The emulation of reality is a hyperrealistic construction. A business model is, by definition, a hyperreality.

Unicist hyperrealism becomes functional when the unified field of a business has been envisioned in its oneness, including the operational aspects that allow achieving the established goals.

Unicist hyperrealism requires being able to define a business model at an ontological (conceptual) level and describe its operational aspects.

This process requires integrating different contexts, including the person who is envisioning it, in a unified field. A reflection process is necessary because dualistic thinking doesn’t suffice to build a unified field; it hinders its building.

It has to be considered that the unicist reflection process is driven by real pilot tests.

This is what allows building the hyperreality of a business model. Without real pilot tests there is no possibility to validate a business model.

Until the emulation demonstrates its actual functionality, it is just a hypothesis or a projection of those who did it.

The Ladder

There was a clan living at the seaside of the “Land of Opportunities”. They were 6 men and 6 women. They lived in nice huts in a small village. These huts surrounded the shack of their chief, demonstrating his rank.

They were happy and comfortable with their life and deeds but the global warming process was endangering their survival. It was expected that during the next ten years the melting of the North Pole would produce the invasion of their land by the ocean.

Under this extreme condition, the need to survive forced them to seek for new opportunities. The access to other opportunities required climbing a cliff that separated their remaining land from the rest of the country. Fortunately, there was no apparent problem for climbing the cliff because in the Land of Opportunities there were ladders for everyone who wanted to grow.

The chief decided that it was time to grow before the sea invaded their property. So there they went, all together, while the chief entered his shack to plan the details of the new life. Everyone picked up a ladder and began to ascend the cliff. The ladders were large enough to achieve the upper land.

But while they were ascending step by step the ladders began to sink in the soil until they disappeared when they put their foot on the last step.

They looked astonished at each other. What kind of ladders were these?

As there were many ladders available they tried again….. But the result was the same.

They didn’t want to call the chief for such a meaningless problem. They had to solve it.

The senior of the clan proposed to build stone basements for the ladders to sustain them.

So they did and it worked!

They climbed three steps without problems but then, suddenly, the basements disappeared and the ladders sunk into the soil.

Finally, there was a unique ladder left. It was their last chance to grow.

To avoid spoiling their opportunity they called the chief and told him what had happened.

He was astonished and became wordless.

“We need to build ladders”, was the final decision. But the situation was extremely bizarre.

There were neither screws nor nails available to build ladders, because their use had been forbidden many years ago since people used them to screw and nail other people.

Ladders needed to be built using sticks and ropes.

“Let’s build one ladder to test it”, decided the chief.

So they built it following the model of the last ladder that was left. As soon as it was finished they began to climb the ladder one by one. The last one would be the chief.

It worked! And they reached the top land. But suddenly, without notice, the landscape changed and they were again on the same place where they had started.

“Crazy, crazy, crazy!” were the silent words of the chief.

They went to sleep to overcome their frustration in order to start from scratch the following day.

Early in the morning the chief decided to be the first one to explore the Land of Opportunities in order to avoid the frustrations of the group.

And there he went!

Of course he arrived and… “Good!” he thought; “and now what?”

Suddenly the landscape changed again but instead of going back to the starting point he found himself in the middle of a fruitful farm.

He became astonished and wordless again.

He picked up some “Apples” looked down from the new land at his group and showed them shouting that they should follow him because the Land of Opportunities had opened its gates. His invitation was accepted by some members of the group but others didn’t believe him.

Six climbed the ladder and joined him but five remained in their old village.

They arrived one by one. Every new member who arrived produced a change in the landscape making it more fruitful. Thus they started a new life away from the seaside. At the beginning it was too different, hard and uncertain, but fruitful.

What had to happen happened. Weeks later, three of the members of the original group joined them and were welcome and integrated as if they had been there from the beginning.

Two remained on the seaside. Years after, the ocean finally invaded the seaside and their village disappeared. No one really knows what happened with the two who remained in the village. It is said that they went to Peter Pan’s Neverland before the ocean invaded the seaside.

Peter Belohlavek

What is the Ladder?

Riddles don’t have a right answer; they have many possible answers…

(1) Riddles have many solutions. In the Far East, riddles are used to develop internal freedom and responsibility.

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

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.

Fallacious myths are social constructions to avoid the disgregation of a group or community, hindering the perception of significant dysfunctional behaviors.

Fallacious myths are necessarily built to cover:

a)      Implicit weaknesses that cannot be accepted.
b)      Weaknesses that cannot be solved nor faced.

They transform social chronic dysfunctions into acceptable characteristics.

Fallacious myths are necessary to build cohesion

Humans integrate based on their weaknesses and collide based on their strengths. This is self-evident, although it is also a taboo.

But in extreme cases people cannot explicitly accept that they join based on their weaknesses.

Fallacious myths are built to join people without needing to face taboos. Their purpose is to integrate people in spite of existing unbearable weaknesses.

Groups would disgregate if the fallacious myths had not have been built.

That is why they are extremely functional in any culture.

The Ontology of Fallacious Myths

The purpose is disgregation avoidance. Therefore no interaction with the “external” environment is necessary. As no interaction is necessary, utopias do not need to foster actions.

Their utopias are apparent active functions that are coincident with the energy saving fallacies. As they are coincident, no action is necessary and the fallacious myths avoid disgregation without requiring any action.

The interaction happens among the members of a group. The purpose of this interaction is to confirm the validity of the fallacious myths. People who do not share the fallacious myths of a culture are aliens and cannot be part of the group.

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.

P=W/t

Work implies the capacity of displacing facts in nature in order to generate a usable added value for a society. Therefore it is implicit that the fundamentals of work are consistent with the different levels of archetypes.

The purpose of work in elites of influential archetypes is to generate added value in their societies. To do so their active function is driven by the transforming of nature and the energy conservation function is the need to overcome resource scarcity.

If we see it at an operational level we can define that:

The maximal strategy of the elites is to transform nature driven by the energy focused on knowledge and the personal need that sustains their actions is the self-affirmation of their deeds.

The minimum strategy to overcome resource scarcity is driven by the energy of their capacity to produce and the personal need that sustains their actions is the capacity to manage the time to make things happen.

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 major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,500 ontological researches in complexity sciences, developed since 1976 until September 2010, 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 Ontology of Evolution.

This is the first archetype that is being presented to apprehend influential cultures in the world. In this case, the objective is to provide information on the ontological structure of the culture of the USA in order to foster adaptation to the real world.

The Archetype of the USA is a paradigmatic example of how a culture can be leading in the world while strengthening its identity.

For this case, it is strongly recommended listening to the lecture you can find at: http://www.unicistinstitute.net/blog/unicist-future-research-the-archetype-of-the-usa/

Based on the research on the Archetype of the USA, its purpose is growth and its active function is given by the propensity to dare while achieving its “dream” within a credibility context.

The Maximal strategy implies that the culture is driven by daring actions to achieve its cultural “dream” within an institutionalized context.

The catalyst of the evolution of the American archetype is its institutionalization that accelerates its evolution. Institutionalization is materialized in the democratic rules of the society.

The icon of the cultural dream is the American Flag. Daring implies doing in terms of concrete operational actions to achieve growth and surpass the well-being achieved by the preceding generations.

The social pressure towards growth within a context of being a leading culture in the world generates uncertainty in the coming generations that fosters the need for addictions to avoid the responsibility to produce growth.

The minimum strategy of the archetype fosters thinking, driven by the personal objectives and within the limits of the personal credibility. That is why the USA archetype includes a multi-minority approach.

This minimum strategy provides the necessary context to develop hard technologies that sustain the economic activities of the maximal strategy.

Personal credibility is the entropy inhibitor of the American archetype. As wealth sustains the perception of security, personal credibility requires having solved the necessary financial situation that makes an individual credible.

Daring, dreaming, credibility and thinking integrated to achieve growth require a strong ethical environment that needs to be sustained by the judiciary system. Lying is unacceptable because it destroys the credibility and transparency of the archetype.

Understanding and respecting the archetype of the USA will be extremely useful to develop global and local businesses.

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 major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,500 ontological researches in complexity sciences, developed since 1976 until September 2010, 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 Ontology of Evolution.

Surviving requires seeing to believe

Conservative thinking requires seeing to believe. That is why when a new concept is being discussed and an individual asks for an analogical benchmark, it is because s/he is avoiding entering a new field.

Seeing to believe is necessary to deal with operational thinking. When operation has to be done it is necessary to deal with a credibility based on seeing. Seeing is used in a wide sense considering all the aspects that deal with sensory experiences to apprehend reality.

Seeing to believe is based on the past experiences of individuals to generate the credibility of present actions.

Forward-chaining thinking is the secure approach to reality which avoids having a high level of inner freedom because the external reality is apprehended through sensory experiences. The use of sensory information avoids the need to make decisions based on internal freedom.

1 + 1 = 2 is an arithmetic metaphor of forward-chaining thinking.

Minimum strategies, which need to ensure survival, require forward-chaining thinking and using the sensory experiences to believe.

Expansive actions require believing to see

Expansive actions require providing additional added value to the environment and thus they are implicitly innovative. The innovation is implicit in the additional added value.

Believing to see is necessary for conceptual thinking. Concepts are essential. Therefore they need to be approached based on abstract beliefs that need to be confirmed in their manifested operational actions.

Conceptual thinking implies reflection that goes beyond the sensory experiences of individuals. Homological experiences are the benchmarks to be used to apprehend new action fields.

Believing to see is an approach to the nature of a reality in order to influence the future evolution and develop present actions.

Backward-chaining thinking is necessary to approach any activity that deals with adaptive systems and complexity. The oneness can only be approached with backward-chaining thinking processes which are integrated in the unicist reflection process.

2 = Infinite Solutions is an arithmetic metaphor of backward-chaining thinking.

It requires the use of a high level of inner freedom, because there are no sensory parameters to confirm the validity of a process. That is why a “believing to see” approach needs to be sustained by destructive and non-destructive pilot tests.

Maximal strategies which allow expansion beyond the present boundaries of an activity require the use of backward-chaining thinking and using individuals’ beliefs that need to be validated with sensory experiences.

Doing within adaptive systems

Actions are the demonstration of a decision. There are unconscious, intuitive and conscious decisions. All actions include all the aspects but when we talk about “Doing” we imply actions ruled by conscious behavior.

Influencing adaptive systems requires integrating “believing to see and seeing to believe”.

But it has to happen following the ontological evolution law. An individual needs to believe in order to be able to see and then confirm what has been seen in order to validate the belief.

Managing adaptive systems implies beginning to apprehend the possibilities that can be achieved. To do so it is necessary to use backward-chaining thinking in order to apprehend the solution in its oneness. Therefore the first step to deal with adaptive systems requires the use of inner freedom to apprehend the actual reality. It requires “believing to see”.

This allows developing a maximal strategy that makes expansion possible.

After the concept has been grasped and used to develop a maximal strategy it is necessary to ensure survival developing minimum strategies. Minimum strategies are operation driven and use forward-chaining thinking as a tool that requires sensory experiences to confirm the validity of actions. Therefore it requires a “seeing to believe” approach.

The level of inner freedom required is minimal because actions are driven by sensory experiences.

Doing implies having the necessary inner freedom to be able to “believe to see” and the necessary discipline to follow a method to do, based on “seeing to believe”.

Businesses require “believing to see” to be defined, because they happen in the future that cannot be perceived through sensory experiences, and “seeing to be believe” in order to be administrated.

In business “seeing to believe” is a fallacy.

In operational activities “believing to see” is a utopia.

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 major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,500 researches in complexity science, developed since 1976 until September 2010,  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 Ontology of Evolution.

Institutions are entities with artificial life. They behave as a species, meaning that their goal is to expand and perdure in time. This is self-evident when we consider a Nation as an institution.

Therefore, institutions have an ontology that is homologous to the one of biological entities: http://www.theoryofevolution.net/blog/the-unicist-ontology-of-biological-entities/

Their purpose is permanence which requires having transcendent goals while satisfying the personal goals of their members.

They need to minimize the energy they consume. To do so the integration of their adaptive systems with their administrative systems is based on a natural organization that considers the environment, the technologies and the business.

Their adaptation is sustained by their strategy including maximal strategies to expand and minimum strategies to survive.

The understanding of the ontology of institutions considered as beings with artificial life allows, on the one hand, accessing a metamodel to build institutions and, on the other hand, it allows managing their evolution.

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,500 researches in complexity science, developed since 1976 until September 2010,  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 Ontology of Evolution.

Unicist Ontological destructive testing needs to be the first test when dealing with complex problems. The first step of a reflection process implies projecting one’s beliefs on the external reality.

This implies needing a destructive testing approach to eliminate the subjectivism that is implicit in any projection.

Destructive testing allows defining the limits of the validity of knowledge considering that there are always, on the one hand, conceptual limits and, on the other, operational limits.

The active function of destructive tests implies finding the conceptual limits which means dealing with operational and ontological benchmarking of succedaneum solutions.

On the other hand, the energy conservation function is based on finding the operational limits considering the operational benchmarking and the ontological benchmarking of substitutes.

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,500 researches in complexity science, developed since 1976 until September 2010,  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 Ontology of Evolution.

The Unicist Research Institute changed the paradigm of the complexity research focused on human individual, institutional and social evolution.

The Unicist Standard for complexity research was developed based on the characteristics of adaptive systems considered in their complexity.

Some of their characteristics are:

1) Open boundaries
2) Biunivocity of its components
3) The existence of conjunctions without disjunctions
4) The inexistence of observers

The consequence was the substitution of an epistemologically invalid approach to complex problems, dividing them into variables, which are inexistent, by a unicist ontological approach driven by objects, in which objects are integrated as subsystems in adaptive systems, following the rules of the ontogenetic intelligence of nature.

The unicist ontological research approach allowed researching adaptive systems in the oneness of the unified field they define, avoiding the development of hypothetical solutions based on inexistent cause-effect relations.

The unicist ontological research model enabled the definition of the field of possibilities of an adaptive system and to enter then in the field of probabilities of the occurrence of events.

This gave birth to the Unicist Standard to research and deal with human adaptive systems.

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,500 researches in complexity science, until September 2010,  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 Ontology of Evolution.

Human evolution implies the existence of an algorithm (taxonomy) to achieve a purpose. The first step appears to be putting the purpose into action.

This implies a previous taxonomic step: the understanding of the purpose. Then the first step is putting it into action. Without understanding, no action is possible.

The second step is then finding a way to optimize the energy; thus the energy conservation principle is applied.

When this taxonomy is respected and successful, individuals are evolving. This implies that they add value to the environment, obtain the counterpart and learn from the environment at the same time.

Evolution implies being aware of reality and making conscious actions in order to adapt to the environment.

More information:
Free access to the e-book: http://www.unicist.org/deb_ustdb.php

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

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,500 researches in complexity science, until September 2010,  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 Ontology of Evolution.