Unicist Logical Approach


The Unicist Ontology of Complex Systems

The Unicist Ontology of Complex Systems was researched and developed by Peter Belohlavek at The Unicist Research Institute based on the experiences and applications in medicine, human behavior, social behavior, businesses and future research. The apprehension of complex systems requires a significant abstraction and integration effort in order to be able to emulate these systems in mind.

Complex SystemsThis unicist ontology provides an answer that ends the open discussion of what complex systems are. It allowed defining the functionality of complex systems and how to influence such systems and build them.

A Complex system is an entity that works as a composite unicist object, integrated by a conjunction of objects, that has open boundaries with the environment.

All complex systems are organized by objects, which allow managing complexity. This is self-evident in a human body where each organ is an interdependent object to sustain the life of the human being. Another example in social life can help to clarify this characteristic of the complex systems: the roles people assume work as objects in society.

At an operational level, the core characteristics of a complex system are:

  1. All the elements of the complex system are integrated by conjunctions without the possibility of the existence of disjunctions.
  2. The openness of the boundaries of the objects that integrate the complex system and the openness of the system as an object itself.

A unicist object is defined as an adaptive system that has a concept to fulfill, has a value adding function and a quality assurance process to sustain the purpose of the system. The concept is defined by having a purpose, an active function to put the purpose in action and an energy conservation function to sustain the achievement of the purpose.

The complexity of a system is intrinsic, which means that it does not depend on the perception of an individual. But in order to apprehend a complex system it is necessary that the person emulates the system in mind, which fully depends on the individual.

This requires that the individual needs to be able to go beyond a dualistic thinking process in order to be able to apprehend the conjunctions implicit in the system and needs to have the concept of the environment in order to be able to deal with the open boundaries of the system.

There are fields that are generally accepted as being complex such as: Life-sciences, social sciences, anthropology, political sciences, economic sciences, behavioral sciences, medicine, psychology, education, businesses, ecology, meteorology.

The Ontological Algorithm of a Complex System

The driver of a complex system is the concept that regulates its unified field to generate results. This driver is what generates the emergence (results) of the complex system.

Ontological Algorithm of a Complex SystemThe system needs to add value in order to influence the environment to sustain the openness of its boundaries. The fulfillment of the purpose of the concept is sustained by a quality assurance process that needs to manage the influence of the environment.

The maximal strategy is based on managing the conjunction of the objects that integrate the complex system. It requires identifying the objects that integrate the system and how they are integrated.

The integration of the objects is given by their conjunction including them following the rules of the double dialectical logic. This logic defines that each object is integrated with another object assuming a complementary or supplementary role and their integration builds an object of superior order of complexity.

Since these interdependent objects that have biunivocal relationships are integrated, it is necessary to apprehend them as a unified field using the unicist logic, which emulates the ontogenetic intelligence of nature.

The functionality of the biunivocal influence works as the catalyst of the functionality of the complex system.

The minimum strategy that sustains the functionality of the complex system is built upon the management of the open boundaries based on the adaptive behavior of its elements. Such adaptive behavior implies that adaptiveness is sustained by the influence that is exerted by the system while the influence that is exerted by the environment on the system is managed.

The influence exerted on the environment is based on the complementation of the complex system with the environment. This complementation requires covering two different aspects:

  • An asymmetric complementation with negative slope in order to have an influential role.
  • A symmetric complementation to establish a participative relationship with the environment.

The influence exerted by the environment is based on a competitive relationship, which implies the existence of supplementary roles between the system and the environment. This requires paying the prices of sustaining the objective of the system within the boundaries established by the influence of the environment.

Adaptiveness is the final goal of the minimum strategy and requires managing the biunivocal influence between the system and the environment.

Levels of Complexity Management

Unicist Ontology of Complex SystemsThe complexity of a system is defined intrinsically by the characteristics of the system. The more objects that integrate a complex system, the higher the level of complexity of such system.

Five levels of complex systems have been defined:

  • Level of Complexity 0 – Over-adaptive Complex System
  • Level of Complexity 1 – Influential Complex System
  • Level of Complexity 2 – Reactive Complex System
  • Level of Complexity 3 – Proactive Complex System
  • Level of Complexity 4 – Adaptive Complex System

Level of Complexity 0 – Over-adaptive Complex Systems

These are entities that have adjacent roles to the environment which makes them work as “hygienic” entities.

They have no internal complexity because they follow the environment which implies that they establish an asymmetric complementation with positive slope. Over-adaptive systems are not complex.

Level of Complexity 1 – Influential Complex Systems

These are the complex systems that participate in isolated niches of the environment having the capacity of influencing the environment by providing elements that are perceived as necessary by the environment.

They are integrated by few interdependent objects and the open boundaries deal with a restricted isolated environment. Their level of complexity is given by the need to build complementary roles.

Level of Complexity 2 – Reactive Complex Systems

This level includes the complexity implicit in the previous level. These are complex systems that are organized to manage the influence of the environment without over-adapting.

These system are extremely efficient in their peripheral structure, which allows them to respond to the influence of the environment without losing their purpose and functionality. Their level of complexity if given by the need to manage the influence exerted by the environment.

Level of Complexity 3 – Proactive Complex Systems

This level includes the complexity implicit in the previous level. These are complex systems that exert an active influence on the environment in order to expand.

They are expansive entities that have developed a superior capacity to manage processes in a competitive environment that is basically defined by the biunivocal relationships they need to manage. Their level of complexity is given by the need to manage biunivocal relationships with the environment.

Level of Complexity 4 – Adaptive Complex Systems

This level includes the complexity implicit in the previous level. These are complex systems that adapt to the environment that are driven by their capacity of building bridges between apparently incompatible needs.

They manage the capacity to build complementation at a superior level when the lower level fails. They are innovative entities that manage the conflicts with the environment by generating additional added value. Their level of complexity is given by the need to manage the future of the environment, the possibilities of the system and its complementation in changing environments.

Conclusion

All complex systems are organized by objects, which allow managing complexity. This is self-evident in a human body where each organ is an interdependent object to sustain the life of the human being.

Another example in social life can help to clarify this characteristic of the complex systems: the roles people assume work as objects in society.

This has several consequences:

  1. A complex system is, by definition, constituted by interdependent objects.
  2. When researching a complex system what needs to be researched are the objects of the system.
  3. When a human built complex system has no established objects, it is transformed into an over-adaptive system.
  4. To apprehend complex systems individuals need to be able to emulate their architecture in mind, which requires being able to deal with open boundaries and conjunctions while leaving aside the disjunctions implicit in value judgments.

Unicist Executive Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm. https://www.unicist-school.org/theoryofevolution/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/turi.pdf

Share

Homology between Unicist Concepts and Stem Cells

The function of stem cells in the human body is homologous to the function of concepts in the field of human actions. While stem cells can give rise to specialized cells and thus organs, essential concepts allow building unicist objects.

Essential ConceptUnicist objects are adaptive systems that have a concept and generate added value within a quality assurance system to fulfill the purpose of the concept. Unicist objects are interdependent entities that integrate a complex adaptive system.

The knowledge of the essential concepts is basic to build unicist objects because these objects are the materialization of a concept.

Under certain conditions, organs can be transplanted and this is also the case of unicist objects that can be replicated as long as they belong to homologous and analogous entities.

Objects are inserted into processes to produce specific results. The same way stem cells have the potential capacity to give birth to human organs, concepts can give birth to objects to produce results.

The knowledge of the Unicist Theory allows using a double dialectical approach to reality to emulate the organization of nature using an object driven organization.

Nature is organized by objects which can be observed in the ecosystem. The human body is an example of the organization of nature, where organs are homologous to unicist objects. That is why the transplantation of organs became possible.

While the structure of the different organs of the body derives from the stem cells, the unicist objects derive from the essential function of an entity that is defined by its concept.

Properties of Stem Cells and Concepts

Stem Cells

Concepts

They are unspecialized They are universal
They are capable of self-renewal They are timeless
They can give rise to specialized cells They allow building operational functions

Thus, stem cells and concepts are homologous. While essential concepts allow the construction of objects to insert into human adaptive processes, stem cells allow the building of organs that work as unicist objects to sustain the functionality of a complex adaptive system such as the human body.

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

The Unicist Theory solved the approach to complexity

Unicist Theory, its Applications and Scientific EvidencesThe Unicist Theory made adaptive systems manageable and gave an epistemological structure to complexity sciences. As it is known, the management of complexity has been an unsolved challenge for sciences. This challenge has been faced in 1976 by Peter Belohlavek at The Unicist Research Institute, which became a pioneering organization in the development of concrete solutions to manage the complex adaptive systems by developing a logical approach that uses the Unicist Theory.

A double dialectical logical approach to manage complex problems has been discovered. This approach is based on the discovery that complex systems have a triadic structure that emulates the ontogenetic intelligence of nature, represented by a purpose, an active principle and an energy conservation principle and their integration. The Unicist Theory that solved the approach to complexity includes the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature, the Unicist Ontology, the Unicist Logic, the Unicist Conceptualization, the Unicist Ontology of Evolution, the Ontogenetic Maps and the Unicist Objects.

There are fields that are generally accepted as being complex such as: life sciences, social sciences, anthropology, political sciences, economic sciences, behavioral sciences, medicine, psychology, education, businesses, ecology and meteorology.

The complexity of a system is intrinsic, which means that it does not depend on the perception of an individual. But in order to apprehend a complex system it is necessary that the person emulates the system in mind, which fully depends on the individual. This required defining what a complex system is.

Science dealt with complexity using multiple palliatives but without achieving consensus of what complex systems are. The main problem to manage complexity is that all the elements of the complex system are integrated by bi-univocal conjunctions without the possibility of the existence of disjunctions, that the boundaries of the objects that integrate the complex system are open and that the system is open in itself. The only measurable facts are the results that such system produces.

The most difficult task was the completion of the scientific evidences to confirm the functionality of the solutions, which demanded thousands of applications until they could be synthesized. The scientific evidences of the Unicist Theory were: the functionality of amino acids, the structure of atoms, the structure of biological entities, the nervous system, the similarity between natural and social objects, the fact that unicist concepts behave as stem cells and that thinking processes are homologous to the functionality of electricity.

The Unicist Theory was used to develop applications in Life Sciences, Future Research, Business, Education, Healthcare and Social and Human behavior. Now complex adaptive systems became manageable and complexity science received its epistemological structure. Palliatives to deal with complexity will continue to be used until people accept that complexity needs to be approached in its nature.

Learn more: http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Basics

Executive Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm.
https://www.unicist-school.org/theoryofevolution/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/turi.pdf

Share

Discovery of the Evolution and Involution of Human Intelligence

The research on the possibilities of influencing the evolution of individual intelligence was based on the already demonstrated fact that the ethical intelligence evolves based on the maturity of individuals.

Evolution of IntelligenceThe intelligence used by the stagnant survivor ethics, survival ethics, value earning ethics, value adding ethics and foundation ethics that were discovered, defined different functionalities in the adaptation process. While, just born babies are driven by the ethics of survival, wise people, in their field of wisdom, are driven by conceptual ethics.

Ethical intelligence defines the true intentions of individuals and drives the long-term results of their actions.

While ethical intelligence defines the purpose, the true intentions of an individual, it influences the use of the strategic intelligence – that deals with actions and conflict solving – and of the logical intelligence – that deal with conceptualization, defining the concepts that guide the individual’s actions.

The question posed by this research was: how can the evolution of intelligence be stimulated? This question drove to develop multiple applications since 2003 that confirmed that the strategies individuals use when developing actions are the drivers of the evolution of intelligence.

The following table shows the equivalence of the different levels of intelligence.

(*) Ethical
Intelligence

(*) Logical
Thinking
(*) Strategic
Intelligence
Influence /
Adaptiveness

Stagnant Survivor
Ethics

Analogies /
Preconcepts

Subjective
Strategy

+/-

Survivor
Ethics

Idea of the
Concept

Operational
Strategy

++

Value Earning
Ethics

Operational
Concept

Non-influential
Strategy

+++

Value Adding
Ethics

Functional
Concepts

Specific
Strategy

++++

Foundations
Ethics
Essential
Concepts
Universal
Strategy

+++++

(*) See paper on “The roots of human intelligence”:
http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Psychology

The evolution of intelligence has two functionalities in itself:

  1. On the one hand, it upgrades the level of ethical intelligence. The use of a superior strategic intelligence, based on the development of repetitive actions of a comparative superior level that the ones the individual used to perform, fosters the development of a superior level of ethical intelligence.
  2. On the other hand, it the development of intelligence fosters an expansive attitude in everyday actions that drives individuals towards evolutive actions that increase their level of adaptiveness and influence.

Conclusion

The research demonstrated that the evolution of the strategic approach of individuals drives the evolution of their intelligence and can be considered the core of adults’ evolution.

The more influential the strategies are, the higher the level of ethical intelligence that is required. The systematic exercise of performing influential strategies expands the functionality of ethical intelligence.

It is important to clarify that the intelligence of an individual does not evolve based on strategic planning, it evolves driven by the planned actions an individual does. The success and the failure of these actions drive the evolution of intelligence when the individual does the necessary amendments in case of failure.

The stagnation of the level of use of strategic intelligence generates the degradation of ethical intelligence because the individual loses, step by step, her/his adaptation capacity, which drives necessarily towards a survivor ethics in order to avoid being excluded from the environment.

While the evolutionary process requires increasing the level of consciousness of actions, the involution process is fully unconscious, because “involution” is a personal and social taboo that cannot be accepted.

Intelligence evolves based on actions in the real world. The brain requires having a real need in order to expand the functionality of the neural system that guides human actions.

That is why the reading of books empowers the intelligence necessary to improve the reading capacity and not the doing capacity.

Intelligence CatalystsOne of the objectives of the research was to find personal methods that catalyze the expansion of an individual’s intelligence. What was discovered is that catalysts for the development of intelligence only work when the individual has a real need to generate value to influence an environment, s/he has an institutionalized attitude which means a role driven attitude, that implies that this search to add value is not subjective-driven and has the necessary reliable knowledge to generate such value.

In conceptual terms, this can be defined as being complementation building driven, assuming an adaptive leading role and being able to acquire the necessary knowledge to build such complementation.

Complementation Building (Unicist “Q” Method), Institutionalization (adaptive leadership) and Reliable knowledge Building (Unicist 5 Why Method) work as catalysts in the development of intelligence.

In this context, The Unicist Research Institute has decided to give free access to these technologies to the community through the Unicist Goodwill Network to foster equal opportunities for young people.

You can access the Unicist “Q” Method at:
http://www.goodwillnetwork.net/deb-uqm.php

The Unicist “5 Why” Method is available at:
http://www.goodwillnetwork.net/deb-5why.php

The approach to “Adaptive Leadership” can be found at:
http://www.goodwillnetwork.net/deb-leadership.php

Introducing these catalysts requires having the necessary will and discipline to make this process work. It requires installing “evolution” in one’s lifestyle. The comfort zone needs to be displaced towards the satisfaction of generating value.

A Generic Solution to Expand Intelligence

The action-reflection-action process proposed by the unicist logical approach to complex environments is a way to deal with such environments but also a way to expand the intelligence of those who use this approach. This approach implies the use of the before mentioned methods (Unicist Q Method, 5 Why Method and Adaptive Leadership approach).

The final conclusion, in plain language, is that if someone wants to empower her/his intelligence, s/he should not imagine or study. Only actions will drive the evolution of intelligence; and the action-reflection-action process is the most powerful method to influence an environment while developing one’s intelligence. Ethical intelligence does not evolve based on moral thinking but on developing value adding actions.

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm.
https://www.unicist-school.org/theoryofevolution/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/turi.pdf

Share

Evolution is Purpose Driven: The Discovery of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature

Darwins finchesThis research began in 1976 with the hypothesis that in nature there are mutations that are random but others that are driven by a purpose.

If this hypothesis was confirmed and there were a purpose, Peter Belohlavek concluded that there would have to be an intelligence that defined such purpose.

For this reason, Belohlavek researched on the essential structure implicit in nature’s intelligence to be able to predict and exert influence on the evolution of complex adaptive systems when possible.

Charles Darwin demonstrated the adaptation process of species that, having the same structural constitution, developed adaptive changes to live in a certain environment.

The hypothesis of Belohlavek’s research was that these changes were driven by an intelligence that underlies nature.

The Unified field of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of NatureHe concluded that each living creature’s evolution is ruled by its ontogenetic intelligence, that defines it as unique both in its species and individuality and that the essential structure of this intelligence is integrated by a purpose, an active principle (entropic function) and an energy conservation principle.

The research was focused on the unified field of living beings.

The basic assumption that sustains this development is that the evolution of living beings, their behaviors, actions and deeds are driven by the same logical structural framework.

This implies that there is an intelligence that defines the structural behavior of any entity that integrates this framework that allows predicting the behavior of all the entities where this intelligence is known.

You can find the complete document on the “Discovery of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature” at: http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Basics

Unicist Press Committee

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

Share

Unicist Research: Closing the gap between macro and micro behavior

The Unicist Research closed the gap between macro and micro behaviour. The unicist complexity research approach implies dealing with applications while researching, which requires that the lapse of research time be very long in order to achieve fully accurate predicted results before validating a hypothesis.

discoveries-unicist-2013-2014As it has been done every year since its foundation, The Unicist Research Institute synthesized this January the researches that had been finished until that time. After 38 years, 2013/2014, can be considered the year in which the integration of macro and micro behavior could be confirmed.

The gap between the macro and the micro cosmos has been and is still a problem that theoretical physicists are closing. The integration of the field of macro and micro behavior, that has been solved by Peter Belohlavek, is homologous. It allows integrating social behavior with individual behavior, making human complex adaptive systems manageable.

The publication of Conceptual Economics, Conceptual Anthropology and Conceptual Psychology are some of the milestones of this process that included the researches developed in 2013-2014 (see image above).

You can access Conceptual Economics and Conceptual Anthropology at:
http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Economy

If you want to access the “Drivers of Human Behavior” that explain the structure of human intelligence, please access: www.unicist.org/repo/#Psychology

Unicist Press Committee

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

Share

What are Complexity Sciences?

The objective of the Unicist Approach to Complexity Sciences developed by Peter Belohlavek was to find a scientific approach to understand nature and provide a structure to emulate it when designing, building or managing complex adaptive systems.

Unicist Approach to Complexity SciencesBelohlavek developed the epistemological structure for complexity sciences, by developing the unicist ontological methodology for complex systems research, which substituted the systemic approach to research adaptive systems and was materialized in the unicist logical approach to deal with adaptiveness.

This is an excerpt comparing the different approaches that intended to deal with Complexity Sciences. It needs to be stated that the unicist approach developed the first integrated structure to manage complex adaptive systems.

Until the existence of this approach the methods of systemic sciences were used as a palliative to deal with complex adaptive behaviors.

The structure of the unicist approach to complexity sciences implies the integration of a unicist ontological approach, which defines the structure of the nature of a specific reality with the use of unicist objects that allow emulating the organization of nature to predict the behavior of complex adaptive systems, design them, built them or manage them.

Access to a synthetic comparison of the Unicist Approach with the different approaches based on their nature and functionality:

  1. Complex Adaptive Systems
  2. Ontologies
  3. Objects

Comparison of the Approaches to Complexity Sciences

Aspect

Peter Belohlavek’s approach
to Complexity Sciences
(*)

Preexisting approaches: Bateson, Förster, Lorenz, Maturana, Morin, Prigogine
and others

Field of Study Complex adaptive systems Complex adaptive systems
Approach Pragmatic – Structural – Functionalist Empirical
Definition of the field of study A specific reality as a unified field that includes the restricted and wide contexts and the emergence of the system Based on the emergence of the system
Possibility of external observation Inexistent Inexistent
Research method Unicist Ontological Research Systemic research
Boundaries of the system Open Open
Self organization Concepts – analogous to strange attractors Strange Attractors / undefined
Structure Double Dialectics Dynamics
Purpose – active function – energy conservation function
Variables
Relationship between the elements Following complementation and supplementation laws Undefined
Evolution / Involution Based on the evolution/involution laws of the ontogenetic intelligence of nature Undefined
Processes Object driven processes Undefined
Certainty Dealing with possibilities and probabilities Dealing with probabilities
Demonstration Real applications Real applications
Emulation in mind Double dialectical thinking
(using ontointelligence)
Complex thought
Emergence Results Results
Chaos Inexistent Existent
Influence on the system Based on actions and driving, inhibiting, entropy inhibiting, catalyzing and gravitational objects. Based on actions
Validation Destructive and non-destructive tests (real applications) Systemic research validation methods

 

Comparison of Ontologies with the Unicist Ontology

Comparison of:

Ontology (Philosophy)
Aristotle, Wolff,
Kant and others

Ontology (Information Science)
Gruber, Sowa, Arvidsson and others

Unicist Ontology (Complexity Sciences)
Peter Belohlavek (*)

Purpose Knowledge acquisition Information and knowledge acquisition Managing complex adaptive systems and adaptive processes
Foundations Discovery Shared expert opinions Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature and discovery of functionalities
Use in business To apprehend reality Artificial Intelligence  and building of complex information systems Manage human adaptive systems and adaptive processes
Scope of application Universal Artificial Intelligence, Information Systems Development of ontogenetic maps for the individual, institutional, business and social fields.
Language used Natural Web Ontology Language and others Unicist Standard Language and natural language
Results to be achieved True knowledge Valid knowledge and information Value generation
Evolution / Involution laws Inexistent Inexistent Unicist laws of evolution
Validation model Inexistent Inexistent Unicist logic
Taxonomic structure Inexistent Based on shared validation Defined by the Unicist Algorithms
Mathematic validation Inexistent Inexistent Following the Unicist logic
Deals with Ideas Categories and objects Algorithms and business objects
Oneness One ontology for each aspect of reality Depending on the consensus of the expert opinions One ontology for each functionality

Comparison of the different types of objects

Objects Oriented Programming

Main concepts of objects in IT programming

Complex Adaptive
Systems

Main concepts of
unicist objects

Adaptive Systems
in Nature

Main concepts of objects in nature (e.g. a tree)

Class Restricted Context Species
Object Business Object Entity
Inheritance Homologous Inheritance Inheritance
Method Method Functionality
Event Action Action
Message Information System Nervous System
Attributes Fundamentals Morphology
Abstraction Ontogenetic Map Genotype
Encapsulation Unified Field Phenotype
Polymorphism Polymorphism Polymorphism
Synchronicity Synchronicity
Critical Mass Critical Mass

Complexity Science Research

The unicist theory expanded the frontiers of sciences making the scientific approach to complex adaptive systems possible without needing to use arbitrary palliatives to transform complex systems into systemic systems in order to be able to research them.

Complexity Science ResearchParadoxically, this is a breakthrough and a back to basics. On the one hand, it is a breakthrough because it changed the paradigms of scientific research. On the other hand, it is a back to basics because it drives sciences to deal with the nature of reality.

The unicist logical approach opened the possibilities of managing complexity sciences using a pragmatic, structured and functionalist approach.

The unicist approach to complexity is based on the research of the unicist ontological structure of a complex adaptive system which regulates its evolution. This is based on emulating the structure of the unicist ontogenetic intelligence of nature considering that every functional aspect of reality has a unique unicist ontological structure.

The approach to ontological structures of reality requires going beyond the dualistic thinking approach and being able to use the double dialectical logic to approach complex adaptive systems.

The research in complexity science needs to have its own format for its presentation that has a structural difference with the papers for systemic sciences (abstract, introduction, materials and methods, discussion, literature).

Synthesis

The unicist approach to complexity sciences is a pragmatic, structural and functionalist approach.

This approach establishes the framework for the research on complexity sciences but also for the unicist logical approach that uses the conclusion of the researches in their application in the field of complex adaptive systems.

The Unicist Research Institute

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems.
https://www.unicist-school.org/theoryofevolution/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/turi.pdf

Share

Researching Adaptive Systems is an Adaptive Process

The research and design of complex adaptive systems requires adapting to the different application fields.

Therefore the semantics of the ontological structure has been defined using different wording for the homologous ontogenetic structure.

Logical approaches have been developed to solve specific problems. Researching and designing human complex adaptive systems implies the use of a new logic.

Unicist logic has been developed to deal with complexity and integrates preexisting logical approaches in their oneness.

The learning of the reading of unicist ontologies and unicist logic is strongly recommended when entering the field of researching human complex adaptive systems.

The understanding of the ontology of “biological entities” helps to follow the laws of nature when dealing with genetic engineering processes and use it to apprehend the nature of beings with “artificial life” such as institutions.

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the pioneering complexity science research organization developing solutions for complex adaptive systems using ontogenetic ontologies and object driven technologies. More than 4,000 ontological researches were developed since 1976 until July 2011 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution.

Share

Dualistic thinking drives towards non-adaptive behaviors

Unicist double dialectics requires using unicist logic that makes adaptive processes possible. Simple dialectics is the consequence of using dualistic thinking to deal with reality.

Dualistic thinking necessarily fosters non-adaptive behavior driven by idealistic, materialistic, spiritual or egocentric needs. Dualism is necessary when personal needs prevail over functional adaptation.

The consequence of dualistic thinking is that people believe in dialectical behavior. Adaptation is impossible when using dualistic thinking.

The benefit of using simple dialectics is that it transforms humans in judges of reality instead of responsible participants. “Right/wrong”, “nice/ugly”, “thesis/antithesis” are just examples of this way of thinking.

Why is simple dialectics so addictive?

There are several reasons:

1) It provides the foundations for rational univocal thinking which sustains the cause-effect approach to deal with simple problems.
2) It is the less energy consuming thinking process because it uses the natural binary neural process which is implicit in instinctive behavior.
3) It allows individuals to make value judgments disguised as rational processes. This provides the perception of being in power.

But simple dialectics has proven to be fallacious to understand and influence evolution. That is why simple dialectical approaches to reality drive to non-adaptive behaviors stimulated by the needs of domination, criticism, survival and inaction of individuals.

Access or request a Unicist Tweetinar on this subject at:
http://www.academic.unicist.org/unicist_tweetinars.shtml

Learn more about the trend of ontology based solutions for businesses:
http://www.unicist.net/obs.shtml

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the pioneering complexity science research organization developing solutions for complex adaptive systems using ontogenetic ontologies and object driven technologies. More than 3,500 ontological researches were developed since 1976 until September 2010 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution.

 

Share