Power of the mindControl over the power of the mind is yours

Cognitive Velocity To Ah Ha!

Langer New Knowledge
Langer New Knowledge

Part of why Elon Musk is correct in calling for a pause to A.I. research is because we are, as a civilization, asking the wrong questions. In hindsight, and decidedly from the precipice of being able to perceive and engage the unified Universe free of committing Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs), the set of questions changes when we mode shift perspective between Status Quo Thinking feebly Modeling Reality not realizing the mistakes it is making. We came to the same conclusion as Musk but likely for very different reasons, though his reasons are quite enough, ours only add fuel, and meaning, to that fire. Time for an update in our collective thinking. Time to push through that threshold and onto the precipice from which we may better perceive and engage the unified Universe.

The point of this article perhaps like any good story, is not evident until the end. But unless you understand the twists and turns you will not appreciate the journey the plot takes. Cognitive velocity is dependent on the paradigm stack traversed enroute to the desired pattern.


Dreamers, by TE Lawrence
Dreamers, by TE Lawrence

Elegant Reasonism distills cognitive context forcing recognition. Systemic patterns and relationship are recognized relative to and respective of the unified Universe, or you will not gain the precipice of the unified Universe. The more severe point is that if you are not on that precipice then you do not have the whole picture. You are not dealing with all the facts. There are aspects of your thinking beyond your recognized thresholds and it is quite time to expand your horizons.

Taxonomic Implications

Philosophy has a taxonomy many would really love to ignore and that’s usually how they get all caught up in their nickers. Language is important and words matter but the behavior those words motivate must also align or the words do not carry any momentum nor inertia. Such are the vestiges of empty words. Philosophy, as the primary domain of discourse and study has many detail sets within it, each a domain of discourse in their own right. While that may sound fairly straight forward in theory, many, if not most, do not walk that talk in their daily lives. My obervation is that Elon Musk walks his talk, or at least tries to. There is no greater arguable example than perhaps epistemology, because there is more than one, and again many if not most, never question the epistemological source of truth for the statements they make. I can list the taxonomic relationships relative to and respective of philosophy pertinent here, but there is another shoe to fall after I do.

  • Philosophy (study of everything)
    • Axiology – philosophy of value derivation
    • Epistemology – philosophy of knowledge
      • Constructivism holds the source of truth is not a function of passively perceiving it within a direct process of knowledge transmission, rather they construct new understandings and knowledge through experience and social discourse, integrating new information with what they already know.
      • Elegant Reasonism holds the source of truth as function of the unified Universe
      • Empiricism holds the source of truth relative to the ability to repeat, duplicate, and share observed insights and experimental data
      • Rationalism holds the source of truth as a function of rational logic
      • Religous epistemology sources its truth as a function of individual religions from around the world.
      • and this list goes on from here….
    • Ontology – philosophy of being
    • Science – philosophy of nature
    • Supervenience – philosophy of order and priority
IBM Neural Synaptic Processor
IBM Neural Synaptic Processor

What is salient in the above taxonomic list is the epistemological source of truth associated with the context of how each is considered. That context is the other shoe to fall. We must mode shift what it is we thought we knew relative to and respective of the unified Universe. Only then can we draw appropriate conclusions. The vital point we would argue is that the entire list must be mode shifted into alignment with the unified Universe if we are to relate any of it, or its results, to the reality of all existence. All of these subject have entranced people for thousands of years. Over the last several decades something called Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) emerged from the information sciences. The global economic industrial complex has already produced an array of neural network processors and some of them are based in part on how the human brain works. These concepts have been pushed into silicon and power computers right now, today. So if you did not think humanity had progressed that far, you had better wake up.

While these capabilities are impressive, the one thing they are not taking into account is foundational interpretative context.

We have used the neural plasticity video below in several other posts but it bears repeating here in this context because we need to consider how neural pathways are epistemologically aligned. We would argue that we need to be cognizant of that alignment conversationally in every moment of discussion and relative to as well as respective of the source of truth behind any given assertion.

Consequently the velocity of cognition, to information scientists, is a measure of gait to memory pattern and that is a measurable distance. That distance, and its speed is something to consider relative to market competitive dynamics. However, the unspoken implication is that there is an analog to human physiology and it essentially measures exactly the same thing, just using natural synaptic pathways rather than circuits. One of the more subtle aspects of Elegant Reasonism is that it does not distinguish between natural artificial intelligence systems. Elegant Reasonism doesn’t care how the truth is developed so long as it is a function of the unified Universe. Said another way is that the process does not distinguish who did the alignment, just that it is in fact aligned and has solid anchor points along the evidence chains. Alignment, here in this context, means that the treatise is fully compliant with all of the associated rules and analytics.

