real world. www.unicist.org

The Crisis of Ukraine – A Functionalist Approach to Scenario Building

February 25, 2022 in A) Country Archetypes & Scenarios / Future Research Lab / The Unicist Research Institute tagged Countries evolution / Future Research / Peter Belohlavek / Social Scenario / The Unicist Research Institute / Ukrainian Archetype / Unicist Future Research Lab by Unicist-Master

Ukraine has basically evolved in a transition stage for centuries. Transition stages are such when there is more than one cultural nucleus seeking dominance in a culture. Transition stages drive naturally towards a need to survive to avoid being submitted to alien values.

In Ukraine there are now two different cultures in conflict. Now, this conflict assumed the extreme state of war, which in fact is the consequence of external interests that are associated with one of the archetypes of the population of Ukraine.

When there is a transition stage, the dominant values that ensure survival are individualism and materialism, which generate social dysfunctional behaviors. Dysfunctionality is always hidden behind fallacious cultural myths that avoid the perception of being endangered.

The chaos produced by war might generate three different consequences that cannot be predicted, because there is chaos, the influential forces are unclear, and there is an actual conflict of archetypes:

Access

Solving the problem of the internal cultural dispute.
Generating an excision of the country
Degradation of the culture to a deeper survival stage without solving the conflict.

A social mutation is produced when the functionality of a social entity has been lost, and there is the necessary available energy to generate a change.

The values of cultures are implicit in the values of their elites. Therefore, the understanding of the archetype of a culture implies researching the evolution of their establishment and the facts that were produced.

If you enter deeply in the history of a country, which is the way to try to discover the nature of a culture defined by its archetype, you will see that most of the changes happen at an operational level and not at a structural level.

But you can find turning points in culture like the one that was produced in Sweden more than 100 years ago. It might or not be the case of Ukraine. It fully depends on its establishment.

Peter Belohlavek

Religious Democracies: Understanding Afghanistan and other Countries

August 17, 2021 in Future Research Lab / The Unicist Research Institute tagged Countries evolution / Future Research / Religious Democracies / Social Scenario / Understanding Afghanistan / Unicist Functionalist Approach / Unicist Future Research Lab by Peter Belohlavek

The chaos generated in Afghanistan in August 2021, is a demonstration that there are cultures where there is a concept of religious democracy that differs totally from the concept of democracy of the developed counties of the West.

Religious democracy is a special case that refers to cultures or institutions that are centrally ruled by their religious beliefs. Their functionality does not deal with the social, economic and political aspects but with the transcendent, moral and political aspects.

The purpose of a religious democracy is to sustain the supernatural and natural transcendence of the members of a society. This transcendence is materialized in the morality of the members. The role of its political democracy is to ensure that the morality of the actions drives towards transcendence.

This implies that social democracy is implicit in the attitude towards transcendence and the economic scenario is acted out by the moral-driven actions of a community.

Their Functional Drivers

The driver of a religious democracy is to foster the supernatural transcendence of the members of a culture. This driver makes individual actions become extremely powerful because of the need to fulfill the religious beliefs to achieve this goal.

The supernatural transcendence implies a personal transcendence for those individuals who participate and the recognition of the community, which allows individuals to achieve a transcendent role integrating the supernatural, the personal and the social transcendence.

This fulfills the need of all members of a religious democracy and allows managing the transcendence in the materialistic world following the rules of morality that are implicit.

Religious fundamentalism becomes necessary when religious democracy cannot satisfy the immanent needs of a culture. It drives the culture beyond materialistic needs to provide a superior level of satisfaction. Learn more:
https://www.amazon.com/-/en/gp/product/B00UVRQ6KA/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i8

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute (TURI) is a world leader in its segment. Since 1976, it has been specialized in complexity sciences applied to the research on the roots of evolution and its application to social, institutional, business and individual evolution.

Unicist Approach: What drives the evolution of cultures?

March 5, 2018 in D) Unicist Future Research / The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Cobots tagged Countries evolution / Country Archetypes / Future Research / Intelligent Systems / Peter Belohlavek / Social Scenario / unicist anthropology / Unicist Confederation / Unicist Corporate University / Unicist Evolutionary Approach / Unicist Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature / Unicist Theory of Evolution by Unicist Press Committee

The unicist approach defines that the driver of cultural evolution processes is the adaptation of a culture. This adaptation implies that a democratic attitude prevails, providing the necessary consensus to have social cohesion, being driven by a social efficiency, and making the necessary trade offs to maintain an efficient consensus.

The consensus of an evolutionary culture is oriented towards growth, which implies having a proactive attitude in the environment to generate value. Social efficiency means that the system is institutionalized having therefore a minimum level of entropy.

This institutionalization is materialized in the habits and in the myths and fallacious myths installed in a culture.

Trade-offs are implicitly conflicts and generate crises.

On the one hand, they can be evolution conflicts when they happen within the limits of efficiency and the value earning behavior. Or they can be involution conflicts, on the other hand, when the goal of these trade-offs is “buying” consensus. In this case the culture enters a conjunctural involution which naturally eliminates the leaders that made this trade-offs if the value adding ethics prevails in the institutions.

If this is not the case, and a survivors’ ethics becomes necessary for the institutions, the culture will have entered into an over-adaptive behavior driving the culture towards involution.

The maximal strategy of evolutionary cultures is sustained by their value adding ethics. This implies that the leaders of the dominant segments have a level of consciousness that allows them to be aware of the social processes and the long term consequences of the decisions that are made.

Social evolution requires participative processes within an authoritative environment that does not require the exertion of power to be efficient.

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.

The use of dualistic logic to deal with the here and now

January 29, 2016 in The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Cobots tagged dualistic logic / Future Research / Intelligent Systems / Social Evolution / The Unicist Research Institute / unicist approach / Unicist Confederation / Unicist Corporate University / unicist double dialectical approach / Unicist Evolutionary Approach by Peter Belohlavek

While the unicist double dialectical approach requires investing energy to apprehend the nature of reality, dualism provides the most energy saving approach to manage the “here and now”.

The dualistic logic implies using Hegel`s or Marx`s dialectics. This use has a specific functionality in order to allow dealing with aspects that require an operational approach to deal with the here and now.

It allows accepting “absolutes” in order to separate what is true from what is false. This gives dualistic thinkers the perception of inner freedom while they move within the boundaries of the absolute.

Dualistic thinking also allows avoiding uncertainty. Uncertainty is an unbearable feeling for people that forces them to use dualism to analyze reality until they are able to eliminate the uncertainty from the environment.

It has to be considered that while analysis requires the use of a dualistic logic, synthesis requires the use of unicist double dialectical logic.

The energy conservation functionality of a dualistic logic is given by its capacity to avoid ambiguity. It provides a spontaneous solution that confirms the “absolute” individuals have in their mind.

It has to be considered that dualistic thinkers cannot infer the future and need to forecast it using any kind of extrapolation. This implies assuming that the past and the future are symmetric which is “an aprioristic” fallacy.

Peter Belohlavek

Future Research: The Nature of Economic Freedom

September 21, 2015 in A) Country Archetypes & Scenarios / D) Unicist Future Research / E) Structural Conflicts / The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Cobots / Unicist Functional Design tagged Conceptual Economy / Country Future Research / Future Research / Social Scenario / The Unicist Research Institute / unicist anthropology / Unicist Confederation / Unicist Evolutionary Approach / Unicist Future Research Lab / Unicist Logical Approach / Unicist Theory of Evolution by Unicist Future Research Lab

This work deals with the conceptual structure of economic freedom and its integration with economic democracy. It includes no ideological considerations or influence. It is based on the unicist approach to complexity science, which uses a pragmatic, structural and functionalist framework.

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

There are prejudices and fallacious myths installed in the world dealing with the concept of economic freedom.

Unfortunately, no literature could be found that approached economic freedom based on its concept to define its nature (the “stem cell” of economic freedom).

The existing approaches are strongly influenced by ideological positions.

This introduction, based on an excerpt from the book “The Future of Democracy and Capitalism” by Peter Belohlavek, provides a conceptual approach to capitalism, going beyond the beliefs deposited on facts by people to understand the nature and dynamics that define the present and future of Capitalism.

It can be said that Greece was the origin of political democracy in the West but was not an economic democracy because in those times the expansion of cultures was driven by military actions.

It can also be said that the United States of America are a paradigmatic example of evolutionary democracy that integrates social democracy, economic democracy and political democracy to manage the domestic affairs.

As an evolutionary democracy, the United States of America could be taken as a paradigmatic example of Economic Freedom and Capitalism. But Economic Freedom and Capitalism cannot be imported or exported. The unique structure of values that are implicit in a culture’s archetype are the demonstration that it is meaningless to copy any model to a foreign culture that has different structural values.

The understanding of the nature of economic democracy and capitalism allow defining the particular way in which a country can deal with economics and economic democracy considering its own characteristics.

This complete document includes:

Economic Democracy Ethics
The Structure of Capitalism
The Nature of Justice: The Catalyst and Entropy Inhibitor of Capitalism
The Future of Capitalism
Annex 1: The Nature of Economic Democracy
Annex 2: Corruption: The Anti-concept of Capitalism

Economic Democracy Ethics

Ethics defines the accepted rules of an environment. These rules satisfy the functional needs, the morality that is accepted in the environment and the ideology that underlies this ethics.

In the economic democracy, we have structured the four basic ethics that are accepted as existent:

The Statism
The Protectionism / Dirigisme
The Pre-capitalism
The Capitalism

The ontogenesis of these ethics is homologous to the phylogeny of the human growth processes. This is to say that Statism implies the childhood of economic behavior, protectionism / dirigisme is its adolescence, Pre-capitalism is its youth and Capitalism is its maturity.

Anarchy is the stage previous to these ethics. It implies that individuals develop their economic activities eluding the rules of the environment.

Statism

Economic Statism is based on using the drivers of rational morality to guide economic actions. As economic or materialistic behaviors belong to the field of individualistic attitudes, Statism necessarily needs to make others responsible for the results to be achieved.

It is a low productivity economic ethics, in which the fulfillment of the established rules prevails over the achievement of results. Statism installs economic behavior in the rules of childhood, which means that the “family” prevails over the individual desires. It achieves a superior level of productivity in environments that have a superior ethics driven collective intelligence and are highly disciplined.

This is not the case when dealing with the social aspects of Statism. Statism in economic behavior requires authoritarian dirigisme in order to define what needs to be done and is driven by the need to make people align in an environment where the property belongs to others.

Protectionism / Dirigisme

Economic protectionism / dirigisme is based on installing autonomous entities that live based on the exchange with other protected entities in order to survive and provide adequate living conditions for the members.

Protectionism is a typical adolescent organization that corresponds to an economic stage where the environment has not been organized as a democratic entity.

It is based on the self-sufficiency of the productive entities that cannot deal in an adapted way with the environment because the control on their protected organization prevails over the productivity that can be achieved.

As there is a need to be self-sufficient, there is no possibility of introducing innovations or adapting to the change of the external environment. Their productivity suffices for survival and their horizon is limited to the reality of their “private” entity. Economic protectionism achieves a superior level of productivity when it is driven by a superior ethics driven ideology.

Pre-capitalism

The economic pre-capitalism ethics implies that private property prevails over any other consideration in economic behavior.

Pre-capitalism implies, on the one hand, that the private initiative should prevail over governmental or State interventions and that all that hinders economic freewill is dysfunctional.

It is naturally the capitalist logic of non-democratic environments and, paradoxically, it represents the prejudices that non-democratic and non-developed countries have about capitalism.

Pre-capitalism is homologous to the behavior in youth where the voluntarism, omnipotence and energy prevail over a rational use of resources. It is a typical model for primary industry driven countries that have not known the meaning of a true democracy.

The productivity of pre-capitalism is based on the power of transferring costs to the participants of the economic activity.

Capitalism

Capitalism is the ethics that corresponds to a superior economic democracy, which is natural in democratic countries and not natural in countries that are developing towards a democratic environment.

Economic capitalism implies, on the one hand, the existence of a social economy where the society participates in the ownership of the productive entities through the stock market and, on the other hand, the existence of a newcomer’s place in which pre-capitalist rules apply within the general rules of capitalism

Capitalism is sustained by justice, which is the catalyst and entropy inhibitor of the system. Without a functional judicial system, capitalism degrades towards a pre-capitalist ethics.

The level of productivity in capitalism is catalyzed by the need to integrate shareholders and clients within the entities. Thus, those who achieve an adequate level of productivity succeed and those who do not, disappear.

The educational system is the driver to provide the necessary resources for R&D to maintain the competition at a superior level.

Unicist Future Research Lab

The Unicist Approach to Future Research

June 22, 2015 in D) Unicist Future Research / The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Cobots tagged Conceptual Anthropology / Conceptual Economy / Countries evolution / Country Archetypes / Country Future Research / Future Research / Institutional Evolution / Intelligent Systems / Social Scenario / Unicist Evolutionary Approach / Unicist Future Research Lab / Unicist Theory of Evolution by Peter Belohlavek

The unicist approach to future research is based on knowing the nature of an environment that is found in its past and using the data of the present to infer the future based on the knowledge of the evolution laws.

This approach is based on the fact that future and past are not symmetric. This is the case of all the environments that are evolving or involving. The past and the future are only symmetric in stagnated environments.

The Unicist Approach to Future Research is based on the research of the unicist ontogenetic intelligence of nature that started at the beginning of the 80’s. It was developed at The Unicist Research Institute.

It was a step by step discovery based on the apprehension of the nature of social phenomena entering afterwards in the institutional and individual evolution. Its integration with biology and physics was the final stage that was achieved.

The objective of the unicist approach to future research is to define a future scenario in order to adapt and influence it.

When an individual “looks back” at the history, the events that occurred are reasonable, understandable and logical. Therefore when approaching the future what is required is having the “logic” that is evident when analyzing the events of the past.

The building of future scenarios is based on the fact that the structure of the unicist ontology of a specific environment needs to be found in the past and that the facts of the present are used to infer the future.

The unicist approach to future research is based on inferring the future based on the laws of evolution established by the ontogenetic intelligence of nature, which allowed developing the unicist ontology of evolution.

This allows building reliable future scenarios.

The Unicist Ontology of Cultural Evolution

Introduction

The members of a culture that is evolving naturally accept that they might be involving. This concern is what avoids their involution.

The dominant ethics defines the evolution of a culture and defines its attitude towards influencing the environment. A culture is evolving when it has the capacity to adapt to the environment, meaning that it is able to influence it while it is being influenced.

This implies that the dominant cultural segments and the elite of the culture have a spontaneous attitude towards influencing the environment to generate growth.

As the habits of a culture evolve driven by the dominant ethics, an evolutionary culture evolves when the ethics of value adding prevails and the value earning ethics is the energy conservation function of the culture.

The synthesis

The driver of cultural evolution processes is the adaptation of a culture. This adaptation implies that a democratic attitude prevails, providing the necessary consensus to have social cohesion, being driven by a social efficiency, and making the necessary trade offs to maintain an efficient consensus.

This institutionalization is materialized in the habits and in the myths and fallacious myths installed in a culture.

Trade-offs are implicitly conflicts and generate crises.

In this case the culture enters a conjunctural involution which naturally eliminates the leaders that made this trade-offs if the value adding ethics prevails in the institutions.

If this is not the case, and a survivors’ ethics becomes necessary for the institutions, the culture will have entered into an over-adaptive behavior driving the culture towards involution.

The maximal strategy of evolutionary cultures is sustained by their value adding ethics.

This implies that the leaders of the dominant segments have a level of consciousness that allows them to be aware of the social processes and the long term consequences of the decisions that are made.

Social evolution requires participative processes within an authoritative environment that does not require the exertion of power to be efficient.

The catalyst of the evolution of a culture is given by the value earning behavior which includes a conscious value adding process.

This conscious value adding process is what accelerates the processes of the minimum strategy in order to sustain the adaptive behavior and the evolution of a culture.

The minimum strategy is based on a value earning behavior in order to ensure the wellbeing of a society.

The entropy inhibitor of this value earning process is given by the survivor ethics behavior of the members which ensures the wellbeing of the members of the society.

Levels of cultural evolution

The stability of the evolution of a culture depends on the attitudes of the culture. The spontaneous behaviors of the members of a culture are: Work driven behavior, Education driven behavior, Institution driven behavior, Technology driven behavior.

1) Work driven behavior

It is defined by the “purpose of life” of the members of a culture. Work driven cultures are those where pastime activities are only valid if the duties of work have been fulfilled. People feel guilt if they cannot do “their” work.

2) Education driven behavior

It includes a work driven attitude. The role of the members of a society depends on the educational level of its members. In this case, the central role of families, the introduction of the new generation in the society, is ensuring that they an education that allows them to overcome the level of their parents.

3) Institution driven behavior

It includes the education driven attitude. In these societies the behavior of the members is subordinated to the rules of institutions. Institutional behavior prevails over individualistic attitudes.

Freewill has the place established by institutional rules which have been established in a democratic way. The roles of the members are within the limits of the roles of the institutions.

4) Technology driven behavior

It includes the institutions driven attitude. As technology is the driver for growth, this requires that the members of the dominant segments of a culture need to be technology oriented.

This technology orientation implies seeking for new ways to produce more with less. This attitude fosters growth and drives towards permanent changes in order to upgrade the possibilities of a culture.

The capacity to generate or use innovative behaviors establishes the roles of the members of a culture. Democratic leaders are natural in this environment.

The Unicist Ontology of Social Mutation

The evolution of a biological entity is produced by “tiny” revolutions that produce small mutations that are integrated in the complex system generating the evolution or involution of this entity. Social environments also evolve based on small mutations.

A social mutation is produced when the functionality of a social entity has been lost, and there is the necessary available energy to generate a change. This can happen based on the persistence of social viruses type “A” that become chronic social diseases, generating a dysfunctional purpose that can be hardly limited by the exertion of power.

This chronic disease of an entity can be produced by inaction or by the continuous use of palliatives to neutralize its crises.

The mutation is produced by the appearance of a strange attractor that generates a change of the chaos, transforming it into a new and different functional behavior.

The strange attractor generates an unpredictable new order that exceeds the possibilities of the power to control it and mutates the existing chaotic credibility zone towards a different functionality. That is why mutations cannot occur in entities that are managed based on the exertion of absolute power.

This strange attractor disappears as such and evolves into an object as soon as the new credibility zone begins to exist.

This process can be understood by comparing, at the end of the first decade of the XXI Century, the evolution of the European Communist Countries and the evolution of Communist China.

Social strange attractors are social objects that have a lower ethics when the situation mutates towards a more instinctive and individualistic behavior.

Strange attractors generate evolution when they are objects that integrate a driver and catalyzing and gravitational aspects. In this case, they become fully unstable but conjuncturally functional, because catalysts and gravitational aspects cannot be part of a system.

It has to be considered that strange attractors disappear as such and are replaced by an object that is homologous to their driver as soon as the entity has mutated.

This new object generates the necessary complementary and supplementary functions in the environment using the energy generated by the dissolution of the original object.

The result of social mutations is unpredictable. All what can be predicted is the trend towards evolution or involution.

If this process includes the participation of change agents, they are excluded in the case of involutions and eliminated in the case of evolutions.

Strange attractors are defined by the change of the technology that sustains the ideology on which the social entity and its environment are based. The dysfunctionality of the existing technology is what generates the chaotic situation that requires the use of power in order to control it. The concept “technology” needs to be apprehended in the wide sense, meaning different ways, hard and soft, to improve the functionality of something.

The introduction of a new technology maximizes the existing chaos and generates the possibility of the appearance of the new strange attractor.

If the strange attractor does not appear, the chaotic entity explodes or implodes depending on the characteristics of the context. If it appears, the entity evolves or involves depending on the characteristics of the strange attractor.

Peter Belohlavek

The Nature of Justice: The Catalyst and Entropy Inhibitor of Capitalism

May 8, 2015 in A) Country Archetypes & Scenarios / The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Cobots tagged Country Archetypes / Future Research / Social Scenario / The Nature of Justice / The Unicist Research Institute / unicist anthropology / Unicist Confederation / Unicist Corporate University / Unicist Evolutionary Approach / Unicist Future Research Lab / Unicist Logical Approach / Unicist Theory of Evolution by Peter Belohlavek

The purpose of justice in a culture is to provide a safe environment to allow that roles fulfill their objectives within an institutionalized environment. In other words, the purpose of justice is to foster and inhibit the dysfunctional activities of institutionalized environments.

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

Justice can either work as the catalyst or as the entropy inhibitor of social behavior. Justice only exists as an external entity in a community and ensures the functionality of those institutions that allow the society to work as a system.

The concept of Justice does not refer to the judicial system of a culture. It includes all the individual, social and institutional actions that are developed to sustain the functionality of the system.

Justice is naturally driven by “common sense” which implicitly includes the values of the cultural archetype, the life-style and the moral of a culture. Justice works as a rigid framework that defines what is functional or dysfunctional in an environment.

Justice has two different roles that need to be integrated in order to sustain institutionalization: justice as a catalyst and justice as an inhibitor.

On the one hand, there is a catalyzing justice that has the responsibility of fostering the equality of opportunities that allow expanding the boundaries without endangering the institutionalization.

But, on the other hand justice has the role of inhibiting dysfunctional actions, which drives towards ensuring equal rights to all the members of a community. This avoids the entropy in institutions and establishes the framework to develop minimum strategies.

The Ontogenetic Map of Justice

The purpose of justice is to foster the existence of transcendent roles in a society in order to make institutionalization possible and avoid its corruption. An institution becomes corrupt when it needs to degrade the environment in order to profit from it.

Institutions are driven by transcendent goals. Therefore, the driver of justice is to confirm the achievement of the transcendent goals of a culture. These transcendent goals are included in the Constitution of a country.

This process is materialized when justice provides the framework to sustain the functionality of the country as a system. However, this is only possible if both the individual roles of the entities and the individuals of the culture are protected.

When the legal framework and the social and judicial system have solved these aspects, it becomes possible to deal with the active function of justice to provide equal opportunities for all.

The final purpose of justice is the fulfillment of the transcendent roles of a society and ensuring the functionality of society as a system. This is only possible if the individual roles have been assumed in order to make the institutionalization real.

It has to be considered that the judicial system of a society only punishes those aspects the society considers punishable.

The Maximal Strategy

The maximal strategy is given by the catalyzing justice of a culture that needs to provide equal opportunities for the members of a community.

Equal opportunities require the existence of a democratic environment that fosters cooperation. That is why justice is an essential part of democracy and democracy is the necessary environment for justice.

When the intention of ensuring equal opportunities has been confirmed, it becomes necessary to accept that there has to be a social repair to respond to the deviations produced by injustices in the real world. Therefore, social repairs need to be sustained by the judicial system in order to make them functional.

Equal opportunities become possible if they include the social repair for the dysfunctional actions that hindered the possibility of an individual or group to access such opportunities. Social repair needs to recognize the opportunities lost and not only the costs that were produced.

When social repair exists, it becomes possible to confirm the existence of social sanctions that sustain the equal opportunities. This implies that the society punishes those who limit others to achieve goals.

The catalyzing justice requires the existence of social sanctions for all those behaviors that endanger equal opportunities. These social sanctions sustain equal opportunities and are the catalyst for the existence of justice. In democratic environments legal justice does not sanction what is not sanctioned by society.

The Minimum Strategy

The equality of rights, as the purpose of the minimum strategy, needs to achieved in order to sustain the institutionalization of a society. This requires individual repair for all the dysfunctional actions an entity has suffered.

The individual repair has to fit into the limits of acceptance of a society. If it is below, it has no effect as a dissuasive object, but if it is above, it generates a “judicial profitable business” that produces paradoxical results in the judicial system.

The legal sanction is the entropy inhibitor of justice. Legal sanctions imply that they need to be in accordance with the dysfunctional behavior and its consequences. Legal sanctions are a way to punish actions and to dissuade their repetition.

The legal framework and its application establish the entropy inhibitor that avoids the corruption of the institutionalization of a culture. The entropy inhibitor is the basic price to be paid to ensure the functionality of justice.

The Types and Levels of Justice

We have synthesized the different levels of justice in four segments. These segments are:

Defensive Justice
Protective Justice
Social Justice
Adaptive Justice

Level 1) Defensive Justice

The first level of justice is the defensive justice that allows providing individual repair through the different alternatives the judicial system provides. This justice provides every member of the community with a defensive system to sustain the right the individual has according to the legal framework of the community. Defensive justice seeks individual repair in order to ensure that individuals have the right to recover part of the damages produced by someone’s dysfunctional behavior. Defensive justice allows individual to recover from unfair damages produced by third parties.

Level 2) Protective Justice

It includes level 1. The second level is the protective justice, which provides a framework that allows protecting individuals and entities from the dangers of the environment. Protective justice implies a legal framework to protect from direct actions or the collateral side effects of actions. Protective justice is simple to install when providing support for unprotected people, like children, but needs to include all the participants of a community in order to provide a safe environment to live in. It is based on providing protections for individuals to prevent the existence of dysfunctional behaviors. Protective justice is natural in the field of crimes but difficult to apply in civil and commercial affairs.

Level 3) Social Justice

It includes level 2. The third level implies the existence of social justice to exclude socially all the members who behave beyond the rules of a community. This justice exceeds the limits of the legal framework and deal with the acceptance of the social rules to limit the actions of individuals. Social justice implies both the existence of social sanctions and social repair to equilibrate the actions and ensure social institutionalization.

Social justice implies the existence of a social sanction produced by dysfunctional behaviors that have social consequences. It implies that the private damage is considered in terms of its social consequences in order to dissuade its repetition. Social justice implies considering the greater good when dealing with dysfunctional behaviors.

Level 4) Adaptive Justice

It includes level 3. The fourth level implies the existence of a justice that is able to interpret the spirit of laws and the spirit of a society in order to provide equal opportunities for all including the equality of rights. Adaptive justice is the justice that allows institutions to evolve towards a superior level by accepting and fostering behaviors that are beyond the standards of a culture but foster the expansion of the community. Adaptive justice implies paying the prices of individual felonies considering the greater good and the consequences in the environment. Adaptive justice implies considering the field of individual actions as part of social dysfunctional actions in order to find the better way to manage justice.

Peter Belohlavek

Future Research: the Era of Participation is changing the habits

March 19, 2015 in The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Cobots / Unicist Functional Design tagged Era of Knowledge / Era of Participation / Future Research / Individual Evolution / Institutional Evolution / Intelligent Systems / Peter Belohlavek / Social Evolution / Social Scenario / The Unicist Research Institute / unicist anthropology / Unicist Evolutionary Approach / Unicist Future Research Lab / Unicist Logical Approach by Unicist Press Committee

The objective of people in the Era of Participation is to find a better place in the world, conserve it, expand it and avoid losing it. This era changes the way people deal with others. It generated a major change of habits that gives access to influential roles to all those who feel that they have something to say and drives towards an increasing transparency of public and private actions.

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

The unicist future research on the displacement of the “Era of Knowledge” by the “Era of Participation” was triggered by the need of knowing how to influence people in an adapted way. The notorious change in communication technologies, that gave most of the hidden villages in peripheral countries an access to the world, made evident that a new ideology was being introduced.

The research was led by Peter Belohlavek at The Unicist Research Institute using the Unicist Complexity Science Methodology. The research began in 2001 and included: Algeria, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Holland, India, Israel, Korean Republic, Mexico, New Zealand, Italy, Japan, Norway, Peru, Poland, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, UK, Ukraine, Uruguay, USA.

The closing of the conclusions was possible based on the experiences with Google, Greenpeace, Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.

To access the basics on Unicist Future Research please enter: www.unicist.org/sdp.shtml

Which technologies have given birth to the Era of Participation?

Internet (Sharing)

The sharing capacity of Internet changed the world of communication in the field of work and of pastime activities. Although it began as a tool to work it evolved towards a tool to access and share.

Cell Phones (SMS – Short Message Service)

The communication and influential capacity of messages when they are used to share weaknesses transformed cell phones into a weapon to generate both adaptive and over-adaptive participation.

Facebook – Twitter (Social networks)

Social networks became the natural tool to be used by all the segments of participants (publicity driven, bragging driven, utopia driven, recognition driven, action driven). They made the building and managing of superficial relationships possible, which were not possible before.

Linkedin (Professional Networks)

Professional networks became a way to position individuals in hypothetical roles in order to make them become real personal roles. Their use is based on providing hope to the participants who want to find or improve their place in the world.

Consequences of this New Era:

The change of the depth of relationships making them basically superficial and based on fallacious myths
The increasing importance of the word of mouth communication to install ideas
The increase of the value of charismatic leadership and its dysfunctional counterpart: the “manipulative leadership”
The substitution of structural participation (institutions) by conjunctural participation
The loss of credibility of formal authorities and the empowerment of authoritative roles
The increase of egocentrism and the demand of permanent sensorial and materialistic stimuli
The increase of addictive behaviors to escape
The increase of fundamentalist groups to ensure survival (religious, civil, military)
The multiplication of sectarian movements
The installation of over-adaptive behaviors as a standard in the world
The existence of multi-minorities
The installation of active inaction as a standard in underdeveloped environments

The Increase of the Influence of Public Opinion

Public opinion became the central power in democratic countries. Public opinion is now driven by the new technologies that are available and tends to install a dualistic approach in cultures defined by those who accept something and those who oppose to it.

As public opinion is intuition driven, this conflict becomes extreme when untrue information or disinformation is used by the parts.

Public opinion has always integrated the structure of the governmental power integrated by the legislative power, the executive power and the judiciary power.

The role of the legislative power is that of the driver of maximal strategies. In this role, it needs to be compatible with the public opinion but at the same time foster expansion and equality of opportunities.

The executive power has two alternatives in this Era: covering both the needs of expansion and distribution or focusing on distribution becoming a populist government. The extreme situation occurs when Distributism prevails absolutely to sustain the power of the government itself.

The judiciary power equilibrates the conflict between the public opinion, the legislative power and the executive power.

In the Era of Participation, the direct influence of people in governmental decision becomes dominant.

The End of the Era of Knowledge

The Era of Knowledge implied that the access to personal and social evolution was basically sustained by the knowledge individuals had and was demonstrated by their credentials.

But the Era of Knowledge came to an end. An “ERA” is such when it establishes an imperceptible “gravitational force” that sustains the behavior of an environment.

It has to be considered that knowledge began being ruled by religions in order to avoid the deviation of human behavior from the moral rules, but became a value in itself with the appearance of the Industrial Era in the world.

The paradox is that industrialization empowered knowledge but at the end, the Era of Industrialization was exceeded by the Era of Knowledge. Nevertheless, knowledge is still an appendix of religions in pre-industrialized societies.

Internet opened a window that allowed making the access of knowledge massive. It expanded the use of data and information that gave access to any person who lives in a non-marginal environment.

Information can be defined as any data that can be transformed into a meaningful entity and thus can be stored in the long-term memory of an individual. Knowledge is such when the information one has can be used to produce something.

Google, as a concept, made the access to information basically free for everyone. The paradox is that people now have all the information they are willing to search but the value generation, which is based on knowledge, depends on the concepts they manage.

This explains why the open access to information did not produce a significant increase in productivity and quality of work.

Thus, the functionality of knowledge as a driver for personal evolution became fallacious. Education became a hygienic key; it was necessary to open doors but did not suffice to drive personal evolution and provide a meaningful place in the world.

The occurrence of economic crises in the world was the trigger to the end of the Era of Knowledge. Every economic crisis generates the lack of opportunities for many and the degradation of the ethical intelligence of a culture in order to survive. When crises are not cured, but only palliated, they plant the seed of the next crisis and the degradation of cultures continues.

A consequence of these crises is a growing individualism, which drives people to develop a surviving attitude that diminishes the generation of value and installs an unstable social environment.

Another consequence is the exclusion of youth, the newcomers in societies, diminishing their possibilities to find a social role to evolve.

These consequences gave birth to the Era of Participation, which can be synthesized in a shout:

“I need a better place in the world”

What is the Era of Participation?

The objective of participation is to find a better place in the world, conserve it, expand it and avoid losing it.

What needs to be established is the social role an individual looks for, which can imply a structural or an incidental positioning. It implies that there has to be an acceptance of the reference group the individual accepts as a rule maker.

This reference group can be real, virtual or super-natural. All what matters is that it has to exist in order to make a participative process possible. Without a superior reference group’s acceptance, there is no true place in the world and the participation degrades towards achieving a role of active or passive opposition.

The social role individuals fight for needs to have a belonging group where the individuals feel at home. Belonging groups are what make a place in the world safe. Therefore, participation implies fostering the existence of belonging groups who share similar utopias while they share the same weaknesses they need to cover.

The participation process becomes redundant when a place in the world, accepted by the reference groups and the belonging group, has been gained. However, as the satisfaction of needs generates new needs this is a never-ending process at an operational level. This process generates social evolution when individuals have a role in the world that allows them to evolve based on the value they add.

Adaptive Participation

Evolutionary participation requires beginning with a conscious adaptive process where the individual is looking for a place to be who s/he is. This makes the individual a differentiated person that needs to begin by participating through value adding actions (participation to do) while sustaining the identity of the role by having the necessary image that allows others to tag him/her properly (participation to appear).

Participation is only possible when the members who participate are able to recognize each other as part of the same group. In fundamentalist groups this tagging might include tattoos or similar timeless marks but in social groups individuals need to have the necessary “look & feel” in order to be tagged and recognized as members.

This appearance is extremely notorious in social and professional networks that establish the basics of the profile that need to be covered in order for the group to accept a possible member. That is why appearance, which is given by the personal brand or image, is the entropy inhibitor that makes expansive participation possible.

When the image has been positioned, the final objective of being a real member becomes possible.

Over-adaptive Participation

The apparent paradox is that over-adaptation is the minimum strategy. This requires an explanation. Adapting implies influencing while being influenced to achieve a goal, which in this case is to have a place in the world. Influencing is what we call adaptive participation and being influenced is what in this case is named over-adaptive participation.

Over-adaptiveness implies accepting the rules of the environment, which implies submission but beginning with a dominant participation in order to feel that one is not submitting but establishing the rules.

When the self-esteem has been conserved by this dominant participation, which mostly implies active inaction that allows judging the environment, an oppositional role becomes necessary to accept the rules of the game.

When individuals are able to feel superior by judging the environment, opposing to some aspects to preserve their self-esteem, then over-adaptive participation becomes functional. But, this functionality depends on its compatibility with the adaptive participation.

Segments of Participation

There are different segments or participants that need to be understood in order to deal with them. Accessing profiles and activities on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn is very useful to identify the different segments, which are never pure but always have an implicit dominant trend that drives their participation.

Publicity Driven
Bragging Driven
Utopia Driven
Recognition Driven
Action Driven

Conclusions

Paradoxically, the Era of Participation implies a prevalence of observation over true participation. This implies that this Era will represent implicitly a battle between observers and participants.

Over-adaptive participation is based on an observational attitude while adaptive participation is based on the synergy of the members to produce something.

The preexisting Era of Knowledge will be included as a secondary driver during the next decades to sustain, on the one hand, those who participate to build and, on the other hand, to sustain those who participate to expose the implicit weaknesses of the adaptive participants.

This makes this period a battle and an integration of these two groups. Dualism will be the driver for the mass that over-adapts while integralism will be the driver for the elites who adopt an adaptive participative approach. It is a battle of communication.

Adaptive Participation Building

The building of adaptive participation is the responsibility of the elite of cultures. It is an institutional role that needs to exist in order to make participative behavior meaningful.

The purpose of adaptive participation building is to establish an influential social capital. Social capital is given by the strengths of the bonds among the members of a group or community that drive their value generating actions. Social capital implicitly implies the existence of a greater good to sustain the relationships among the members.

Adaptive participation requires the existence of a double ethical behavior in the community. On the one hand, there has to exist an internal ethics of the group which needs to be based on cooperativeness and, on the other hand, an external ethics with the environment is required, which needs to be driven by competitiveness in order to ensure survival.

This is evident in the behavior of countries that naturally have two different attitudes: one towards the environment and another towards the members of the culture. However, both ethics need to be integrated by a social capital, which establishes the participation rules for the members of the group towards other members and towards the environment.

If cooperation is replaced by competition among the members of a group or community, the social capital becomes corrupt and over-adaptiveness replaces adaptiveness.

Corruption and over-adaptiveness also prevails when competition is based on the destruction of the environment in order to take advantage of it.

Adaptiveness drives towards evolution and over-adaptiveness is the cause and consequence of involution.

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

Unicist Press Committee