Pattern and Process: Two Modes of Causal Reasoning in Human and Artificial Cognition
This article explores two fundamental modes of causal reasoning: TPT (Transfer-Process-Transfer) and PTP (Process-Transfer-Process) structures. These structures help clarify how humans and artificial intelligences like large language models reason about cause and effect, why both are susceptible to error, and why combining them is essential for a robust understanding.
Polyperspectivism
We all have a different perspective on reality and the world around us. It is formed of our unique individual knowledge, experience and personality. Polyperspectivism explains how to work constructively with this diversity of perspectives.
I am presenting a paper on the topic to the ISSS 2025 Conference in Birmingham on 14th July. Here are the links to: my paper; supporting documents explaining the concept in more detsil and offering practical tips for its practice; and a copy of my presentation slides. They are in pdf and Powerpoint format.
Human Cognition and its Evolutionary Roots
Across a century of psychology, communication theory, and leadership research, the same insight keeps re-emerging: human cognition is triadic. Freud called it the Id, Ego, and Superego. Eric Berne described Child, Parent, and Adult ego states. More recently, systems thinkers speak of Ego, Eco, and Intuitive Intelligence.
Each of these frameworks highlights a different aspect of a common truth: the human mind is a layered system shaped by evolution, motivation, and reflexivity. We are driven by instinct, shaped by society, and guided by reflection. Understanding how these layers work can help us communicate better, make peace with ourselves, and grow as individuals and communities.
In my new article, I explore this recurring cognitive triad and its evolutionary foundations. I show how it maps onto brain structures, motivational needs (via Alderfer’s ERG theory), and modes of interpersonal communication. It also shows us how reflexivity and observation give us the tools to navigate these inner voices constructively.
Motivated Symbolic Interpretation Theory: A Summary
Why do some words open doors while others close them? Why do some images attract and others repel? Why are some ideas welcomed and others dismissed; not because of their merit, but because of how they’re framed?
Over the past few months, I’ve been developing a theory that helps explain exactly that. It explores how certain words, phrases, images, and symbols may, in the past, have become associated with satisfying or frustrating experiences, and how these associations shape our responses to new information, often before we’re even aware of it.
The theory is easily understood, and is outlined in a concise summary document that introduces its core definitions and propositions. It’s a practical, cross-disciplinary idea with applications in communication, education, psychology, therapy, and personal relationships.
This is just the beginning. I’m working on a fuller explanation, with examples and practical tools to help people use the theory to improve clarity, trust, and understanding in everyday life.
An Introduction to Motivational Reflexivity
Motivational reflexivity is a reflective practice aimed at understanding the motivations behind our personal beliefs, especially those driven by the satisfaction of needs. Drawing from diverse theoretical foundations in psychology, sociology, and philosophy, this concept offers individuals a means to critically evaluate their beliefs and decisions. In particular, motivational reflexivity helps distinguish between beliefs grounded in objective reality and those formed to satisfy emotional or psychological needs.
This paper explores the foundations of motivational reflexivity through the lenses of human needs, automaticity, reflexivity, and the morphogenic cycle, ultimately offering strategies for integrating this practice into daily life.
Motivational Reflexivity – Guidance for Practitioners
This document provides guidance for practitioners of Motivational Reflexivity.
Needs-driven beliefs are beliefs that satisfy human needs but that are not necessarily true. The purpose of Motivational Reflexivity is the identification of false and harmful needs-driven beliefs and a better alignment of our beliefs with reality. This brings benefits to the individual practitioner in terms of overall wellbeing. It also brings benefits to society and the natural environment through an objective recognition of the harms that needs-driven beliefs can cause.
Motivational Reflexivity: An Enjoyable Practice
Motivational Reflexivity is a process of self-reflection aimed at understanding and aligning beliefs with reality and ethical values, ultimately enhancing personal well-being. This guide presents a step-by-step method tailored to your interests or relaxation activities to make the practice more engaging and enjoyable. Additionally, this guide can be used to address internal obstacles to achieving specific life goals, such as career success, academic recognition, or improved relationships.
Motivational Reflexivity – Guidance for Trainers
This document provides guidance for Motivational Reflexivity trainers. Ideally, before embarking on training others you should read the Guidance for Practitioners and also gain some experience of the practice yourself.
Unifying Folk Theories of Social Change Through Margaret Archer’s Morphogenetic Cycle
The internet is brimming with intuitive “folk theories” of social change, often shared on platforms like LinkedIn, YouTube, and personal blogs. These theories, ranging from grassroots mobilisation to social entrepreneurship, typically reflect a genuine desire to address societal and environmental concerns. However, they often appear fragmented, competing, or anecdotal, and can be dismissed for lacking rigorous scientific backing.
Yet “folk theories”, although lacking academic foundations, should not be dismissed. Frequently, they are based on the empirical observation of real-world events and draw on their proponents’ practical experience of dealing with them.
What if these theories could be unified under a scientific framework? Margaret Archer’s Morphogenetic Cycle, a sociological model explaining how social structures, cultural systems, and human agency interact over time to yield social change, provides just such a foundation. By grounding these “folk theories” in Archer’s model, we can see them not as disparate or competing ideas but as complementary strategies in the dynamic process of societal transformation.
The Illusion of Autonomy in Belief Formation
We often like to think of ourselves as independent thinkers, masters of our own beliefs, immune to the influences of social pressures, peer groups, advertising, and political spin. Yet, beneath this comforting illusion of autonomy lies a complex web of external forces that shape our beliefs, often without our conscious awareness. Recognising these influences is not a concession to vulnerability but a step toward deeper understanding and authentic belief alignment.
Belief Formation: The Interplay of Spinoza and Bartlett’s Models
This article introduces the Spinozan Model of belief formation and Bartlett’s Theory of Effort After Meaning. The interaction between them at different stages in our lives offers valuable insights into how we can better educate, protect against misinformation, and cultivate adaptability in belief systems.
Imagine a scenario where a false claim, such as the notion that certain foods can cure chronic diseases, spreads widely on social media. Many people, overwhelmed by the volume of information and lacking the time to scrutinise sources, may accept this claim as true. This automatic acceptance highlights the vulnerabilities described in the Spinozan model of belief formation. Furthermore, even when credible evidence debunks the claim, entrenched beliefs shaped by existing mental frameworks, as explained by Bartlett’s theory, make it difficult for individuals to revise their understanding.
By studying how beliefs are formed and altered and addressing the vulnerabilities in these processes, we can better equip individuals to critically evaluate information, resist misinformation, and adapt to an ever-changing informational landscape.
A Deep Dive into Beliefs, Schemata, Tropes and Culture
In today’s interconnected world, understanding how our beliefs, cultural frameworks, and social structures interact is more crucial than ever. In my latest article, A Deep Dive into Beliefs, Schemata, Tropes, and Culture, I explore these foundational elements of human cognition and culture, offering insights into how they shape individual behaviour, societal norms, and cultural evolution.
At its heart, the article examines the Modified Morphogenetic Cycle, an original extension of Margaret Archer’s framework, which includes the often-overlooked interplay between human cognition and the natural environment. This innovation provides a comprehensive model to understand how individual schemata, shared tropes, and societal culture influence, and are influenced by, our surroundings.
Key highlights include:
- Schemata as Cognitive Foundations: How individual mental frameworks shape beliefs and behaviour.
- Tropes and Cultural Patterns: The emergent collective structures that guide societal values and norms.
- Dynamic Interactions: How culture and societal structures evolve through individual agency and collective action.
- Implications for Change: Practical applications for interdisciplinary collaboration, problem-solving, and fostering innovation in an ever-changing world.
This article not only explains these concepts but demonstrates their application to real-world challenges, from gender equality to environmental sustainability. Whether you’re a researcher, educator, or curious thinker, this exploration offers tools to bridge divides and create meaningful change.
Preventing the Leveraging of Religious and Ideological Beliefs
Religion is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it can assuage our otherwise unsatisfiable existential needs, i.e., the need to escape death, the need for meaning and guidance, and the need to escape our ultimate state of isolation. On the other hand, autocrats can gain and retain wealth, power and influence by leveraging our religious beliefs. This is particularly the case for religions that emphasise obedience to the will of God. Throughout history autocrats have claimed to be a conduit for the will of God, from Egyptian Pharoahs and Incas, through popes and kings, to those of the present day.
The current rise of humanism/secularism in the West and its global expansion poses a threat to autocrats who rely on religious obedience by the population for their status. This results in internal stresses within nations where beliefs are divided. It also results in stresses between nations.
Ideologies such as communism, capitalism and nationalism, also inculcate beliefs. Nationalism, for example, often posits that members of the population owe allegiance only to fellow nationals and not to citizens of other nations. Leaders can also leverage ideological beliefs in their own interest. The rise of liberal democracy poses a threat to their status and similar internal and international tensions can arise as a result.
Frequently, a combination of both religious and ideological beliefs are leveraged. The checklists below will enable you to assess the likelihood of such leverage by aspiring leaders, and its existence in organisations, political parties, and nations. The fewer safeguards there are the more likely it is that the leverage of our beliefs is occurring or will occur. In the case of aspiring leaders, it is the extent to which they value these safeguards that should be considered.
Harnessing Motivational Reflexivity: A Practical Tool for Career Growth and Ethical Practice
In an increasingly complex world, where decisions are influenced by diverse motivations, Motivational Reflexivity emerges as a transformative tool for personal and professional development. At its core, Motivational Reflexivity is a reflective practice that helps individuals critically evaluate the motivations behind their beliefs and decisions, distinguishing those driven by objective reality from those rooted in emotional or psychological needs. By aligning beliefs and actions with deeper truths and ethical values, this approach not only fosters personal growth but also enhances societal and environmental well-being.
Central to this practice is the concept of needs-driven beliefs: beliefs adopted to satisfy personal or emotional needs, which may not align with reality and which may be unethical. By uncovering and addressing these beliefs, individuals can develop greater self-awareness, make more informed decisions, and contribute positively to their communities.
Navigating Cognitive Dissonance: A Personal Journey
This article marks a departure from my usual writing, as I delve into my personal experiences with cognitive dissonance. Readers familiar with my past work might wonder, “Does he practice what he preaches?” I hope to answer with a resounding “Yes, very much so.”
Recently, I encountered several instances of cognitive dissonance, a mental state in which something feels misaligned without a clear understanding of why1. These experiences were unsettling, eroding my confidence and leaving me feeling depressed. Resolving this dissonance became a priority, therefore, prompting me to draw upon my professional and theoretical knowledge.
A Fusion of the Confucian and Ubuntu Ethical Traditions
In a world increasingly defined by cultural and ethical diversity, how do we create a cohesive and practical moral framework? This question is deeply personal for me, as I have grappled with cognitive dissonance arising from my upbringing in a Western culture heavily influenced by Christian values such as care, altruism, and compassion. While spiritually uplifting, these values often felt disconnected from the practicalities of improving society.
Through my exploration, I found two traditions, Confucianism and Ubuntu, that framed these values as transactional and interdependent, emphasising their role in fostering societal harmony and mutual benefit. Yet, neither fully addressed the complexities of Western society or the pressing challenge of leaders who exploit power for personal gain, disrupting collective well-being.
This article examines Confucianism and Ubuntu as distinct but complementary ethical systems, highlights the challenges posed by dark leadership, and proposes a fusion of these traditions into a practical framework. This ethical code aims to balance individual rights, values regarding relationships, societal responsibilities, and collective well-being, offering a roadmap for a more harmonious society.
The Hierarchy of Organising Principles: A Hypothesis that Explains Reality and Human Understanding.
This paper presents a comprehensive hypothesis that seeks to explain the nature of reality and how humans understand it, integrating foundational concepts from critical realism, systems theory, and causality. The hypothesis holds that reality can be viewed as a fractal-like structure, generated by underlying organising principles that operate at various ranks in a hierarchy. Starting from acausal foundational principles, the paper explores how systems interact, transfer matter, energy, and information, and contribute to the complexity observed at different levels of organisation. The hypothesis extends to the idea that human understanding is structured by organising principles that differ from reality’s, leading to distinct layers of comprehension reflected in scientific disciplines. The paper suggests that integrating these principles may help bridge gaps between disciplines, such as the disconnect between social sciences and the biological sciences. This unification has the potential to deepen our understanding of both the natural world and human social behaviour, while identifying new pathways for societal change.
Vanishing Properties and Social Change: A Systems Science Perspective
In systems theory, an emergent property is a characteristic that arises at the level of a system but is absent in its individual components. This is commonly seen in nature, physics, and social systems. The classic example of an emergent property is, of course, consciousness. The human mind is conscious, but its component neurons are not.
But what of the complementary concept: disappearing or vanishing properties? There appears to be little, if any, awareness or discussion around this concept in the systems community. Yet the concept not only exists but also has a significant impact on the reality that we experience. Vanishing properties are crucial to understanding why large-scale social and environmental problems persist despite widespread individual concern. Perhaps, it is because vanishing properties are often more easily explained than emergent ones, which to this day, seem to have a mystical aura around them?
Vanishing properties occur when attributes present in individual components fail to manifest at the system level. For example, atoms consist of positively charged protons and negatively charged electrons. While the individual components have a charge, a neutral atom as a whole exhibits no net charge, effectively “cancelling out” this property.
While emergent properties have long been studied in systems science, the concept of vanishing properties remains underexplored. Yet, understanding how responsibility, action, and ethical concern can disappear in collective settings is crucial for tackling today’s most pressing social challenges from climate change to political engagement.
Slides for ISSS Mini-symposium Talk. An Overview of Social Systems Theory.
The presentation provides an overview of Social Systems Theory, which is being developed in the public domain at rational-understanding.com and in Academia.edu. The foundational principle is that of Critical Realism. This philosophy holds that reality exists and is the source of truth, but that our human understanding of it can be flawed. The theory also centres around the Social Morphogenetic Cycle developed by the British Sociologist, Margaret Archer, and Philosopher of Science, Ram Roy Bhaskar. Their model has, however, been modified to include the impact of the natural world on society and vice versa. Finally, the theory is multi-disciplinary, drawing on the principles of systems science, psychology, sociology, and ecology.
The resulting model has great explanatory power, demonstrating the relationships between the individual, society, and nature. It also reveals the impact of individual and social pathologies on both society and the environment, how social change comes about, and how society evolves over time.
Although much work has been done on social interactions and how they can morph into pathologies, there is further work to do. Some work has also been done on how to reduce the impact of these pathologies, but again, there is more to do.
A Theory of Society Derived from the Principles of Systems, Psychology, Ecology, & Evolution (Part 1)
The lack of a unified theory of human society is hampering our ability to tackle the self-induced existential threats that we currently face. This paper presents a practical social systems theory that addresses that absence. Furthermore, because the theory has been derived largely from the principles of systems science, ecology, and evolution, it has a broader application to natural ecosystems, artificial ones, and the interactions between them and the human species. The theory draws on an empirical observation of society; the principles of systems science to describe the general structure of society; on the principles of ecology to describe the ways in which two components of society can interact; and on the principles of psychology and evolution to demonstrate how those interactions can alter with time. The principles employed are fundamental to the field from which they were derived, are broadly accepted by practitioners in those fields, and were obtained by research of the literature. What is new, in this paper, is the combined application of principles from these different fields to human society. The result is a model that accurately reflects real situations involving social units of all sizes from individuals, through organisations, to nations. Methods are suggested for symbolising, diagramming, and analysing these interactions and how they change over time. This provides a basis for better understanding the causes of the threats that humanity and the natural world faces, and for designing interventions to counter them. This paper is targeted at a broad audience which may include specialists from various disciplines. Interpretation of the language used and the concepts that underpin this theory may differ from individual to individual and from discipline to discipline. No prior knowledge is assumed, therefore. Furthermore, the paper is written in plain English and, where any technical terms have been used, they are clearly defined.
A Theory of Society Derived from the Principles of Systems, Psychology, Ecology, & Evolution (Part 2)
In this part, the work of the English philosopher of science, Roy Bhaskar (1944 – 2014), and the English sociologist, Margaret Archer (1943 – 2023), is described and commented upon. Bhaskar’s contribution to the theory of society was twofold. Firstly, his “transcendental realism” dealt with the nature of science in general, and secondly, his “critical naturalism” with the social sciences in particular. The two terms were later conflated by his followers into “critical realism”, the philosophy of science of which he is now regarded as the founder. His transcendental realism is consistent with the author’s “Systems Theory from a Cognitive and Physicalist Perspective” (Challoner, 2023). The latter was derived independently, largely from work on symbolic logic. However, Bhaskar also provides further insights that will be described here. His work can be regarded as falling within the discipline of systems science, although Bhaskar makes little reference to systems. Regarding Bhaskar’s critical naturalism, the author generally agrees. However, there are details on which we diverge that will also be described. Archer’s main contributions to the theory of society were her explanations of social morphogenesis and reflexivity, both of which will also be described and commented upon.
A Theory of Society Derived from the Principles of Systems, Psychology, Ecology, & Evolution (Part 3)
Part 1 of this series of papers focussed largely on the principles of systems, ecology, and evolution to describe the ways in which individuals and organisations of all types interact, and so, create the structure of society. That is, how they exchange satisfiers and contra-satisfiers; satisfiers being those things that increase the level of satisfaction of our needs, and contra-satisfiers those things that decrease their level of satisfaction. However, Part 1 did not account for the choices that we make in the ways that we interact.
Human needs motivate our behaviour, but beliefs determine what form that behaviour takes. Although needs are fundamental to everything that has a function, beliefs are an emergent property of humanity, and a consequence of our ability to manipulate information and our highly social nature. However, beliefs can be true, or they can be false. In observing reality, we make mistakes and frequently distort it to satisfy our needs or avoid our contra-needs.
Part 3 will, therefore, discuss the psychological and social psychological aspects of our nature, particularly the beliefs, psychological defence mechanisms, and their socio-cultural reinforcement, that lead to our choices.
A Theory of Society Derived from the Principles of Systems, Psychology, Ecology, & Evolution (Part 4)
Part 1 of this series of papers discusses the structure of society, i.e., the relationships between human holons, such as individuals, organisations or nations, the various forms these relationships can take, and how they alter with time. It notes that, with a very few exceptions, human interactions are much the same as those encountered elsewhere in the animal world. Conventionally, the structure of society is taken to mean its network of cooperative relationships. However, in this series of papers, a much broader definition is used that includes non-cooperative ones. Thus, for example, ongoing wars are also considered a part of this structure. It is also acknowledged that it is not only human needs that dictate relationships and the way that they change but also the values, norms and beliefs held by the related parties (Law C13). Thus, the subsequent Parts of this series discuss the latter in more detail.
Part 2 describes the work of the English philosopher of science, Roy Bhaskar (1944 – 2014), and the English sociologist, Margaret Archer (1943 – 2023). Roy Bhaskar is regarded as the founder of Critical Realism, a philosophy that holds reality to exist and to be the source of truth. It also holds that our beliefs about reality are not necessarily true. Both Roy Bhaskar and Margaret Archer described how culture affects individual agency and how individual agency alters culture. Bhaskar referred to his model as the Transformational Model of Social Activity (TMSA) (Collier, 1994), and Archer to her model as the Morphogenetic Cycle (Archer, 1995). Archer also described how reflexivity, i.e., an agent’s internal conversations, can lead to cultural and structural change.
Part 3 built on the work of Margaret Archer to describe the outcomes of those internal conversations in more detail. It explains that to satisfy our needs or to avoid contra-satisfiers, we can adopt, form and propagate beliefs that are not necessarily true, but ones thought likely to satisfy our needs. Furthermore, to avoid anxiety caused by circumstances beyond our control we can adopt beliefs that act as psychological defence mechanisms. These beliefs when propagated do, of course, influence culture and structure.
This Part 4 now draws on the preceding three to discuss the nature of culture in more detail together with the processes of cultural evolution, stagnation, and regression.
The Relationship Between Systems Theory, Causality and Symbolic Reasoning
This article describes enhancements to Symbolic Reasoning that allow systems to be represented and which simplifies the expression of capability and causality. The result achieves my aim of unifying th universal disciplines of natural language, logic, mathematics, causality and systems theory via a single formal language.
The Mathematics of Language and Thought, Volume 1
This substantial, two volume work, has taken 23 years to complete. It presents a new axiom based meta-language which unifies all branches of formal logic, probability theory, set theory, causality, and basic mathematics. It also describes the deep structure of natural language and natural human reasoning. Volume 1 provides the theory and Volume 2 the formal proofs.
The purpose of the book is to make formal logic and reasoning more accessible to non-specialists, and does so by providing a single, intuitive form of symbolism which can be manipulated in a similar manner to algebra. Unlike algebra, however, only the rules of the meta-language itself, and none from other systems, are used in this manipulation. The language lies, therefore, at the foundation of human reasoning.
The meta-language contains several innovations. It treats everything as a bounded entity in space-time, i.e., as a system, including relationships and information. It also improves on conventional set theory, tense logic, epistemic logic, and complex causality. Importantly, it offers a means of manipulating qualitative concepts such as those found in the social sciences, as well as the quantitative concepts to which conventional mathematics is applied.
The Mathematics of Language and Thought, Volume 2
This book contains the mathematical proofs in support of Volume 1
Symbolic Reasoning in a Nutshell
This short document explains the basic symbolism used in my book, The Mathematics of Language and Thought.
Social Systems Theory in Practice – An Example
Intuitively, many of us sense that there are intangible “forces” that are beyond our individual control and that shape our society. In this article, I draw together the information provided in my previous articles on evolution, psychology, organisations, and systems theory, to show that these intangible “forces” are, in fact, tangible processes. These processes provide an understanding of why society is as it is. To a limited extent, the processes also provide an understanding of where society is heading unless we intervene.
Systems Theory from a Cognitive and Physicalist Perspective (4)
Abstract
This paper, originally published in January, 2023, has been updated to include observations from:
- “A Conceptual Framework for General System Theory”, John A. Challoner, March, 2024.
- “Different Interpretations of Systems Terms” sent to the Research towards a General Systems Theory SIG of the International Society for the Systems Sciences’ in April, 2024.
- “The Mathematics of Language and Thought” (Challoner, 2021).
The paper discusses systems theory from a cognitive and physicalist perspective. The cognitive perspective holds that we are our minds and cannot escape the constraints imposed by their biology and evolutionary history. Nevertheless, human cognition is a reasonably accurate representation of reality. Physicalism holds that space-time comprises the whole of reality and that everything, including abstract concepts and information, exists within it.
From this perspective, conceptual and theoretical frameworks for systems theory are proposed and described. Concepts include: the importance of structure; the nature of relationships, causality, and physical laws; and the significance of recursion, hierarchy, holism, and emergence. Human cognitive factors are also discussed, including: their limitations; the nature of information and language; and the search for knowledge in a world of complexity and apparent disorder.
The paper includes the implications of this perspective for General System Theory and Social Systems Theory, suggesting further work to advance those disciplines.
A Systems Model of Human Organisation
This short monograph describes a model of human society based on the principles of general systems theory. The model can help us to understand human interaction at all levels. It can also be used to identify behavioural changes which might lead to social improvements such as the prevention of conflict and the alleviation of poverty.
A Systems Model of Leadership and Followership
This monograph follows on from A Systems Model of Human Organisation. It describes the processes involved in the command or leadership components and in subordinate or follower components of human society. It recommended that it be read in conjunction with the two sets of diagrams below which support it.
Logic Causality and Systems
This set of Powerpoint slides describes a means of translating systems and causal processes into symbolic logic.
Leader & Follower Process Diagrams
This is a set of A3 causality diagrams which illustrate the processes described in “A Systems Model o the processes involved set of A3 diagrams.
Rational Understanding – Articles 1 to 42
On 4th June, 2022, I had been posting at Rational-Understanding.com for a year. This first year’s articles are combined here into a small booklet.
How Organisations and Hierarchies Arise
Articles 53 to 70 combined to form a single pdf document.
How to Reunite a Nation
This articles offers a solution to divisive politics in the USA.
The Relationship between National Fragility Trust and Religion
In this article I compare data taken from the World Values Survey and the Fragile States Index which shed some light on why people follow a religion. Cause and effect are unclear, suggesting that feedback processes are involved. This article investigates those processes in some detail and finds that the relationship between the three factors is complex. The article also provides a general model that is applicable to circumstances in which any two competing cultures, ideologies, or cults draw on the same population.
Rational-Understanding.com 