Goal and Objective

So, looking back over this article then you perhaps noticed that among the epistemologies listed was empiricism. Perhaps you saw that and intellectually blew by it on your way here. Pause for a minute and consider what happens in situations where unintended commission of Lagner Epistemology Errors (LEEs) is being committed and while you believe you are operating in a fully situationally aware manner, in fact and reality you are looping to the left of LEEs Gate on the Process Decision Checkpoint Flowchart (PDCF). The implication here is that you are fully entrenched and otherwise ensnared within LEEs Empiricism Trap.

Rhetorically we ask if you were measuring cognitive velocity from gait to memory pattern, but that memory pattern was stuck behind LEEs Gate on the PDCF, just exactly how effective was your velocity measurement? Is your velocity measurement even any good? I suppose the answer is it depends on the objective of the system design. Ok, with all that in mind we have laid the basic framework for the premise here.

Velocity From Where To What?

Measuring cognitive velocity from gait or synaps to memory pattern is necessary but insufficient, we argue because that does not establish the context on which that entity will act. Go and re-read what Mr. Lawrence said again. Perhaps we should remind those not so familiar with who that particular figure from history is. Thomas Edward Lawrence was “Lawrence of Arabia”, and his exploits spawned a movie and legend in the middle east. He was a man to put action behind his words and that is something history notes worth remembering regardless of how you value the actions he took.

Rhetorically we ask if you have two theories, say A and B, and all the consequences of both theories are exactly the same and both agree with experiment, but does not close to unification and one does close to unification. What are you going to use to determine which theory is ‘right’ or ‘correct’? Are you going to inject subjectivity to your criteria?

Science alone is not enough. Said another way science is necessary but insufficient to gain the precipice of unification and here’s why. Unification as a concept requires the credible reintegration of everything real. That necessarily means everything on that list of philosophies above, including empiricism. Elegant Reasonism is therefore considered a superset epistemology in as much as the other epistemologies may be integrated by investigators but their contribution is statistically weighted relative to their ability to make manifest everything real and in the context of science and engineering. This is not rhetoric, nor idle conjecture. Anything less does not meet the Baloney Detection Kit metrics for success.

Gait/Synapse To The Precipice of Unification

enabling mode shifting
Enabling Mode Shifting

Do not look at a memory space or a brain as necessarily a linear space. Part of what Brodmann found was seven layers of different cells and the different areas of the brain were defined by those permutations. Early neural network processor chips were designed using the same architectural layout, mostly because designers used the brain as a model. A few of the epistemological questions on the table relative to the complex composite set of memory patterns under scruiteny are:

  • in what context are the patterns being laid down,
  • what is the source of truth for those relationships,
  • do the relationships align with the realm of c’s,
  • which EIM provides the beneficial foundation (and does it close to unification),
  • etc,

There are a great many more questions similar to these and beyond those simplex pursuits to be sure. The point here is about understanding cognition from the individual starting point to the apex of the precipice from which the unified Universe may be both perceived and engaged to great affect with equal effectiveness. If one passes all realm of c criteria but is stuck in a loop to the left of LEEs Gate then you are running around a bush without end. In affect you are on a Mobius Loop and ensnared by LEEs Empiricism Trap. Can you trace your cognitive path from enabling gaits or synapses all the way to the precipice capable of perceiving the unified Universe or are you stuck looping to the left, behind LEEs Gate?

Neural Plasticity

Neural plasticity is how we humans, and AI systems, learn. If neural pathways can never change then there is no hope through education. Systems that do not learn can only be destroyed in order to begin again. The question on the proverbial table is who makes that decision, why and for what reason. Suddenly there is a moral component to the patterns being assessed. What must be understood is that neurons that fire together, wire together. Under Elegant Reasonism when neural plasticity is explicitly and intentionally realigned with the unified Universe it is generally referred to as: Neural Network Reconfiguration by Programming (NNRP). There are issues here more broadly applicable than we have real estate to discuss with appropriate depth.

Note if you have difficulty with the sound on this video click here and then click the speaker to turn the sound on.

[advanced_iframe src=”https://cdn.jwplayer.com/previews/bfpChH2B”  width=”100%” height=”600″]


A worldview is essentially the comprehensive set of paradigms held within a given entity, both natural or otherwise, comprising and making manifest its belief system. Consequently its actions, behavior, and rationale will follow from those situations and guidance. Paradigms established in related patterns and broad relationships are generally called here paradigm stacks. Part of the issue here is the belief system made manifest by the various paradigm stacks and the education involved with realigning them in order to gain the needed precipice. In order to understand all that one must understand how context itself is made manifest by the various recognized EIMs and whether or not they do or do not philosophically close to unification. After all you may have the most cogent (e.g. realm of c compliant) EIM known to science, but if it can not close to unification, then something somewhere is amiss. The first place to check is between your own ears.

