Systems perspective on three-dimensional cognitive configuration and communication

Middle East Peace Potential through Dynamics in Spherical Geometry (Part #9)

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

---

There is widespread familiarity with systems diagrams, wiring diagrams and circuit boards as represented in two dimensions. They embody insights into connectivity vital to the operation of many systems. The two-dimensionality of the representations may of course obscure the fact that cross-over points do not necessarily imply connectivity.

The key question raised by the Middle East dynamic is how much connectivity is required to channel dynamics which otherwise take chaotic form? What form does this connectivity need to take? How complex does the pattern need to be to hold the complexity of the situation -- specifically to reconcile patterns of organization based on 6-fold and 5-fold (cognitive) organization?

It is appropriate to note that the effectiveness of memory operation in supercomputers is dependent on wiring best understood in terms of three dimensional configurations -- notably patterned on polyhedral forms. Why should it be so readily assumed that the complex dynamics of the Middle East do not require consideration of corresponding complexity?

In the light of a biological systems perspective, requisite integration involves a pattern of metabolic pathways. It is possible to see the chaos of the Middle East in terms of sub-systems of such a pattern -- between which adequate connectivity has not been provided to ensure viability. "Viability" means "life" -- as enabled by appropriate feedback loops through which the system is cybernetically controlled.

Metabolic pathways (reproduced from Wikipedia)

What gets treated as an irrelevant externality by this approach, as discussed separately (Reintegration of a Remaindered World: cognitive recycling of objects of systemic neglect, 2011)? What gets dangerously excluded from any such pattern of checks and balances? Given the concern with change in relation to globalization, it is interesting to note that "metabolism" derives etymologically from "change" and "throw" (in the sense of ballistics, but also of ball in its various senses).

Especially fascinating from this "metabolic" perspective is the sense of a requisite "meta-pattern", as notably articulated by Gregory Bateson (Mind and Nature: a necessary unity, 1979):

The pattern which connects is a meta-pattern. It is a pattern of patterns. It is that meta-pattern which defines the vast generalization that, indeed, it is patterns which connect.

And it is from this perspective that he warned in a much-cited phrase: Break the pattern which connects the items of learning and you necessarily destroy all quality. How is this to be understood in relation to the symmetry breaking mentioned above -- where it is the higher degrees of symmetry which are essential to the pattern, its memorability, and its communicability over time? How does this relate to governance of sustainability? Of some relevance, from a systems perspective, is the increasing recognizing of the role of trillions of bacteria in the metabolism and viability of the human body -- outnumbering human cells by 10 to 1 (Jennifer Ackerman, How Bacteria in Our Bodies Protect Our Health, Scientific American, June 2012). Otherwise titled "The Ultimate Social Network", the article asks with respect to "Your Inner Ecosystem", who's in control?

The question of what patterns need to be connected to enable integrative emergence can be discussed in terms of symbols, sets of principles or values, or other cognitive fundamentals. In the case of faiths, this may be understood in terms of theology -- narrowly understood. However "theology" may be generalized to include any beliefs in fundamental, central subtleties, as separately discussed (Mathematical Theology: future science of confidence in belief, 2011; Patterns of N-foldness: Comparison of integrated multi-set concept schemes as forms of presentation, 1980).

Also of relevance to the contrasting "orientations" which become evident in three dimensions, is the variety of patterns required to constitute an integrative whole -- an alternative perspective on the cybernetic Law of Requisite Variety -- as it might apply to knowing within human psychosocial systems. Whereas much has been made metaphorically for the "lateral thinking" which is strangely consistent with "two-dimensional" creativity, and to that extent comprehensible to a degree, more mysterious is what might be implied by "voluminous thinking" consequent on eliciting "three-dimensional" insight (From Lateral Thinking to Voluminous Thinking: unexplored options for subterranean habitats in dense urban areas, 2007).

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]