Unicist Logic


Marx’s Dialectics is a Fallacy based on Hegel’s Fallacious Idealistic Approach to the Real World

Introduction


The objective of this document is to initiate in 2024 an international debate aimed at moving beyond the oversimplification inherent in the dialectical approach, in order to accurately define the structure of the evolution of the real world.

The research into the origins of evolution began in 1976, and by 1997, it had become possible to demonstrate the fallacy of the dialectical evolution of the real world as proposed by both Hegel and Marx and installing the double dialectic as a solution.

The relaunching of this double dialectical approach becme necessary to sustain the 50-year transgenerational evolution non-profit program, where teenagers learn to use abductive reasoning based on unicist logic.

The Research

This research was conducted by Peter Belohlavek at The Unicist Research Institute. It focused on the evolution of nature and was ultimately completed through the establishment of evolutionary laws and their application in the development of multiple future scenarios to verify their reliability.

This research confirmed that unicist logic, which employs a double dialectical approach, accurately describes the functionality, dynamics, and evolution of adaptive systems and environments.

About Dialectics

Marx’s and Hegel’s fallacies are based on the belief that the world as a system is dualistic and behaves based on Thesis, Antithesis, and Synthesis. But systems always have a triadic structure that is defined by a purpose, an active function, and an energy conservation function which makes the evolution work based on thesis, antithesis, and homeostasis.

Unfortunately, things do not need to be true to influence the environment. They just need to be believed. Marx’s dialectics is an example of how a hypothetical evolutionary approach is believed and changes the world without being true.

Modern dialectics began based on an idealistic and materialistic-voluntaristic approach to reality. This dialectics provides an explanation of the evolution of human idealism and human materialism.

It is the way of natural dualistic thinking. It produces rationalistic conclusions of reality that sound incredibly simple and make the producer feel extremely powerful in the sense that with a “push,” it is possible to change an existing reality.

Hegel’s Dialectics

Dialectics as defined by Hegel is contradictory with the concept of complex systems. Complex systems are integrated based on the conjunction “and”, and their evolution includes the complementation between the apparent opposites.

This dialectical thinking of Hegel, who considers the synthesis as a result of the opposition between a thesis and an antithesis, permits the construction of parallel realities based on the disintegration of the real world and the construction of a world where the limitless evolution of ideas drives towards an ideal. Hegel builds an apparent upgrading fallacy.

Hegel’s dialectic is valid when discussing ideas but not when discussing the functionality of the real world. Ideas, that become part of the real world exist when they are acted out and are stored in episodic, procedural, and semantic long-term memories. In this case, they are stabilized by a structure that can be defined as a thesis, an antithesis, and a homeostasis.  

Marx’s Dialectics

Marx perceives the fallacy implicit in Hegel’s approach, but he cannot get rid of his dualistic approach to reality and his need to build a better future that only depends on the promotion of an adequate antithesis. However, his materialistic approach hindered him from accepting an ethic of added value in the real world.

He built a dialectics based on the definition that thesis is given by an existent myth and the antithesis is a utopia that will change the myth creating a new environment. This implies considering that the utopia is a response to the existing myth.

Marxist dialectics implicitly generated a paradoxical effect because it generated the need for materialistic absolute ideologies to sustain it.

Marx’s materialistic dialectic is the dialectic of conflicts; therefore, Marxism naturally sustains ideologies that foster conflicts in groups. The consequence of using a materialistic dialectic approach is a change that doesn’t deal with the evolution of the environment but is the result of the conflict generated.

The Unicist Double Dialectics

Hegel’s dialectic originally refers to the evolution of ideas, which do not exist in the real world, not even in the mind. When ideas are generated in the mind, they are merely installed in the semantic memory.

They become functional entities only when integrated with episodic and procedural memories, working as concepts to drive human actions. The evolution of ideas functions through confrontation with another idea, driving towards a synthesis of both. Therefore, the concept of thesis-antithesis-synthesis applies to their evolution. However, this is not the case when dealing with the real world.

Entities in the real world are integrated by a purpose, an active function, and an energy conservation function. These are homologous to having a thesis, an antithesis that makes things work, and a homeostasis that ensures their functionality to achieve results.

The real world evolves through a double dialectic. On one hand, it establishes the integration of the purpose with the active function, defining an action to make it work. On the other hand, it establishes a dialectic between the energy conservation function and the purpose, defining an action that ensures the achievement of objectives.

The functionality of these elements drives evolution, always introduced by the active function, which works homologously to an antithesis, while the homeostasis ensures the stability of the system.

The Unicist Approach to Evolution

The Unicist Logic builds a double dialectic that demonstrates that when there is a thesis, an antithesis is a natural step that drives evolution, but the thesis is sustained by a homeostasis that tries to hinder a change of the thesis by covering its implicit weaknesses.

The unicist double dialectics is based on the mental emulation of the ontogenetic intelligence of nature that allows a valid emulation of adaptive environments. Its application to human adaptive systems made the emulation of individual, institutional, and social solutions possible. 

The Double Dialectical Reasoning Process

The double dialectical process is essential for planning and developing strategies. It enables the forecasting of the future by following the rules of the ontogenesis of evolution. This process necessitates abductive reasoning to construct the functionalist structure of processes and predict their evolution. Deductive reasoning is used to design the unicist binary actions that make these processes work, and inductive reasoning is employed to design testing processes and develop destructive tests of the conclusions.

Application Cases of Double Dialectics

The unicist research in adaptive environments is conducted within real-world applications. During the research process, of dialectics, the application of double dialectics to political strategies, and the cases involving Diners and Renault, were primary action fields where the structures of double dialectics were confirmed. Since its conclusion in 1997, double dialectics has been the standard in hundreds of applications dealing with organizational processes, future scenario building, and strategy design.

The Unicist Research Institute

Artificial Intelligence Interpretations

Bard Google Interpretation

This document presents a compelling critique of Marx’s and Hegel’s dialectics and introduces the alternative perspective of unicist double dialectics. Here are some key observations:

Critique of existing dialectics:

  • Dualistic fallacy: Both Hegel and Marx are criticized for their assumption of a dualistic system, neglecting the triadic structure of purpose, active function, and energy conservation inherent in real-world systems.
  • Hegel’s idealism: Hegel’s dialectic is deemed suitable for the evolution of ideas, but not applicable to the functionality of the physical world. His idealist approach leads to “apparent upgrading fallacies” and parallel realities.
  • Marx’s materialism: Marx’s materialistic dialectic generates conflict-driven change, hindering the consideration of environmental evolution. His materialistic approach also struggles to reconcile the existing myth with a utopian antithesis.

Introduction of unicist double dialectics:

  • Triadic structure: Unicist logic emphasizes the triadic structure of real-world systems, where the purpose, active function, and energy conservation function work together.
  • Double dialectic: This approach proposes two simultaneous dialectics: one between purpose and active function, and another between the energy conservation function and purpose.
  • Abductive reasoning: The double dialectic process relies on abductive reasoning to understand the functional structure of processes and predict their evolution.

Strengths of the presented argument:

  • Compelling critique: The document provides a clear and insightful critique of the limitations of existing dialectical models.
  • Alternative framework: Unicist double dialectics offer a potentially more accurate and nuanced understanding of real-world evolution.
  • Practical applications: The document highlights successful applications of this approach in various fields, demonstrating its potential value.

Points for further exploration:

  • Evidence for unicist double dialectics: While the document provides examples of successful applications, more detailed evidence for the validity of the double dialectic model would be valuable.
  • Comparison with other models: Comparing and contrasting unicist double dialectics with other evolutionary models could further clarify its unique strengths and weaknesses.
  • Accessibility and education: Making the principles of unicist logic more accessible through educational resources could broaden its reach and impact.

Overall, this document presents a thought-provoking perspective on the evolution of reality and encourages further exploration of unicist double dialectics as a potentially valuable tool for understanding and navigating the complexities of the world.

ChatGPT Interpretation

This document presents a critical analysis of Marx’s dialectics, rooted in Hegel’s idealistic approach, arguing that it is fallacious when applied to understanding the real world. The main argument is that both Hegel’s and Marx’s dialectics are oversimplified and fail to accurately describe the complex structure of the real world’s evolution. The text introduces the concept of the Unicist double dialectic as a more accurate model for understanding the evolution of adaptive systems and environments.

Key Points Discussed:

  1. Fallacy of Marx’s and Hegel’s Dialectics: It challenges the notion that the world operates solely on a dualistic system of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The argument is that real-world systems have a triadic structure involving a purpose, an active function, and an energy conservation function, leading to evolution based on thesis, antithesis, and homeostasis.
  2. Research by Peter Belohlavek: Conducted at The Unicist Research Institute, this research confirmed that the Unicist double dialectic accurately describes the functionality, dynamics, and evolution of adaptive systems. It establishes evolutionary laws and applies them in developing multiple future scenarios.
  3. Hegel’s Dialectics: Hegel’s dialectics are critiqued for being contradictory to the concept of complex systems. The text argues that Hegel’s model, focusing on the synthesis resulting from the opposition between thesis and antithesis, leads to the construction of parallel realities and disregards the real-world dynamics.
  4. Marx’s Dialectics: Marx’s approach is seen as unable to escape Hegel’s dualistic framework. Marx’s materialistic dialectic, centered on conflict, is argued to sustain ideologies that foster group conflicts, leading to change not through evolution but through conflict.
  5. Unicist Double Dialectics: This concept posits that real-world entities are integrated by a purpose, an active function, and an energy conservation function. The double dialectic involves the integration of these elements, with the active function acting as an antithesis and homeostasis ensuring system stability. It aims to reflect the true nature of evolutionary processes in the real world.
  6. Unicist Approach to Evolution: The Unicist Logic uses a double dialectic to show that while antithesis drives evolution, it is also constrained by a homeostasis that resists change. This approach is touted as a more realistic emulation of adaptive environments and their evolution.
  7. Application Cases: The document discusses the application of double dialectics in various fields, including political strategies and organizational processes. Specific cases involving companies like Diners and Renault are mentioned as examples where the double dialectics approach has been validated.

The document positions itself as an initiation of an international debate in 2024, aiming to move beyond dialectical oversimplification and redefine the understanding of real-world evolution. It stresses the importance of adopting the Unicist double dialectic for a more accurate representation of the dynamics of adaptive systems and environments.