Evidence-00

Evidence

What is the source of truth?

The ultimate source of truth must be the unified Universe. The actual real Universe is unified whether or not your thinking about it is. To the degree that your thinking can or can not fathom that alignment characterizes your ability to discern reality. What is important in that characterization is the ability to recognize what you see when you look. If you can quickly discern linkage to reality through established evidence chains then you may have a relatively good grasp on those skills. However, from time to time we must inspect deeply those anchor points of those evidence chains for assurance purposes. We must verify and validate the foundational basis of those anchor points remains in alignment with the unified Universe to the highest affinity possible. In short we must revalidate the integrity of our interpretations.

Epistemological Truth

There exists more than one epistemology and each seeks truth as a function of how that epistemology is framed out philosophically. That requires us also to recognize where epistemology fits taxonomy of philosophy.

Elegant Reasonism is a utility process employing a technological 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) closing to unification: The Emergence Model. Cognition of Elegant Reasonism comes into its own when we realize that unification demands integration of everything real. What constitutes ‘everything’ does not stop at the boundaries of any individual domain of discourse or its constituent detail sets. ‘Everything’ means all that exists in the realm of reality. Reality here is reflected in/by the logical assignment of abstractions characterizing and describing fundamental behavior, interactions, properties, and phenomena. Herein reality is always held distinct and litmus. The line between reflection and declaration is not crossed in order to assure that Langer Epistemology Errors (LEEs) are not committed. Paradigms of Interest/Nature (POI/N) then have their manifestation uniquely reflected by each indidual EIM employed by a given investigation, remembering that every investigation must employ at least one EIM closing to unification. Today, The Emergence Model is the only fully compliant EIM, but that may not necessarily always be the case. Investigators are free to develop other fully compliant EIMs if they chose to pursue such an effort, but they must reconcile all requirements of unification and be able to describe the entire real unified Universe Bang to Bang.

Alphabetically a few major epistemologies are:

  • Constructivismargues that humans generate knowledge and meaning from an interaction between their experiences and their ideas. During infancy, it is an interaction between their experiences and their reflexes or behavior-patterns. Piaget called these systems of knowledge schemata. Constructivism is not a specific pedagogy, although it is often confused with constructionism, an educational theory developed by Seymour Papert, inspired by constructivist and experiential learning ideas of Jean Piaget. Piaget’s theory of constructivist learning has had wide ranging impact on learning theories and teaching methods in education and is an underlying theme of many education reform movements. Research support for constructivist teaching techniques has been mixed, with some research supporting these techniques and other research contradicting those results.
  • Elegant Reasonism – seeks truth as a function of the unified Universe.
  • Empiricism – seeks truth as a function of independently verified exact conformity as learned by observation or experiment between judgements or propositions and externally existent things in their actual status and relations usually in context of science.
  • RationalismDifferent forms of rationalism are distinguished by different conceptions of reason and its role as a source of knowledge, by different descriptions of the alternatives to which reason is opposed, by different accounts of the nature of knowledge, and by different choices of the subject matter, for example, ethics, physics, mathematics, metaphysics, relative to which reason is viewed as the major source of knowledge. The common application of the term ‘rationalist’ can say very little about what two philosophers have in common.

Elegant Reasonism is herein considered a superset epistemology in so much as it may integrate all other epistemologies statistically weighted relative to their ability to close to unification in any given point of epistemological philosophy. Any epistemology failing to describe comprehensively holistic reality in full compliant context here is otherwise not compliant with, but subsumed by Elegant Reasonism.  For investigative purposes all evidence produced by any epistemology, including Elegant Reasonism, must be statistically weighted relative to, and respective of, their ability to manifest reality as a function of the unified Universe if it is to be considered by investigators. And in this manner investigative integrity is maintained and affinity to the unified Universe is maximized. Any incremental EIM subsequently devised which is fully compliant with the unified Universe and different than The Emergence Model will only serve to make this utility process and framework stronger and more than it already is.

Evidence Chains

The length of evidence chains and their various anchor points holistically represent relational patterns manifesting a given Paradigm of Interest/Nature (POI/N) and may be distinct EIM to EIM. There is no guarantee that a given pattern will remain intact beyond encapsulation boundaries of any particular EIM. Elegant Reasonism will likely be needed in order to present, justify, consolidate, illuminate and illustrate validity and integrity associated with any given assertion relative to the unified Universe.

There is immediately a degree of concern relative to material previously declared as evidence whose interpretative processes making that declaration were not fully compliant with the Elegant Reasonism (e.g. the unified Universe).  Some should be warned that this does not necessarily invalidate evidentiary concerns. In fact, complying with Elegant Reasonism may strengthen evidentiary claims and assertions relative to any given case. That said, it may also invalidate some assertions a given piece of evidence holds relative to contextual assertions and therein lay the foundation of concern here. What investigators must gain cognizance on is that answers to standard root cause analysis questions may shift EIM to EIM. Context may morph but the POI/N manifestation, if instantiated at all, should essentially remain. For example dimensional spacetime is instantiated under M1 but is declared ‘dimensionless nothing’ under M5, but we must then remember that M1 can not close to unification but M5 does exactly because nothing real can transition the spacetime-mass interface without first conversion to energy. That particular problem does not exist under M5 because the philosophical, foundational, premise there is different.

Unified Truth

Truth as a function of the unified Universe is congruent with everything real and may be both illuminated and illustrated via fully compliant Elegant Reasonism. The rigor and discipline necessary to accomplish that compliance is no small order or task. It took almost two decades to even get this far. There is a great deal more work to do for us all. We are only just beginning the real quest. Establishing this truth is always subject to subsequent analysis which may provide improved resolution, accuracy, insight application and, of course, subsequent fully compliant EIM development.

What does unified truth mean?

  • All reference frames may employ a common geometric basis point for all real objects.
  • All reference frames are fully coupled interactively relatively to all real objects
  • All fundamental, foundational, constructs of basis EIMs are fully and holistically compliant herein and are cleanly systemic across the entire entanglement gradient
  • Evidence chains reflect reality, are (today) declared logical. Currently we do not have the capability of working with real physical systems as MBPs can not be measured circa 2021 and most if not all instrumentation is fabricated from an entrenched M1 point of view (e.g. it does not recognize M5). Much work is needed here.
  • Evidence chains tie out to credible fully compliant insights, equations, concepts, constructs, etc. consistent with the unified Universe (e.g. real reality).
  • Unified truth is fully integrated philosophically, scientifically and is fully congruent with the unified Universe which is always held litmus.
  • Unified truth is seamless in support of other unified truths. If you can not show clear evidence chain linkage then you have work to do. For example, under Elegant Reasonism ‘art appreciation’ lnks back through Susanne K Langer‘s work in symbology and physiological infrastructures supporting psychology relative to The Emergence Model instantiating organic biology employing advanced Central Nervous Systems (CNS) and Brains. Another example would be Ludwig von Mises body of work on economics through Human Action is similarly linked but also more directly employing the action principle in physics (See EMCS01).
  • Unified truths support and are reinforced through NNRP activities.

Mode Shifting EIMs

Mode shifting is labeled as it is because this is not a simple translation between interpretations, it demands whole new modes of thinking about patterns and relationships EIM to EIM. Being able to conversationally mode shift in an active debate is something of an art to be honed and appreciated. Tone and manner matter. This is a skill we very stongly be wielded transformationally exactly because not every individual is ready for the ultimate truth that will be revealed. Those who chose not to engage or embrace truth as a function of the unified Universe may have our empathy but the train is leaving that particular station. They can catch the next one or be left in the annals of history. Wielding Elegant Reasonism circa 2022 requires something of a maverick individual willing to empower others in the face of inhibitors and obfuscations. Recognizing that many of those vested in otherwise status quo institutionalized interpretations will likely also be in positions of power and influence they will need to tread carefully, diligently, and transformationally. These kinds of environments are normal for Six Sigma black belts. These are the circumstances where people so trained thrive. If you are familiar with ISO 9001 Quality Management Systems (QMS) standards or programs implementing them as a part of business process reengineering then you understand the implications relative to your organization.

Everyone should be prepared for individuals so vested in institutionalized status quo positions to transition through industry standard stages of grief when forced to recognize the implications stemming from accomplishing unification. If you are one of these individuals then you may be in denial and in need of some deep contemplation and/or paradigm shifts. Only you can affect such transition to any effect. If you are in a leadership position be wary of these circumstances because it will likely lay landmines for for your effort. Again, something Six Sigma black belts are accustomed.

Professional Scientists & Engineers

What individuals in these fields need to immediately understand is that we did not sit down an just write out a technobabble paragraph characterizing The Emergence Model. The M5 cogent description is the result of reverse engineering the original systems review, an effort spanning from 2004 through 7 May 2019 (See Press Release entitled: Unification Accomplished) to the present day. Those most vociferous are those stuck in LEE Loops of the PDCF used as part of the process and methods. If you can’t get past LEEs Gate on that chart then you very likely can not perceive the unified Universe nor any of its insights, much less any philosophical value they contain.

Mode shifting scientific & engineering environments will be one of the most revolutionary and evolutionary to reshape these fields on record. It certainly sets the stage for the next millennia. Practitioners should be aware and be interested to know that we mode shifted the Baloney Detection Kit. In hindsight it is somewhat bemusing to watch online arguments between educators, scientists, and engineers discussing the pros and cons of logically correct systems in juxtaposition with one another and none of them having any awareness of the unified Universe. At some point their radar will get pinged and their proverbial lightbulb will illuminate at 1/c velocities and when it does, they will actually know why it did.

Simultaneous Logically Correct Interpretations

When you run into this circumstance consider adding questions that will get you through LEEs Gate.

 

 

Systems Engineering

Systems engineering professionals worldwide should be aware that the unified Universe has illuminated something completely unexpected, at least as made manifest by The Emergence Model. The key insight there is everything real can be construed as a system or system of systems. The historical debate between anthropogenic systems and natural systems has metaphorically come home to roost. While many will chose to stay with anthropogenic systems analysis, others may embrace the new frontier. In either case both are correct in their positions, they just need to be aware of one another. There are a great many people who do not have your skills and talent that will need your help and assistance now more than ever. Many average people are not used to logical views of physical system or manifestations of a plurality of all that reflecting reality. Sorting these issues out and collecting effective requirements from that environment will call heavily on your talents. We encourage you to lead transformationally as well and for all the same reasons.

Mathematical Proofs

Remember if your thinking is within EIM boundaries you can not penetrate those boundaries because they are fundamentally constrained by the core constructs of the EIM. Only after essential recognition and entering the Illumination phase can you begin to see mode shifted insights and elements and even then you are far from done. Not until you are fully within the analytical phase can you begin juxtaposed analysis in deeper levels of Translation Matrices analytic layers. The reason is simple, that analysis is external to all EIMs and is looking at them objectively. In essence: ‘the blinders come off’. Such analysis however requires the complete integration of all sciences and philosophies simultaneously. One needs to put all the cards on the table so to speak. Nothing must be held sacrosanct. The basic mechanics of mathematics does not change; however the parameters against which it operates does. The more skilled one is at conversational dynamically wielding Elegant Reasonism the more adept they will be executing the later stages of this process and supporting conclusions in treatise.

Jurisprudence

Jurisprudence is the theoretical study of the propriety of law. Scholars of jurisprudence seek to explain the nature of law in its most general form and provide a deeper understanding of legal reasoning and analogy, legal systems, legal institutions, and the proper application and role of law in society. Such scholars make their informed decisions as a function of philosophical epistemological interpretations of evidence. What these scholars need to understand with great intrepidity and urgency is that there are aspects of reality that are likely beyond the threshold of their current comprehension. Not because of any failing on their part, but because these insights are only now emerging across civilization. These insights are only at the most nascent type at the moment. What we do know is that insights are constrained by EIM boundaries. Perception of POI/N insights mode shift EIM to EIM and that has direct implications on how you conduct your affairs. Effective immediately your arguments should be in full context of the unified Universe. If they are not, they may be as affected as those discussed In Unifiction’s Wake, part 05: Business Impact. Relative to global enterprise Elegant Reasonism is considered a disruptive technology and it may be just as disruptive to your your case set for all the same reasons.

Global Enterprise

Global business may be in the most precarious position of all. If we are to presume that because the manifestion of POI/Ns in other EIMs are not recognizable EIM to EIM, means that mode shifted assets are net new incrementally defined insights then we may assume existing portfolios are in danger of being mode shifted by competition complete with patents filed in context of the unified Universe and using Elegant Reasonism as a basis. The only business defense is wielding Elegant Reasonism to greater affect with better effect than your competition. No one anywhere will be able to anticipate how all this plays out across the global economy and civilization as a whole. We strongly encourage everyone to be familiar with all aspects of Elegant Reasonism as best they can.

Subscribe

 

#ElegantReasonism #EmergenceModel #Unification #Evidence #Philosophy #Axiology #Empiricism #Epistemology #Ontology #Supervienience #UnifiedUniverse #SixSigma #BlackBelt #INCOSE

 

%d bloggers like this: