Langer New KnowledgeLanger New Knowledge

Knowledge Dependencies

Expanded Stages of Grief
Expanded Stages of Grief

The degree to which we can know is dependent on the particulars of the Encapsulated Interpretative Model (EIM) employed, and even then it may be problematic. Some point out knowing is a function of measurability. Others point out the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and we can know this part or that part but not both at the same time. Philosophers must immediately ask whether or not, and perhaps the degree to which Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) are being made in the particular investigation or discussion. Perhaps they should come to understand the implications of LEEs Gate on the Process Decision Checkpoint Flowchart (PDCF) because it is important to understand whether or not you are looping on the lefthand side and never getting past that gate, or not. Rhetorically then we must ask if the congruence you experience has more to do with the EIM you employ than alignment with the unified Universe and the degree to which all the criteria from the realm of c’s is met, most especially Closure. Inevitably those individuals who are highly entrenched in status quo thinking methods for modeling reality will find everything here very difficult to cope and deal with due to the volume of paradigm shifts they must endure. Consequently they will likely transition standard stages of grief making those transitions. Subsequently we can only suggest that team leaders, management, and administrators wield Elegant Reasonism transformationally and with great empathy and compassion. Knowing that invested individuals will move through these stages is helpful not only dealing with others but reflectively and introspectively in recognizing these stages within ourselves, and for all the same reasons.

Leveraging The Fine Line Advantageously

There is in Elegant Reasonism a fine line made manifest by Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) and under Elegant Reasonism commission of such errors is something to be avoided. The implications of this situation is that investigators can not declare absolutes regarding nature. We can declare what we think it might look like (e.g. reflections or characterizations of it), but we can not declare “this is nature”. In the language of systems engineering and information sciences this situation is tantamount to a logical view of a real system. What we are striving to do is craft precision and accurate characterizations of multiple logical views in order to understand how they are instantiated by the real view. If we replaced the appropriate phrases in that characterization with specific references yields, as an example: An Elegant Reasonism based investigation perhaps into why electrical circuits work that includes the logical views of M0, M1, M2, M4, and M5 in order to better understand aspects of how M6 instantiates those logical views and to reinforce the logical nature of M0, M1, M2, M4, and M5 (along with implications and ramification of that nature). Such an investigation would seek greater understanding of the details of constituents within complex composite architectures of mass as configured by The Fundamental Entanglement function, limited by Severance. The investigation may also explore additional proof that M3 does not in fact exist which reinforces the fact that M6 instantiates the logical views employed. Nature may instantiate our characterization, but it may also instantiate other interpretations as well (e.g. simultaneous truths). The question then becomes how do we leverage this situation to our advantage? Elegant Reasonism is designed with exactly that circumstance in mind. Elegant Reasonism Rules demand that a plurality of EIMs be employed in any given investigation. When you look back at the original question why electrical circuits work, from the perspective of Elegant Reasonism rather than status quo thinking which is modeling reality under the erroneous belief it is dealing directly with reality (e.g. they committed Langer Epistemology Errors), there is a great deal that is almost instantaneously made very clear and that clarity is a breath of fresh air.

Elegant Reasonism expects and encourages simultaneous truths. Elegant Reasonism seeks out, as a matter of policy, a plurality of multiple ways to describe exactly the same set of consequences all of which agree with experimentally derived empirical results. Elegant Reasonism seeks to avoid commission of LEEs. The result of this design and expectation is to surround reality with reflections and characterizations of it so that we might better interpolate how it instantiates what we humans experience as real. LEEs Empiricism Trap is armed when we fall prey to mistaking abstractions for actual reality. When your belief system so ingrains your worldview that those abstractions define the only reality you can perceive then the trap is sprung an you are ensnared and the only exit is objectifying reality in this manner. That means removing yourself mentally from the equation but then turning around and realizing that the physical you must be integral to the whole because you are a part of what is. The idea here is to create a marshmallow affect surrounding reality in order to maximize the numbers of instantiations in order to discern distinctions and celebrate how those holistically reflect what is. We then subject all of that to intense analytical rigor.

Systems Engineering

Within the information sciences is a process, principles, practices, and a profession called Systems Engineering. Out of this area comes the capability to leverage multiple logical views of the same real system. One somewhat ironic twist of fate is that logical systems are often more precise than are real systems exactly because there is more than one real way to accomplish the same goal or objective. It’s like asking how many different equations can you write that all start off with some set of numbers and arrive at the same result. This is why following many equations are caveats further defining domains, or circumstances are true or perhaps what they mean. Abstractions are somewhat frustratingly irritating in as much as they tend to insulate and isolate higher ordered ideas from lower ordered details. The more one abstraction depends on another creates replicate of fading affects when these issues are highly systemic.

Ultimate Source of Truth

True vs Truth
True perspective of truth.

Elegant Reasonism seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe. To do that means we must penetrate what is true to the truth of unified reality. Central to understanding truth is the context in which it is made manifest. Something may be empirically true but the question is do those circumstances close to unification? Because if circumstances do not close to unification then something, somewhere, is not being considered and you have no idea the degree to which those excluded criteria are relevant to what you are doing. You may have a real object that must simultaneously fit into both a square hole and a round hole. Not until you realize your object is a cylinder and whether or not it fits into its respective hole is dependent on how you orient the object in space will your problem be reconciled.

