Global Coherence by Interrelating Disparate Strategic Patterns Dynamically

TRANSCEND MEMBERS, 19 Aug 2019

Anthony Judge | Laetus in Praesens – TRANSCEND Media Service

Topological Interweaving of 4-fold, 8-fold, 12-fold, 16-fold and 20-fold in 3D

Introduction

19 Aug 2019 – The following presentation follows from discussion of the Coping Capacity of Governance as Dangerously Questionable: recognizing assumptions and unasked questions when facing crisis (2019), and specifically from the closing section (From disorderly “collapse” to orderly “renaissance”, 2019). The focus there was on exploring mnemonic aids to comprehension of 16-fold patterns, as exemplified by the 16 binary truth functions, but characterized by a wide range of other uses of 16-fold patterns, whose potential relationships appear to merit attention with respect to governance (Deprecation of potential correspondences: 16-fold patterns? 2019).

Any 16-fold pattern is a provocative challenge to comprehension, given the constraints on human capacity with respect to the complexity of any such pattern as a whole (Conceptual clustering and cognitive constraints, 2014). This is especially the case when such a pattern is used by the United Nations to frame an overriding strategic preoccupation for global governance — with an explicit call for widespread credibility. The challenge is all the greater when 16-fold patterns are upheld by physics as of fundamental significance to the organization of reality and by logicians to the distinction in discourse between truth and falsehood.

How is the imposition of strategic patterns beyond average comprehension capacity to be interpreted? Who has a cognitive grasp of such patterns as a whole — with an ability to remember all their elements? Does the situation bear comparison with a cognitive analogue to the Peter Principle — promoting the requirement for comprehension beyond the competence for such comprehension? Is this then related to the so-called “Belgian Compromise” — with complex issues being settled by conceding something to every party concerned, through an agreement that is usually so complicated that nobody completely understands all its implications? Faced with such deliberately manipulative patterning complexity — a form of global “cognitive violence” — should individuals then explore for themselves what might be termed Personal Globalization (2001)?

The challenge to comprehension of logical connectives was presented in the introductory paper as relating to both a mapping of the 16-fold pattern of the standard model of particle physics and to that of the 16-fold pattern of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The assumption made is that there are well-recognized fundamental constraints on human ability to comprehend patterns of coherence. There are qualifiers in topological terms to recognition of 16-fold, exemplified by the Higgs boson (a 17th particle in the standard model), and by the 17th SDG (coordinating the other 16). It was suggested that both cases are characterized by their elusive nature. Variants of such “qualification” are evident with respect to the pattern of logical connectives.

The polyhedron identified as of particular interest to any such mapping was the so-called “simplest torus” (12 sides, 16 vertices, 28 edges), and more specifically its dual (16 sides, 12 vertices, 28 edges). The 16-fold pattern also recalls that of the Earth Charter (as it emerged from Agenda 21) and presumably influenced the configuration of both the 16 (+1) SDGs and the 8-fold pattern of the UN Millennium Development Goals. The simplest torus also has 8-fold features.

Also of interest are the 12-fold features of that form, given their relevance to previous explorations (Checklist of 12-fold Principles, Plans, Symbols and Concepts: web resources, 2011; Clarifying the Unexplored Dynamics of 12-fold Round tables: visualization of patterns of sustainable discourse between 12 systemic archetypes, 2019; Eliciting a 12-fold Pattern of Generic Operational Insights: recognition of memory constraints on collective strategic comprehension, 2011). These can be discussed in relation to the 12-fold pattern of the Flag of Europe (Experimental Visualization of Dynamics of the European Parliament in 3D, 2019).

Of further interest are the 20-fold features evident in the first stellation of that toroidal polyhedron, given previous discussion with respect to that pattern (Requisite 20-fold Articulation of Operative Insights? Checklist of web resources on 20 strategies, rules, methods and insights, 2018; Memetic Analogue to the 20 Amino Acids as vital to Psychosocial Life? 2015). Of potential relevance is the 40-fold organization of Agenda 21 and that of a recent 40-segment strategic report to the Club of Rome, as reviewed separately with possible polyhedral mappings (Exhortation to We the Peoples from the Club of Rome, 2018).

With the focus here on mnemonic aids to comprehension, the question is what kinds of “stories” can be elaborated with regard to the interweaving of these patterns in a toroidal form with unusual properties suggestive of helical organization. These are reminiscent of both the paradoxical Möbius strip and current preoccupation with the Triple Helix model of innovation. More provocative, but of significance to far wider comprehension, is the sense in which the toroidal form in 3D can be seen as implying an expanded variant of what is appreciated in the conventional 3×4 patterns of the triplicities and quadruplicities of the zodiac in 2D. However, potentially far more provocative, is the manner in which the form is reminiscent of the NATO logo, as previously discussed (Envisaging NATO Otherwise — in 3D and 4D? Potentially hidden faces of global strategy highlighted through polyhedra, 2017).

The possibility of mapping the 16-fold standard model of particle physics onto such a form is intriguing in the light of the cognitive integrity it would then exemplify to a higher degree than in its tabular form. As with the other 16-fold patterns, of further interest is the extent to which the relationship between the elements are then understood dynamically rather than statically — forming some analogue to a resonance hybrid (Configuration of alternatives as a resonance hybrid, 2008).

TO CONTINUE READING Go to Original – laetusinpraesens.org

 

Share this article:


DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


There are no comments so far.

Join the discussion!

We welcome debate and dissent, but personal — ad hominem — attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), abuse and defamatory language will not be tolerated. Nor will we tolerate attempts to deliberately disrupt discussions. We aim to maintain an inviting space to focus on intelligent interactions and debates.

*

code

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.