Integrating Elegant Reasonism Across Academia

Given Unification Accomplished, and the quest for it apparently over, the question then becomes where do we go from here? SOLREI INC is working to develop a syllabus acting as an example and fodder for others to throw darts at. The idea being the development of a solid curricula spanning all levels. Accreditation for such a curricula needs to be developed and we have sent letters to the U.S. Department of Education seeking to train all the necessary key influencers in this particular domain of discourse. That audience is likely huge and we need an approach to get to them all expeditiously.

NOTE: This article is under active development and is not finished.

What Elegant Reasonism Is

Elegant Reasonism is a utility process employing a framework supporting an epistemology which seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science and which produced the first fully compliant Encapsulated Interpretative Model (EIM) to close: The Emergence Model.

The Importance Is Because

Richard P Feynman, circa 1950, discussing the vagaries between knowing and understanding. Strategically at issue and relevance here is the ability and capability to discern and engage simultaneous truths and theories. Historically, under empirical rules, if two experiments agree with reality there was no real way to determine preferential treatment of them. That may no longer be the case. We now have Elegant Reasonism which joins the traditional epistemologies and establishes truth as a function of the unified Universe rather than the ability to duplicate the results. Elegant Reasonism can be considered a superset epistemology in as much as it integrates empiricism, rationalism, etc., etc., but statistically weights those other epistemologies relative to and respective of their ability to reflect the unified Universe. Empirical evidence is necessary and must also comply with what we call the realm of c’s, but it is insufficient to accomplish unification alone. Here again, we simply cite history. If empirical evidence were sufficient we likely would have accomplished unification a long time ago but we did not.


  • Encapsulation prevents, precludes, and otherwise obfuscates evidence, insights, and therein derived knowledge EIM to EIM. Therefore it is necessary not only to employ the process to develop these domains of discourse and constituent details but to justify them to other people. Anyone encountering insights from area B whose fundamental interpretative insights are from area A will think the person espousing those items from area B to be ‘off their proverbial rocker’. The two groups have no basis for context except the utility process and framework supporting the epistemology.
    • For example, humanity has been searching for unification for thousands of years. Why did no one find it before now? The answer is that the solution required a complete reintegration of philosophy and science. We have been looking for an object in the corner of a round room. We needed to pause, take a breath, and back up to look at the problem objectively. SOLREI INC did that and it took almost 20 years to accomplish. Now its done. At strategic issue is where we go from here, when, and with what urgency. (We think its pretty urgent for a variety of reasons).
  • Everyone has been rampantly committing Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs). What is at fundamentally at issue here is not just what is perceived but why and the implications of that. We need to be enabling our successors and progeny to perceive and engage the unified Universe. Status quo thinking does not accomplish that task and anyone doubting that need only look at history for their evidence.
  • These issues affect all business enterprise and industry. The euphemism “what I am doing is logically correct, therefore I don’t need this” is akin to sticking your head in the sand. Any critical review of In Unification’s Wake, Part 05: Business Impact will understand that existing IP assets must be mode shifted with intrepidity and urgency if they are to be protected by current owners. It is a relatively safe wager that almost no entity currently has adequate skills to accomplish that. Consequently the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) should be {very} concerned about market volatility as we cycle through these issues relative to enterprise performance in a competitively free marketplace. The marketplace will be at the mercy of deep pocketed competitors skillfully wielding this disruptive technology.


Many just want the silver bullet answer and the situation is not that simple. It is not because the fundamental interpretative context changes EIM to EIM. That context is encapsulated and unique to the EIM manifesting those patterns. Those patterns and the context manifesting them are internal to each EIM.  Those patterns must be holistically recognized before they can be subjected to any analytical rigor or discipline. That is to say for any given Paradigm of Interest/Nature (POI/N) each EIM manifesting those pattern must be fully documented along with all of the constituent abstractions and their definitions. The ISO 9001 Unification Tool, or its equivalent may be used for that purpose. The process of encapsulation obfuscates perception of other EIMs exernal to the current EIM manifesting that fundamental context. Perception generally does not penetrate encapsulation boundaries. That’s why encapsulation is so important on the 2D Articulation Layer. Once the basic mode shifting capabilities are enabled is when the real work begins, although there will no doubt have already been major insights illuminated for the investigative team. They were for us anyway. Presuming your experience is similar to ours then your experiences will be tacit and palpable.

The take away from the paragraph above is that results documented in Treatise will likely hold no value for anyone not familiar with the utility process, framework and epistemology. All these things must be simultaneously understood in order to establish fundamental value which is represented in the Treatise. If the results are presented in a disconnected fashion then others will have no basis to establish justification for your assertions. Everyone must be on the same page in order to understand how those insights were developed and to do that requires a common foundation for communications. See In Unification’s Wake, Part 03: Communications. It will be important to segregate the process, the framework, the epistemology, from any results generated and talk about them separately in order not to confuse your audience. Discuss the benefits each brought to your investigation separately. The more you can articulate these distinct values the more your audience will relate to your objectives and understand how you arrived at your conclusions. These factors all go hand in hand. Having said that there is another factor here and it is the fine line between Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) and the actual real unified Universe. Never do we want to cross that line in our work but at the same time we need to understand that requirements we must work under come from the other side of that line. Remember humanity is inside the test tube and what we are doing necessarily integrates everything real – including us. We must be very careful in reflecting reality with the body of our work.

Curricula Standards

If we step back away from all this and look at it objectively then we must recognize the statistically derived value each of the different philosophical epistemologies represent relative to and respective of the unified Universe. That’s not us handing you that requirement, it is the unified Universe handing it to us all. The unified Universe is the final arbiter in every case. We have started working on an example curricula to use as fodder to throw darts at which might be used as an example in order to establish standards across all academic levels, and by enterprise and industry for practical application. Given the obfuscation that arises because of manifestation by any given EIM through the epistemological encapsulation process we must help students understand, at the appropriate levels of maturity how all this comes to bear on our perception of reality. Central to such standards will be something we call NNRP. As students comprehend and increase conversational skills in the holistic, fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism their thinking will too align with the unified Universe. We can not understate how powerful this will be for civilization.







#ElegantReasonism #EmergenceModel #Unification #ModeShifting #Epistemology #UtilityProcess #Framework #TranslationMatrices #Accreditation #Education #Curricula #NNRP


By Charles McGowen

Charles C McGowen is a strategic business consultant. He studied Aerospace Engineering at Auburn University '76-'78. IBM hired him early in '79 where he worked until 2003. He is now Chairman & CEO of SolREI, Inc. ORCID:

%d bloggers like this: