Unicist Ontology for Scenario Building

This year The Unicist Research Institute has celebrated the 35th anniversary with the most fruitful research effort in their history having finished more than 600 researches including some of them than demanded far more than 20 years (consciousness, unified field of human adaptive systems, etc). They made 600 new aspects in the field of individual, institutional and social fields become possible.

The unicist approach is based on finding out what is possible in order to focus on it. The unicist approach deals with the “possible”, defined as a noun. It has to be considered that a possibility is a conditional situation while the “possible” is an assertive fact.

What is possible sustains success. Everything that is possible can be achieved. But this has a problem: while it provides the security of what can be done, it demands the freedom of assuming the responsibility for doing it.

The crises in the world happen because something was not “possible” but this situation was disregarded. Failures are always a consequence of someone trying to do something impossible or of something possible that was not done because people did not assume the responsibility.

That is why The Unicist Research Institute promotes:

2012, the year of the “Possible”

Executive Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became the major research organization in the world in the field of human adaptive systems. More than 4,200 unicist ontological researches were developed since 1976 until December 2011 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution. They included the development of the unicist ontogenetic maps (DNA) of institutions.

The discovery of the anthropological (cultural) invariables allowed explaining human essential behavior. These invariables are, on the one hand, the human need for security and freedom and, on the other hand, the alternative trend towards expansion or contraction.

This was modeled in the double pendular behavior of humans that allows apprehending human evolution at an essential level.

The research on human intelligence and the discovery of ontointelligence, defined by ethical intelligence, the type of thought and strategic intelligence, allowed explaining how humans deal with adaptive systems. It defines the depth, amplitude and timeframe an individual can manage in the field of adaptive systems.

The ontogenetic maps are cross-cultural because their structure is based on the anthropological invariables which makes them self-evident in any culture.

We invite you to be our guest at the Unicist Library : http://www.unicist.com

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became the major research organization in the world in the field of human adaptive systems. More than 4,000 unicist ontological researches were developed since 1976 until July 2011 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution. They included the development of the unicist ontogenetic maps (DNA) of institutions.

The discovery of the ontogenetic intelligence of nature opened the possibilities to deal with adaptive systems without needing to treat them as systemic systems.

It established that every living being is regulated by an intelligence that establishes its purpose, its active principle to evolve and its energy conservation principle to sustain its purpose.

It established that these elements in their oneness behave in a double dialectical way:

• The purpose is put into action by the active function having a relationship ruled by the supplementation law.
• The purpose is sustained by the energy conservation principle having a relationship based on the complementation law.

This discovery established the basics that allowed approaching adaptive systems based on their unicist ontologies and building their ontogenetic maps which emulate the ontogenetic intelligence of nature. The ontogenetic maps remain unchanged as long as a function exists, for example negotiation, leadership, strategy, etc.

We invite you to be our guest at the Unicist Library to access the collection of books on Unicist Business Architecture: http://www.unicist.com

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became the major research organization in the world in the field of human adaptive systems. More than 4,000 unicist ontological researches were developed since 1976 until July 2011 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution. They included the development of the unicist ontogenetic maps (DNA) of institutions.

The social capital of a culture is based on its integration capacity, its competitive attitude and its cooperative willingness.

It can be defined by the strengths of the bonds between the members of the community.

It is necessary to understand the attitude of a culture when dealing with globalization.

Different cultures have different ways to evolve, based on their archetypes and materialized by their social capital.

It can be said that the Central European countries have a cooperative bias while the USA has a competitive bias and Japan an integrative one.

The attitude of a culture is driven by its elite and followed by the mass. Extremely individualistic elites, typical in non-consolidated countries, generate a lack of social capital making their structure unstable.

Diplomacy needs to adapt to the characteristics of cultures to achieve results. Multinational companies need to avoid projecting the values of their headquarters to foreign markets in order to expand.

Knowing the archetypes of countries is useful to adapt to each culture without losing the objectives to be achieved.

We invite you to be our guest at the Unicist Library to learn about “Globalization, the new tower of Babel?”:

http://www.unicist.com/futureresearch/

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is a pioneer in complexity science research. More than 4,000 ontological researches were developed since 1976 until July 2011 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution, including the development of ontology based and business object driven solutions for businesses.

Countries become institutionalized when their governmental actions become interdependent with the actions of the State. This can only be apprehended if the unified field of a Country is known in its ontological structure.

Click on the image to open it.

When governments dominate the actions of the State, there is no possibility of equilibrated evolution. Governments need to ensure the conjuncture while the State provides solutions for the structure.

Political institutions are the representatives of the people that define the politicians that will be in charge of the countries’ administration.

Considering the double dialectical behavior of social systems there are necessarily two complementary positions in the administration of a Country considered as a unified field: The conservative and the liberal.

Conservatives’ goal is to administrate countries as if their past and future were symmetric. As this is obviously illogical, they produce the necessary fallacious rational constructions to avoid the perception that they are building the future based on the past.

That is why they are driven by the answers they find in the past.

They need to have the necessary methods to manage, covering the weaknesses of a culture defined by its fallacious myths. They are necessarily the dominant party of an equilibrated Country.

On the other hand, liberals seek to change a country by opening the boundaries of the present situation based on the strengths of cultures materialized in their myths. They need to be driven by questions in order to find the way to deal with the new boundaries.

They are functional to countries that became stagnated because of long periods of conservatism or that need to change on the basis of the changes of the global context.

Change requires necessarily having the necessary strength to produce it. That is why change requires a liberal approach which deals with the strengths of a culture.

The distance between conservatives and liberals has to be wide enough to produce changes but small enough so as to generate evolution without generating revolutions.

Conservatives imply the prevalence of the energy conservation function of a country with a dualistic approach to ensure the structural values of a culture and their traditional way of life.

Liberals need to be driven by the active function of a country in order to produce changes which become effective if they are defined with an integrative (non-dualistic) approach. Their goal is to drive a country to a higher level.

Non institutionalized countries are endangered because they are implicitly weaker than the institutionalized ones. That is why they become militarily influenced when they consider that their integrity is threatened and religiously influenced when their structural values become threatened.

In both cases these countries are driven by a dualistic non dialectical approach with a hypothetical intention to become institutionalized in a meaningful way.

Military and religious people need to have a dualistic approach to reality. It is natural for their role in society. Their approach also includes two wings, a conservative and a liberal wing, but in a mutually excluding sense.

Paradoxically, they can only generate true institutionalization by the reaction of the culture, not by their action. Understanding the state of political equilibrium allows knowing how to deal with it.

It needs to be known that there is no correspondence between leftists, rightists, liberals and conservatives.  Every ideology has its conservative and its liberal group.

We invite you to be our guest at the Unicist Library to learn about “The Nature of Ideologies”:

http://www.unicist.com/futureresearch/

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is a pioneer in complexity science research. More than 4,000 ontological researches were developed since 1976 until July 2011 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution, including the development of ontology based and business object driven solutions for businesses.

The unicist historical research model is based on the unicist ontology of evolution considering that the structure “thesis-antithesis-synthesis” is inexistent. The “simple” dialectic is an over-simplification to foster voluntarism.

The unicist ontology of evolution considers that natural evolution is ruled by a double dialectic behavior:

1) Thesis-antithesis

2) Thesis – homeostasis

The integration of both dialectics defines the ontological structure of a given reality. The unicist methodology of historical research is based on the analysis of events and their inclusion in an ontological structure.

This explains history integrating the descriptive, interpretative, anthropological and ontological approaches. This methodology considers ideologies as a part of the structure, but avoids ideological contamination in history.

The four segments to approach history are:

The descriptive approach

It is a chronological description of the facts of history. It can be restricted to a particular fact or include its context. It gives equal weight to important and less important events.

The interpretative approach

It is a description focused on important events, excluding those the author does not see as important. It usually includes the qualification of the events to explain their inclusion or exclusion.

The anthropological approach

It is a description of the events describing the facts structured by the knowledge of the anthropological invariables. It includes a functional description of the events and the functional relation between them.

The ontological approach

It is a description of the events describing the facts structured by the knowledge of the ontological structure of the reality under research. It requires the knowledge of the ontological structure of a reality and the use of the unicist logic to be able to define the functionality of the events.

Unicist ontological research of history

The unicist research of history includes the four approaches. Thus the more segments are covered by the researchers the more objective the conclusions of historical research are.

We invite you to be our guest at the Unicist Library to learn about “The Nature of Ideologies”:

http://www.unicist.com/futureresearch/

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is a pioneer in complexity science research. More than 4,000 ontological researches were developed since 1976 until July 2011 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution, including the development of ontology based and business object driven solutions for businesses.

We are republishing the information included in the book “Growth Crisis 2008-2010!” to provide information on what we consider is the nature of the European conjuncture.

The history of the crisis has two basic preconditions and two main triggering causes.

The preconditions are the fall of the communist system and the use of consumerism in order to sustain scarcity as an economic driver.

The two triggering causes were the technological plateau and shareholders dominance in economic organizations.

The dot.com “prelude” was a demonstration of the technological plateau and of shareholders’ dominance using the money of the “market”.

Considering the forecast made using the unicist ontology of evolution, the recovery from the crisis will be based on a structural change of the rules of the game.

Economy will be much more institutionalized with two extreme different solutions.

Those who believe in bottom-up development will develop strong institutions to inhibit the entropy of the economic system.

Those who believe in top-down development will develop institutions to control the market. In the middle, there will be different solutions to catalyze the market growth.

Considering similar economic structures, bottom-up approaches will grow faster than top-down approaches. Top-down approaches will develop in a more secure and slower way and with a higher risk of corruption.

Feudalist capitalism, where there is no real participation of the market in the property of companies will develop naturally towards a top-down approach.

Denial of the crisis is a natural response when structures quake. Denial has two aspects. The positive aspect is that it avoids uncontrollable changes. The negative aspect is that it inhibits the evolution of counter-cycles.

Globalization, being a controversial word in the past, will begin to make sense in order to build the new economic system.

The different types of democracy will develop their bottom-up and top-down trade-offs in order to maintain their participation model.

Businesses have the responsibility to survive and at the same time to develop growth counter-cyclical strategies.

The necessary condition to build a counter-cycle is the development of a niche market. These niche markets behave like parallel realities.

To access a counter-cyclical effect it is necessary to change the concept of what is being offered to the market. The concept to be introduced might be redundant with the existing concept, with the implicit risk of cannibalization. It also might be complementary generating an adjacent market.

The introduction of a different concept of product or service does not generate a counter-cycle. Counter-cycles require also the existence of credibility and trust. Its implementation requires similar or complementary products and services but based on a different concept.

Counter-cyclical strategies require creativity and innovation.

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.

In order to develop a historical research it is necessary to have a mature relation with the history to be researched. That implies having a respectful and adapted attitude towards the specific reality and having the need to unveil the history to add value to the environment.

Rationalistic approaches lead, in the best case, to interpretative and descriptive historical researches.

The methodological steps to follow in the research are:

1. Detailed description of the chronicle of the history under research. It includes only the restrictive context defining the beneficiaries and the damaged of each event.

2. Isolate the most significant events. Significance is defined by the importance of the benefits and the damage of events.

3. Define the events as objects (see glossary), describing the driving function, the energy conservation function and the purpose of each event.

4. Describe the driving function, the energy conservation function and the purpose of the context of the event.

5. Build a concept map of the history under research.

6. Evaluate the evolution occurred in the context after the event occurred.

7. Redefine the event considering its significance in the environment.

8. Describe the events structured by the knowledge of the anthropological invariables. It includes a functional description of the events and the functional relations between them.

9. Describe the events structured by the knowledge of the ontological structure of the reality under research.

10. Analyze the taboos which are affected by the historical research.

11. Publish the history that can be accepted by the environment under research.

12. Keep the non-published information in a special file so it can be published when the appropriate time has come.

Conclusions

Doing historical research implies making a diagnosis of a given reality. Therefore it must be considered that the language to be used is not only the scientific one but also the language that can be read and accepted by the members of the community or institution involved.

That is why historical information is often considered classified to avoid damaging publics’ feelings.

History researchers have to be aware that they deal with the taboos, myths and utopias of the community. Dealing with these subjects requires a respectful, careful and subtle approach to scientific knowledge.

To be able to understand this methodology, it is necessary to comprehend the unicist methodology of complex systems research and the unicist ontology of evolution.

We invite you to be our guest at the Unicist Library to learn about “Beyond Taboos – The Unicist Ontology of History ”:
http://www.unicist.com/futureresearch/

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is a pioneer in complexity science research. More than 4,000 ontological researches were developed since 1976 until July 2011 in the field of individual, institutional and social evolution, including the development of ontology based and business object driven solutions for businesses.

Peter Belohlavek’s research demonstrated that economic growth is produced when there is an increase of technology, scarcity, monetary circulation and competitiveness in an environment. This growth theory is applicable to micro and macroeconomics. The Unicist standard defined the objects that are necessary to be upgraded in order to foster economic growth. The driver for growth is the increase of monetary circulation but its catalyst is competitiveness. Apprehending the concept of economic growth allows designing growth strategies.

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

Press Committee

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.

The purpose of wealth is to foster evolution to guarantee the opportunities for the next generations. Wealth/Social evolution depends on the working capacity limited by the social and institutional inertia of a culture.

Operationally, wealth depends on the working capacity, the technology, the education and the inertia of a culture. Poverty as such doesn’t exist. Poverty implies the absence of Wealth.

That is why it is commonly seen in underdeveloped countries that there are organizations who promote the “combat of poverty”.

You can combat thieves because they exist, you can combat enemies, but you cannot combat poverty. What you need to increase is wealth. The combat of poverty is just a fallacious myth to justify the distribution of an existing wealth.

The production of wealth must be fostered to reduce poverty. Combating poverty produces more poverty.

Poor countries have no power, because their working capacity is extremely low, that is why they are poor.

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.