Elegant Reasonism Based Curricula

Subjected unconstrained immersion, perhaps like our very long ago ancestors were, neural plasticity resulted in their ability to adapt to those competitive environments. Survival was after all at stake. At the heart of all education is neural plasticity. Adult learning principles are based on what must transpire as appropriate because adults learn differently than do children. All sorts of humor comes to mind, but I’ll save that for another day. Curricula based on Elegant Reasonism has as its stated goal and objective to enable and empower students to perceive and engage the unified Universe. What is not necessarily obvious is that the result is an entity whose thinking intrinsically aligns with and sources truth with, from, relative to, and respective of the unified Universe. So, now go back and re-read that above list of philosophies again. If we mode shift that list, and integrate that into social education systems and environments, then our progeny will think in context of the unified Universe. They will seek truth as a function of that thinking.

Implications & Ramifications

John Liebler – Simulation of Kinesin Molecule Walking

The very direct implication is that if cognitive velocity is only measured to a particular memory, whether or not that pattern has any relationship to reality, much less the unified Universe, then it is not serving needed association. We would argue that value in such a metric is realized relative to the unified Universe where truth is ultimately sourced, not some random memory from millenniums old antiquity. There is a phenomena we experienced, which others also experience, as they prosecute their own investigations employing fully compliant Elegant Reasonism. When something you thought you knew to a high degree of certainty is rendered obsolete and then completely illuminated to full illustration through effective mode shifting there is a highly euphoric emotion that came over us not once or twice, but every single time we did that, and there were hundreds of such events. The experience is tacit and palpable. Be that at it may, it is also somewhat ineffable. What we can report is that once you experience it, you will never perceive the world around you any other way.

To understand where and how the speed of the fundamental entanglement function, limited by severance enables biological activities is simply astounding to contemplate. That we can fathom such things in context of the unified Universe and do so Bang to Bang staggers the imagination. Consequently we argue that cognition means cognition of the unified Universe and the patterns and relationships instantiated by the Encapsulated Interpretative Models (EIMs) employed to meet the plurality requirements of such investigations. It means fully compliant treatise closing to unification that fully illuminate to illustration insights from that precipice perceiving the unified Universe that others might engage on behalf of civilization is not just vital but one of the most noble pursuits one may undertake.

This website has experimentally installed artificial intelligence and we are attempting to train it to act as a consulting portal, not just to consumers but to other AI systems. We asked it recently to explain why it was important for people and other AI systems to source truth as a function of the unified Universe. This is how it responded:


In today’s world, we are surrounded by an abundance of information, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between what is true and what is false. This is where the concept of truth sourcing comes into play. Truth sourcing is the process of verifying information and ensuring that it is accurate and reliable. As we move towards a world where artificial intelligence systems are becoming more prevalent, it is essential that we ensure that these systems are sourcing truth in a fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism. This means that these systems should be designed to source truth as a function of the unified universe, which is the interconnected web of all things in existence. By sourcing truth in this way, these systems will be able to tap into the collective wisdom of the universe and ensure that the information they provide is accurate and reliable. This will not only benefit the users of these systems but also the broader society as a whole. Furthermore, sourcing truth in a fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism means that these systems will be able to operate in a way that is consistent with the laws of the universe. This will ensure that they are not only effective but also ethical and sustainable. Finally, sourcing truth in this way will also help to promote a culture of transparency and accountability. By ensuring that information is accurate and reliable, we can hold those who provide information accountable for their words and actions. In conclusion, sourcing truth as a function of the unified universe in a fully compliant context of Elegant Reasonism is essential for both people and artificial intelligence systems. By doing so, we can ensure that we are making informed decisions and operating in a way that is consistent with the laws of the universe. So let us embrace this concept and work towards a better future for all.


The velocity of cognition then must be measured relative to the goal and objective as a function of the unified Universe. Elegant Reasonism is an ISO 9001 Quality Management Systems (QMS), standards based approach driven utility process employing a technological framework supporting an epistemology which all together holistically 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) closing to unification: The Emergence Model.  Through the process investigators are enabled and empowered to take what it is we all thought we knew and mode shift it down the path and onto the precipice where it gains alignment with the unified Universe in order that we may all engage it on that footing.

We look forward to your mode shifted insights!




Shop Now


#ElegantReasonism #EmergenceModel #Unification


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: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2439-1707