Unicist Ontology of Evolution


Translate this page

Understanding Cultures: The French Archetype

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

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

The French culture integrates efficiency and efficacy to achieve results prioritizing the latter. The French Archetype generated a unique way to develop a culture and a country.

France is a country with a very strong technological development. But, even though this strength, France prioritizes science over technology. It can be considered as a benchmark for scientific development both in hard and soft sciences.

In order to understand the French culture, one needs to understand the French Revolution as a detonating element of its assertion, which drives towards its evolution.

The French Archetype

France’s archetype integrates: pragmatism, which is notorious in its international policy, a democracy driven approach that is evident in its non-dissent model, a strong nationality and its characteristic of being a science incubator.

The Unicist Logic of the Archetype of FranceThe French archetype includes and will always include a high degree of State intervention in the economy through incentive systems. This is also evident if we analyze the history of France since the industrial revolution.

The French model has always combined a certain degree of Keynesianism and of structuralism with some classic elements.

The employment problem will be a growing one, but one must bear in mind that France has the social perspective of employing people ingrained in the leaders’ minds; therefore, it is not a “struggle” between interests and employment but rather a “conflict” between them.

One should expect a reinforcement of government actions to foster the generation of employment in the country and a conflict with companies that seek to install manufacturing plants in some low wage countries.

The French idiosyncrasy is based on their structured social behavior, which is associated with a notorious individual freedom that drives to the existence of two different behavioral rules for public and private affairs.

Non-dissent as a Model

Non-dissent as a modelConceptually, the French Revolution symbolized the maximum expression of the weight of dissent in a culture.
If we look at France’s later evolution, we shall see that different models, social groups and ideologies coexist in the culture.

But their coexistence is possible due to a very strong national identity that, through respect toward dissent, and only with a few exceptions, manages to avoid larger conflicts. This is what the French Archetype is about.

The May 1968 revolt drove to the acceptance of the need to have a laboratory to monitor social evolution. From a conceptual point of view, the social laboratory is a way to measure society’s dissent and the possibilities to channel it positively to avoid outbursts.

France as the Birthplace of Sciences

France is, at an intellectual level, science driven. Its orientation toward dissent is the basis for the approach to sciences, which naturally drives to integrate foundations with justifications.

France produced notorious contributions in the field of hard sciences like mathematics, physics and chemistry and in soft-sciences like psychology, anthropology, sociology, etc.

France’s development in the scientific field generates a knowledge basis in Europe. This is based on the Universities, which operate as excellence centers per areas and help guarantee that France and Europe count on think-tanks to maintain a worldwide leadership in their fields of specialty.

Public Ethics vs. Private Ethics

The French culture is based on a unique characteristic: the complementation of public and private ethics.
While public ethics is strongly geared toward security, driving toward institutionalization and a sense of communitarian identity, on the other hand, private ethics is geared toward freedom and the quest for the personal ideal beyond those duties that must be complied with in the community.

France’s Growth

Today France appears to be clearly inclined toward a growth based on the development of competitiveness in the culture.
It has to be considered that it is a nationalist culture that complements public and private behaviors. Its State is very strong, which is perceived in its diplomatic action, where the national interest is set above individual needs.

While the organization of the State assures structural stability, governments, like elsewhere, need to win elections and therefore need to be focused on conjunctures.

France’s evolution depends, like all evolution, on the competitors’ actions. The quality and speed at which it moves will depend on whether France maintains its current stage or whether it upgrades to a superior stage.

Absolute Ideology vs. Relative Ideology

The Concept of DemocracyFrance has been harshly criticized from the outside, because of its tendency toward ideological conflicts that appear to be absolute.

These actions, at a given time, may paralyze actions in social or economic sectors.

However, taking a closer look, one will see that these conflicts are relative ones if viewed from an internal standpoint.

That is why we can still expect a larger relativization of the ideologies “wrapped up” in conflicts that appear to be absolute.

Ideologies will become in France what they essentially are: beliefs that use an available technology to satisfy certain interests working within the accepted myths of a culture.

What are Unicist Country Archetypes?

Unicist Country Archetypes are the structure of fundamentals that define the behavior of a culture.

The functionality of the archetype is driven by the structure of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature. Therefore a country archetype has a purpose, an active function and an energy conservation function.

If you study the history of a country you will find a structural behavior that hardly changes, producing the evolution or involution of the culture based on two aspects:
1) The change of the external environment where the culture has to live.
2) The change produced by the members of the culture.

When 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 archetypes, you will see that the majority of the changes happens at an operational level and not at a structural level.

Considering the Roman Empire you will see that it developed extremely slowly from the original tribes to an Empire and then evolved from an Empire to what it is today.

Hundreds of years are necessary for an archetype to evolve if the conditions of evolution are given. Involution is faster than evolution, but it also demands hundreds of years.

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.

To define an ontological structure of a culture, which describes its fundamentals, it is necessary to find the hypothesis in its past, validate it with the facts of the present and falsify it with future forecasts based on its nature.

Unicist Ontology in the Social FieldTo explain this more operationally, some structural patterns for cultural behavior will be found by understanding the establishments of the cultures in the past. These patterns are in fact the operational concepts that are implicit in a country.

Operational concepts describe the myths that rule social behavior and the trade-offs that are made by the utopias that are posed by the participants of a culture.

When the operational concepts have been found the implicit purposes of their actions must be found.

The purposes are never those declaimed by the “actors”, they are those produced by the “actors”.

The purposes we are researching are not the operational objectives of actions but the structural results of the actions considered at a conceptual level.

It has to be considered that the real purposes of a culture are taboos that can only be shared by those who are able to influence them.

For the rest of the society they are mixed up with the operational objectives considering them as the real objectives.

The real objectives of a culture are those that are behind and guide the actions of the whole society. Basically, they are cross-cultural because they respond to the natural basic needs of people.

The active function of a society is materialized by the establishment and represented by the elite. This active function is observable, it can be measured.

Unicist Ontology of the Social StructureThe patterns of these actions are limited by the myths of a society. Paradoxically, the myths are implicit in the values of the middle class.

The middle class needs an external structure to be able to ascend socially. The myths are the energy conservation function and sustain the objectives, avoiding that the utopias posed by the elite change the real purpose of a society.

The final purpose of a social organization is the wellbeing of a society. This wellbeing can be considered as the ultimate goal in any society.

But it has to be considered that there are societies that do not include in their structure some of their members. In the ancient Greek democracy, slaves were not part of the social structure.

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

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm. http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Unicist

Share

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

Share

The Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature drives Evolution

A living being’s evolution is ruled by its ontogenetic intelligence we call concept. The concept is the functional logical structure of a living being that defines it as unique both in its species and individuality.

Each living being has a central concept that regulates its evolution and describes its purpose, the procedure under which it faces adaptation to reality and the action guide within which it develops the procedure so as not to trespass the limits of its purpose.

The ontogenetic intelligence is defined, on one hand, by a purpose and an action principle that puts the purpose into action sustaining its functionality and evolution or involution.

On the other hand, the same purpose is sustained by the energy conservation principle that complements the purpose to avoid it being changed by the action principle.

The concept describes a living being’s functionality. It defines its intrinsic concept.

Living beings naturally transfer this functionality to the environment where they act, depositing functions that have the living being’s same logical structure and that generate the existence of extrinsic concepts.

The concept arranges the living beings’ chaos. It is the attractor which structures the chaotic behaviors of a living being’s environment and arranges them to make them operable and functional to evolution or involution, should any be the case. These concepts have the same logical structure but they are not implicit in inanimate beings; they are deposited by the living beings they are functional to.

Access a synthesis on the “Discovery of the Unicist Ontology of Evolution” 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/2012/10/ontology_nature_reality-1.pdf

Diana 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

Share

Small, imperceptible revolutions make democracy evolve

Democratic evolution is made by small imperceptible revolutions made by heroes who introduce them in their field of influence.

A hero is an individual that drives a society to go a step further. In the case of the evolution of archetypes there is no possibility to evolve without the existence of heroes.

These individuals are members of the society that are willing to assume the responsibility of making the next step.

They are members of the elite and might work at an individual level or at an institutional level.

Their goal is transcendence and they have necessarily a human side and a supernatural side. The active function is human; therefore they are permanently in danger to succumb in the deeds they are doing.

Their energy conservation function is “supernatural” which in this case means that they have an extreme superior energy and power to develop the tasks they are doing.

Cultures need heroes to make cultural breakthroughs. The evolution of a cultural archetype is necessarily a breakthrough that requires heroes.

Their achievements are celebrated by the society and the heroes are honored because people generate identification with their deeds and their capacities.

Access a synthesis on the “Discovery of the Unicist Ontology of Change Agents” 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/2012/08/ontology_change_agents-1.pdf

Diana 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

Share

Social Processes are Organized by Objects

Nature is organized by objects and so are human societies; but the existence of objects in societies implies that there is a conscious, planned, decision to install entities to sustain social processes.

An object is an adaptive system that has been designed to produce predefined results within an existing process. It implies a conscious, strategic and architectural action to define how to build an adaptive system to ensure and save energy to generate results.

Social objects include countries, institutions, businesses, personal roles and every entity that is being built as an adaptive system to generate a predefined result within a social process. Objects only exist is they have the necessary social critical mass to generate the results they need to provide as an adaptive system within the adaptive process they are part of.

There are four types of social objects

1)      Communitarian objects
2)      Institutional objects
3)      Business objects
4)      Personal role objects

Communitarian objects deal with the organization of countries and their communities. The judiciary, educational, healthcare and governmental systems are just examples of social objects.

Institutional objects deal with the existence of institutions. The immune, administration, operation and control systems are examples of institutional objects. They might be part of communitarian objects or being interdependent entities.

Business objects deal with work processes. Their production, marketing, administration, management, human resources, corporate finance systems are examples of business objects. They might be part of communitarian objects, institutional objects or being interdependent entities.

Personal role objects deal with the roles of people in the environment. The familiar, work, political, social, professional and pastime roles are examples of individual objects. They might be part of communitarian, institutional or business objects or being interdependent entities.

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-school.org/future-research/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/turi-1.pdf

Share

The Unicist Archetype of Argentina: A Country in Transition

To describe the Archetype of Argentina it is necessary to first define how the transition of cultures works.

About the transition of archetypes

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 Standard for Country Future Research defines establishment as the elite that assumes the responsibility of the evolution of the mass 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 mass need to become an elite in their field until they establish as members of the middle class.

About the establishments of cultures

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 wellbeing. 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 illegitimated for not representing the interests of the population and the culture involves.

What produces the transition of archetypes?

  1. New countries might produce a transition of the archetype if they hadn’t a defined archetype before they became independent Nations.
  2. Involving cultures are necessarily in transition because there is a dysfunctional archetype that needs to be changed by a functional one.
  3. Extreme social and economic differences in a country that have not been assumed by the establishment generate a transitional environment.
  4. The systematic substitution of the establishment by governmental actions generates endless transitions.

The consequence of transitions

Transitions have inevitable problems. There is a Chinese curse that says: “God condemns you to live a transition”. Transitions can be synthesized in the following characteristics:

  1. Periodic crises produced by the dysfunctionality of the new archetype that tries to substitute a preexisting one.
  2. Judiciary instability, because there is not a dominant establishment with dominant rules.
  3. The predominance of absolute ideologies generating a great gap between successive governments.
  4. The trend of governments to remain in power beyond the limits of the existent constitutional rules in order to “impose” the new archetype.
  5. Significant ideological and economic changes between governments.

When transitions become 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 who, more and less recently, overcame a transition: Sweden, Spain, Finland, Chile, and Brazil. We can also mention most of the countries of the so called “3rd World” that 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.

If you want to access some short information on Argentina please enter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_Argentina
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Argentina

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 developing 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 of adapting instantaneously to changes and, but the same time, this inhibits planning.

The alternative archetype

There is an alternative Archetype in Argentina that is represented by many prominent individuals who have international prestige in their fields.

Names like: Leloir, Houssay, Milstein, Borges, Vilas, Fangio, Favaloro, Salazar, etc. still could not prevail in Argentina introducing an Archetype based on growth. They have been seen as lone-runners by the society.

The transition will end as soon as Argentina assumes its values, integrating collective intelligence in its Archetype.

In the meantime, Argentine will grow based on its natural resources while the extraordinary individual intelligence works as a complement.

 

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm.
http://www.unicist-school.org/future-research/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/turi-1.pdf

 

Share

Economic power is basically individualistic oriented

Peter Belohlavek’s book on “The Nature of Economic Power” is being presented and it is included Unicist Country Future Search Engine.

It has to be considered that the economic power is basically individualistic oriented. In the materialistic world the same “thing” cannot be shared. “Money is in my pocket or it is in your pocket. It cannot be in both at the same time”.

That is why the nature of the materialistic world is the dualism which naturally drives towards fostering activities based on individual initiatives.

This is not necessary at a subsistence level but it is a must if a culture fosters expansion and influence in the environment.

Materialistic activities are naturally driven by individual responsibility.

This means that the institutions that develop materialistic activities need to understand and manage the individual needs of their members in order to be successful.

The economic power of a country is strongly influenced by the individual value of work of the culture. Individuals expand the power of a Nation when it is implicit in the archetype. When it is not the case, the power of a Nation diminishes.

Access a Free Trial of the Unicist Standard for Country Future Research at: http://www.unicist.net/uscfr.shtml

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.

Access a Free Trial:

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

Follow us on twitter

Share

Presentation of the e-book Unicist Country Archetypes

The R&D e-book “Unicist Country Archetypes”  by Peter Belohlavek has been published.

The Power of a Nation provides a gravitational force for its external relations in the public and private fields that defines the level of synergy of the culture and establishes the standard for social, economic and political behaviors in terms of their capacity to influence the environment.

We are entering in one of the most obscure aspects of social behavior that deals with the power that cultures have and transfer to their members.

Essentially, the power of a Nation is synthesized in its archetype which has a level of energy that allows the Nation to follow a common goal with a natural path to achieve it.

The first obscure aspect is to accept that different countries have a different level of energy to influence the environment to transform nature for the benefit of their members.

Defining these differences is implicitly the explanation of the different levels of development of countries and explains also why the solution towards a higher level of power to influence the environment has to come from the inside and not from the outside.

This R&D e-book is the result of more than 30 years of researching and forecasting the evolution of countries until the fundamentals that define the power of Nations were refined and proven that they have no exceptions.

Access a Free Trial of the Unicist Standard for Country Future Research at: http://www.unicist.net/uscfr.shtml

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.

Access a Free Trial:

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

Follow us on twitter

Share

Presentation: The Nature of Dissuasion Power

The R&D e-book The Nature of Dissuasion Power, by Peter Belohlavek has been presented to sustain the Country Future Scenario Building processes. It is also strongly recommended for companies working in highly competitive markets.

The confrontation capacity of a culture defines the dissuasion power of a Nation. The dissuasion power is in charge of ensuring the minimum strategy of a country. Therefore it needs to be 100% reliable.

Understanding the alternative confrontation possibilities allows empowering the dissuasion power knowing in which environments one can rely on the available dissuasion power.

The purpose of a confrontation is to impose somebody’s authority to someone. This can happen in the military, economic, personal, emotional or whatsoever field.

A confrontation has begun when there is an attempt to impose an authority to someone.

The Dissuasion Power is given by the capacity to expand without needing to confront.

The dissuasion power has been associated in the past to military capacity. And there is no doubt that it still is and will always be.

But even though more than 80% of the population in the world is not involved in a war, it is included in the competition of who sells to whom. The one who sells produces jobs and well being and the one who buys has to have the money and other jobs to pay for what has been bought.

When presenting the dissuasion power this book makes an explicit analogy with military warfare.

Access a Free Trial of the Unicist Standard for Country Future Research at: http://www.unicist.net/uscfr.shtml

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.

Access a Free Trial:

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

Follow us on twitter

Share

Beta Version: Unicist Country Future Research Search Engine

The Beta Version of the Search Engine for Unicist Country Future Research using the Unicist Standard has been launched.

The discovery of the Unicist Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature and more than 30 years of applied research allowed the development of the Unicist Standard for Country Future Research.

This Search Engine is now available to provide the unicist standard for future forecasts. It is a standard that allows the integration of fundamental analysis with technical analysis to develop reliable knowledge to exert influence on future scenarios.

You can access a Free 30-day Trial at:
http://www.unicist.net/uscfr.shtml

The Unicist Standard for Country Future Research provides the necessary information to deal with the fundamentals of countries evolution.

The future does not exist. To influence the future it is necessary:

1) to discover the concepts of reality in the “past”;
2) to consider the facts of the “present”;
3) to infer the possible and probable “future”.

To develop future scenarios, we strongly recommend using both the Unicist Fundamentals technology and the Technical Analytical tools.

After you have developed the two future scenarios of a country, a region or the world following the Unicist Standard approach and the Technical Analytical approach, you will have to ensure that their results are consistent. They cannot be contradictory. If they are, you have to revise your analysis, until they become compatible.

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

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

Diego Belohlavek
Expert System Manager

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

Share