Proper Use of Constraints and Dependencies
Proper Use of Constraints and Dependencies

Let us explore a relatively simplex puzzle often used in global enterprise to illustrate thinking styles. You may already be familiar with the solution to the puzzle but the solution is not the point here. What manifests the constraints and dependencies on how you reach the solution is the point of discussion. So, take any clean writing surface, and there write down three equidistant rows of three equidistant dots each, and then connect all nine dots with exactly four (4) perfectly straight lines without picking up your writing instrument or retracing any line. After some experimentation you will likely get the answer to the puzzle, but again, the question is how you managed your own perceptions between the time you were given the puzzle and you recognized the solution. Where were your constraints and dependencies? What did you have to do in order to set preconceptions aside in order to recognize the answer?

Context or Reality?

Encapsulated Interpretative Models (EIMs) establish fundamental interpretative context. So, what happens when you switch EIMs then? We don’t mean just what is written on a piece of paper either. We mean what must happen between your own ears in order to gain full cognizance of the implications before you. The ramifications of your cognizance may mean the difference between life and death. What happens to your research if all your effort, results, mathematics, papers, etc., and everything you ever learned are all fully compliant and meet every condition listed in the realm of c’s save one: closure? What does that say about your methods. What does that say about your results? What, in fact, does it say about you as an investigator? Is your investigation congruent with EIM derived context or the real unified Universe?

Whoever told you life was fair, lied. Every real person who ever lived on Earth, circa May 2023 or earlier, is guilty of committing Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) without exception and that includes the primary author of Elegant Reasonism. If you are employing status quo thinking or modeling of reality in a way that does not, or can not, close to unification, then you are not reflecting the real unified Universe (e.g. reality). You may think you are but you are not. Because commission of LEEs has placed you in a position of congruence with abstractions of reality, not reality itself. The notion that we inside a simulation is not accurate either because reality instantiates us. We are in fact real. Any scientist who digs up ancient human remnants can illustrate the point wherever viable genetic material remains. That genetic remants can tell a great deal not just about that individual but how that individual existed. That individual had a mother and a father, for example. Mitochondrial DNA can be traced to show migration patterns, etc. Your own DNA has segments from those migration patterns which show ancestral relationships back through time and across the planet. At every step and stage, real objects, real flora and fauna, exist and existed. We therefore must hold the unified Universe as self-evidently real.

The necessary point being epistemologically made here is that empiricism, one of many different epistemologies and one that acts as the foundation to all science, is necessary but insufficient to gain the precipice of unification. The reason for Empiricism’s insufficiencies has to do with LEEs Empiricism Trap and the fact that unification as a concept in the first place demands and requires a credible manifestation of all real objects on the entanglement gradient in both emergent and convergent vectors.

Necessary But Insufficient

Logical correctness and compliance with all realm of c constituents (except closure) can be considered necessary but insufficient. In general science has given us so much but if you watch this video of Richard Feynman presenting a lecture on Knowing vs Understanding back in the 1950’s it is telling of exactly the problems which Elegant Reasonism solves, exactly because it is not limited to science. That requirement was handed us by the unified Universe, not something we invented.



Unification, as a concept, requires credible manifestation of everything real across the entire entanglement gradient, in both the emergent and convergent vectors, as a philosophical predicate priority consideration entering science, not after you get there. If you wait until you get there it is likely too late because by then you are so interested in the bark on the proverbial trees you miss the forest. It is for these reasons that Elegant Reasonism is defined as it is. You must be prepared to reintegrate 100% of all philosophical domains of discourse back into the primary domain and that includes science. The unified Universe demands this. All we are trying to do is characterize how this all fits together.

Elegant Reasonism is here considered a superset epistemology in as much as it can integrate all other epistemologies, including empiricism which is the basis of scientific methods, principles, and practices. Other epistemological sources are statistically weighted relative to and respective of their ability to the unified Universe which here is always held litmus as the ultimate source of truth.


Churchill On Truth
Winston Churchill On Truth

The unified Universe is not without a strong sense of irony. Concepts like the multiverse have been evicerated in unification’s wake, but in a sense are also reborn. When we mode shift what it is we think we know we are suddenly confronted with concepts like the particle horizon which in context of our Bang to Bang insight suddenly resembles an overarching universe frothy bubbling over as it were full of particle horizons. Where before the dimensional nature of the multiverse dies absent real common geometric basis points is reborn in another sense due to issues of scale and immense distance. They are not parallel universes in the traditional sense but they simultaneously exist elsewhere. They are not connected nor do they have any relationship to one another save their core constructs. Core constructs not just shared but integrate across the intervening distances. The real irony here are the partial truths laying all around us that have been there all along. We need only see as we look.

Rationalizing away dependencies, ignoring constraints as if they don’t matter, are all examples and clues needed to bring focus back to the journey needed in order to gain the precipice from which the unified Universe may be both perceived and engaged.



Knowledge Management In Unification’s Wake

The nature of business competition is such that it is only a matter of time before deep pocketed predators slaughter the apathetic or weak. If you have resources right now you best be learning how to wield all this because the only defense against it is wielding it more effectively to greater affect then your competition.

We have repeatedly made the point that 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.


Rhetorically what happens when quite suddenly civilization can source truth in this manner? Everything from nightly news to all sorts of assertions and claims are suddenly going to be exposed for what they are. Overtime these skills will become conversational and getting away with something just because you said it will immediately ring hollow if it does not also align with the unified Universe. What does civilization look like at that point; where it’s progeny, exposed to an Elegant Reasonism based curricula, will manifest things we never had the tools to fathom.

Shop Now



#ElegantReasonism #EmergenceModel #Unification #Knowledge #KM #EIM #ModeShifting #Measuring #Architecture #Configuration #KnotTheory #MBP #M0 #M1 #M2 #M3 #M4 #M5 #M6


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: