Our Take

From the outset, our apex goal was to discover the laws of thought for Cat 3 sociotechnical system problem solving and put them into practice for making appropriate selections of task action. To flesh out and validate the relevant laws of thought, we had to first solve the OD system problem with a generic fix and work backwards, reverse engineering. When Plan B was first secured in 2013, the discovery process was begun. It took a decade. Success with Cat 3 is proof positive that necessary and sufficient thinking took place, protracted thinking at its highest intensity.

All the philosophy on thinking has contributed little to meeting the challenge of unavoidable, important problems that plague modern society, mostly caused by OD. These unsolved problems are entangled system problems, sociotechnical in nature. Establishment-owned academia has contributed little to the art and science of thinking as well. Its fetish for reductionism killed success with the thinking challenge in its crib.

The push on the scientific custodians of “thinking” now is to take what does work, generalize it, and crawl back towards its core elements. As there is no straight forward way to solve a Cat 3 problem, unprecedented by definition, all Cat 3s involve the process of elimination (PoE), a process that requires the highest levels and intensities of thought humans are capable of. In practice, such levels of thinking “system” are seldom applied. The default response is reductionism which abandons the Cat 3 problem altogether to grow and cascade as it will.

Regarding the philosophers, they should work with the success cases we now have and trace back to their elements. Since the PoE needs all the help it can get, whatever they contribute will be put into service. Solving the important problems as they arrive is a part of the standard of care of a flourishing society.

For any system, it is impossible to validate the fix without a before and after comparison of functionalities. A successful Cat 3 project is necessary to determine:

  • The range of causes
  • The cascade of consequences
  • The unknowable benefits revealed by Cat 3 success

Social collapse is no one’s fault; flourishing is everyone’s “fault.” WLL 2023

Our goal in thinking for success is to solve Cat 3 problems as expeditiously as possible. When you can solve a Cat 3 riddle, all other categories of problem have a reference standard that makes solving them easier.  Beautiful win win.

The role of philosophy is to apply its reasoning processes to success examples, what done looks like, with emphasis on the PoE. Their official excuse for non-performance has been working from the great void, no standards of success, never promising success, only endless struggle. With no way to define success, philosophy keeps proving that reductionism doesn’t work for system problems.

Any time the goal is unspecified in working terms, the only approach available to human thinking for system problems is the PoE. It is a repeating process of guess and distress, trial and error that begins with the creativity of an individual. Like Thomas Edison, who used the PoE to find a practical incandescent bulb, failing 13K times, solving a Cat 3 system problem takes a system approach. Reductionism for Cat 3s is fatal.

When you solve a Cat 3 problem like OD, you have, by definition, solved a problem that humanity on autopilot has never been able to solve. The transposition process that succeeded in 2013 was not due to knowledge and enlightenment from philosophy and the famous thinkers of the past. We claim the 2013 success with Plan B, beyond dispute, could only have been attained by top drawer, protracted cognitive efforts, high-stakes thinking. The transposition from OD to Plan B has a radiance all its own, recognized by everyone, especially its Establishment enemies.

The fact that system solutions exist, with implementations to audit, is evidence that the highest levels of human thinking can indeed solve Cat 3 problems. This is saying out loud that the great suffering of humanity with unsolved escalating Cat 3 problems is, as has been, unnecessary. How could you show that high-stakes thinking was not the essential factor in Plan B success? If not thinking prowess, what?

Since the transposition process that delivered Plan B had to be generic to work for OD and thus can be repeated for any tall hierarchy, there is no call to science and philosophy to finish specifying the sociotechnology for Cat 3 system problem resolution.

It’s up to the thinking disciplines, not us, to harvest the transposition of Plan A to Plan B process for reflection and thinking, connecting what has succeeded back to the primary drivers in their world, each element having its own truth. We certify that fixing the Cat 3 problem requires the PoE. There can be no direct path for the transposition and it’s counterproductive to search for one. There is no ratiocination with a chain of premises which inexorably lead to a cogent conclusion.

The more important the issue, the more the Establishment will suppress any and all efforts to understand it and succeed in solving it.

Ruling class influence on social status is grossly underestimated and misunderstood. We hand control over our life trajectory to it where it immediately uses its legal authority to abuse and punish us. It rules by shaping our value systems kept in your subconscious mind for making choices.

There is no bridge here, only the leap. In contrast to a steady progress, where we move unawares from one thing to the next and everything remains alike, the psychological leap to plan B takes us abruptly to where everything is different, so different that it strikes us as strange. Abrupt means the sudden sheer descent or rise that marks the chasm’s edge. Though we may not flounder in such a leap, what the leap takes us to will confound us. It is quite in order, then, that we receive notice from the very start of what will confound us. The matter of thinking is always confounding.

A curious, indeed unearthly thing is that we must first leap onto the soil on which we really stand. That this leap becomes necessary, something must have happened that gives food for thought. Man as he is so far, is why the bridge must be found to that nature by which man can overcome his former nature, his last nature. (Plan B) To rise above himself to the level of his capability. Most of Cat 3 thinking is above the “mentor line.”

Thinking above the mentor line is functioning in a different world. It is not a different version of the same world. The way to tell is easy. When you discuss concepts that were produced above the line, the usual critics don’t understand your concept sufficiently to criticize it.

Cat 3 thinking gives expression to something that already exists but is still concealed from current views. We may assume, then, that here and there, still invisible to the public eye, the thinker already exists. But we must never look for him in those characters who by a shallow and misconceived will to power are pushed to the top as the chief functionaries of the various organizations in which that will to power incorporates itself.

Man is the beast endowed with reason. Reason is the perception of what is which always means also what can be and ought to be. The perception that prevails within reason produces and adduces purposes, establishes rules, provides means and ways, and attunes reason to the modes of action. Reason’s perception unfolds as this manifold providing, which is first of all and always a confrontation, a face-to-face presentation. Man fixes himself, and generally all that is, by a specific way of representing ideas.

Precisely because of our boundlessly, purely quantitative nonstop technological progress, the thinker is tenderer and tougher, quieter and more self-sacrificing and slower of decision, and more economical of speech. He is turning something into something useful by using it.

Delusion believes that it sees, and that it sees in the only possible manner, even while this, its belief, robs it of sight.

Cannot do system think without going cross-discipline.

The kind of value system prevailing in a country determines the country’s reaction and view on corruption. Values are determined by priorities. Sunday Adelaja

Some conditions established by individual Human Choice

  • Health
  • Safety
  • Quality, workmanship
  • Career
  • Collaboration, cooperation, coordination
  • Family, Social connections
  • Value system
  • Pursuit of personal interests
  • Performance
    • Thinking
    • Appropriate selection

Thinking benchmark

The people producing this website have, over the decades as licensed professional engineers, accumulated over 100 USA patents. In our experience, the obstacle course run by the patent system, attorneys and examiners, worldwide, is the ultimate determination of whether or not Cat 3 thinking was exhibited by the applicants.

Your patent attorney dares not bring a weak case to the government examiners. His reputation is at stake. Likewise, the patent examiners are very reluctant to issue a patent for an invention that might not survive examination by patent offices around the globe. Their reputation is at stake.

The patent world is the most politics-free social system there can be. Corruption has no traction. Whoever attempts to cheat will be found out and punished. There are too many checks and balances in the examination process.

The examinations of a patent application are fixated on two questions. Is it new? Is it useful? These questions can only be answered by your attorney understanding your invention in depth. He has to search for prior art in every place the examiners will likely search. You, the applicant, will get a grilling from your attorney you’ll never forget.

Your attorney wants to know the setting in which your invention was made and what led you to think it was patentable. He has to know the technology involved as the examiners will have experts in the room. From this basis he will prepare the claims, the heart of the patent.

There is no way false information or defensive coverup is going to get through the gantlet. Only a fool would attempt it and fools don’t get patents. There is no higher proof that high-stakes thinking took place than an issued patent.

Conscious-mind thinking capability

  • Platinum rule
  • Innovation
  • The instinct of workmanship
  • Authentic outcome responsibility
  • Goal setting
  • Cat 3 choice making
  • Some Cat 2 disturbances
  • GYAT
  • Resiliency

The value system

The fact that the value system of the individuals involved in the choice-making process are neglected is sure proof that no high-stakes thinking is going on. Ca’ canny for one, is a choice on subconscious mind reflex automatic. It is, after all, the value system in use that plays the principal role in selecting amongst the candidate actions. Get the value systems right and predicting social behavior is a snap.

Value systems, resident in subconscious minds, are determined by POSIWID over time. Ask yourself if you have ever written out the values you will use in tradeoff exercises for making high-stakes choices. Value systems are how you determine trustworthiness.

While individual value systems can vary far from the mean of invariant human nature, the value system of each hierarchical layer in the organization are known and shared by every member in that level. The difference between level value systems determines the trustworthiness and productivity of the interactions.

Compare the value system of the ruling class to that of the producers and you will see that the value system of the privileged class is hostile to the class that provides their necessaries and luxuries. The value system of the potentates is at war with the revenue-producing class. You can validate the hostile relationship by watching it play out. The head shed abuses the workers and the workers respond with Ca’ canny. Lose lose.

Perhaps the most significant thing a person can know about himself is to understand his own system of values. Almost everything we do is a reflection of our own personal Value system. What do we mean by values? Our values are what we want out of life.  Jacques Fresco

Creativity

The role of creativity in Cat 3 problem solving is intentionally ignored. The central role of creativity in Cat 3 conditions is to produce the candidates for “appropriate selection” processing. Developing the plausible candidates list is full of creative acts and choice making and it takes time. There’s no way to tell in advance who will come up with the best candidates.

Laws of Creativity
  • Autonomy
  • Pressure-free secure work environment
  • Solitude, social isolation as required
  • Errors and failures as normal, thought provoking
  • Value system alignment
  • No losers

A workforce sunk in ignorance, thinking it is defenseless against authoritarianism, puts the lever of authority in the hands of the ruling class. It intentionally frightens the public into docility and submission – a bait ball to be engulfed and devoured.

Creativity Killers
  • Zero sum
  • Fear
  • Insecurity, angst
  • Depersonalization
  • Drive management
  • Nash Equilibrium
  • Bad quality information

 

Fractal Functions

  • Trigger: event recognition
  • Knowledge development
  • Problem classification
  • Process selection
  • Engage and complete
  • Evaluate
  • Revise and repeat

 

Only MitMs can run the fractal cycle of thought

 

Going with the grain

  • Emulate peers
  • Ignore
    • 2nd Law
    • Context
    • Responsibility
    • Value systems
  • No pushback for OTA
  • One two three →Done
  • Failure not left to chance

From the outset, our apex goal was to discover the laws of thought for Cat 3 sociotechnical system problem solving and put them into practice for making appropriate selections of task action. To flesh out and validate the relevant laws of thought, we had to first solve the OD system problem with a generic fix and work backwards, reverse engineering. When Plan B was first secured in 2013, the discovery process was begun. It took a decade. Success with Cat 3 is proof positive that necessary and sufficient thinking took place, protracted thinking at its zenith.

All the philosophy on thinking has contributed little to meeting the challenge of unavoidable, important problems that plague modern society, mostly caused by OD. These unsolved problems are entangled system problems, sociotechnical in nature. Establishment-owned academia has contributed little to the art and science of thinking as well. Its fetish for reductionism killed the thinking challenge in its crib.

The push on the scientific custodians of “thinking” now is to take what does work, generalize it, and crawl back towards its core elements. As there is no straight forward way to solve a Cat 3 problem, unprecedented by definition, all Cat 3s involve the process of elimination (PoE), a process that requires the highest levels and intensities of thought humans are capable of. In practice, such levels of thinking “system” are seldom applied. The default response is reductionism which abandons the Cat 3 problem altogether to grow and cascade as it will.

Regarding the philosophers, they should work with the success cases and trace back to their elements. Since the PoE needs all the help it can get, whatever they contribute will be put into service. Solving the important problems as they arrive is a part of the standard of care of a flourishing society.

For any system, it is impossible to validate these without a before and after comparison of functionalities. A successful Cat 3 project is necessary to determine:

  • The range of causes
  • The cascade of consequences
  • The unknowable benefits revealed by Cat 3 success

Our goal in thinking for success is to solve Cat 3 problems as expeditiously as possible. When you can solve a Cat 3 riddle, all other categories of problem have a reference standard that makes solving them easier.  Beautiful win win.

The role of philosophy is to apply its reasoning processes to success examples, what done looks like, with emphasis on the PoE. Their official excuse for non-performance has been working from the great void, no standards of success, never promising success, only endless struggle. With no way to define success, philosophy keeps proving that reductionism doesn’t work for system problems.

Any time the goal is unspecified in working terms, the only approach available to human thinking for system problems is the PoE. It is a repeating process of guess and distress, trial and error that begins with the creativity of an individual. Like Thomas Edison, who used the PoE to find a practical incandescent bulb, failing 13K times, solving a Cat 3 system problem takes a system approach. Reductionism for Cat 3s is fatal.

When you solve a Cat 3 problem like OD, you have, by definition, solved a problem that humanity on autopilot has never been able to solve. The transposition process that succeeded in 2013 was not due to knowledge and enlightenment from philosophy and the famous thinkers of the past. We claim the 2013 success with Plan B, beyond dispute, could only have been attained by top drawer, protracted cognitive efforts, high-stakes thinking. The transposition from OD to Plan B has a radiance all its own, recognized by everyone, especially its Establishment enemies.

The fact that system solutions exist, with implementations to audit, is evidence that the highest levels of human thinking can indeed solve Cat 3 problems. This is saying out loud that the great suffering of humanity with unsolved escalating Cat 3 problems is, as has been, unnecessary. How could you show that high-stakes thinking was not the essential factor in Plan B success? If not thinking prowess, what?

Since the transposition process that delivered Plan B had to be generic to work for OD and thus can be repeated for any tall hierarchy, there is no call to science and philosophy to finish specifying the sociotechnology for Cat 3 system problem resolution.

It’s up to the thinking disciplines, not us, to harvest the transposition of Plan A to Plan B process for reflection and thinking, connecting what has succeeded back to the primary drivers in their world, each element having its own truth. We certify that fixing the Cat 3 problem requires the PoE. There can be no direct path for the transposition and it’s counterproductive to search for one. There is no ratiocination with a chain of premises which inexorably lead to a cogent conclusion.

The more important the issue, the more the Establishment will suppress any and all efforts to understand it and succeed in solving it.

There is no bridge here, only the leap. In contrast to a steady progress, where we move unawares from one thing to the next and everything remains alike, the psychological leap to plan B takes us abruptly to where everything is different, so different that it strikes us as strange. Abrupt means the sudden sheer descent or rise that marks the chasm’s edge. Though we may not flounder in such a leap, what the leap takes us to will confound us. It is quite in order, then, that we receive notice from the very start of what will confound us. The matter of thinking is always confounding.

It’s not hard to make decisions when you know what your values are. Roy E. Disney

A curious, indeed unearthly thing is that we must first leap onto the soil on which we really stand. That this leap becomes necessary, something must have happened that gives food for thought. Man as he is so far, is why the bridge must be found to that nature by which man can overcome his former nature, his last nature. (Plan B) To rise above himself to the level of his capability.

Cat 3 thinking gives expression to something that already exists but is still concealed from current views. We may assume, then, that here and there, still invisible to the public eye, the thinker already exists. But we must never look for him in those characters who by a shallow and misconceived will to power are pushed to the top as the chief functionaries of the various organizations in which that will to power incorporates itself.

Man is the beast endowed with reason. Reason is the perception of what is which always means also what can be and ought to be. The perception that prevails within reason produces and adduces purposes, establishes rules, provides means and ways, and attunes reason to the modes of action. Reason’s perception unfolds as this manifold providing, which is first of all and always a confrontation, a face-to-face presentation. Man fixes himself, and generally all that is, by a specific way of representing ideas.

Precisely because of our boundlessly, purely quantitative nonstop technological progress, the thinker is tenderer and tougher, quieter and more self-sacrificing and slower of decision, and more economical of speech. He is turning something into something useful by using it.

Delusion believes that it sees, and that it sees in the only possible manner, even while this, its belief, robs it of sight.

Cannot do system think without going cross-discipline.

Thinking benchmark

The people producing this website have, over the decades as licensed professional engineers, accumulated over 100 USA patents. In our experience, the obstacle course run by the patent system, attorneys and examiners, worldwide, is the ultimate determination of whether or not Cat 3 thinking was exhibited by the applicants.

Your patent attorney dares not bring a weak case to the government examiners. His reputation is at stake. Likewise, the patent examiners are very reluctant to issue a patent for an invention that might not survive examination by patent offices around the globe. Their reputation is at stake.

The patent world is the most politics-free social system there can be. Corruption has no traction. Whoever attempts to cheat will be found out and punished. There are too many checks and balances in the examination process.

The examinations of a patent application are fixated on two questions. Is it new? Is it useful? These questions can only be answered by your attorney understanding your invention in depth. He has to search for prior art in every place the examiners will likely search. You, the applicant, will get a grilling from your attorney you’ll never forget.

Your attorney wants to know the setting in which your invention was made and what led you to think it was patentable. He has to know the technology involved as the examiners will have experts in the room. From this basis he will prepare the claims, the heart of the patent.

There is no way false information or defensive coverup is going to get through the gantlet. Only a fool would attempt it and fools don’t get patents. There is no higher proof that high-stakes thinking took place than an issued patent.

 

The value system

The fact that the value system of the individuals involved in the choice-making process are neglected is sure proof that no high-stakes thinking is going on. Ca’ canny for one, is a choice on reflex automatic. It is, after all, the value system in use that plays the principal role in selecting amongst the candidate actions. Get the value systems right and predicting social behavior is a snap.

Value systems, resident in subconscious minds, are determined by POSIWID over time. Ask yourself if you have ever written out the values you will use in tradeoff exercises for making high-stakes choices. Value systems are how you determine trustworthiness.

While individual value systems can vary far from the mean of invariant human nature, the value system of each hierarchical layer in the organization are known and shared by every member in that level. The difference between level value systems determines the trustworthiness and productivity of the interactions.

Compare the value system of the ruling class to that of the producers and you will see that the value system of the privileged class is hostile to the class that provides their necessaries and luxuries. The value system of the potentates is at war with the revenue-producing class. You can validate the hostile relationship by watching it play out. The head shed abuses the workers and the workers respond with Ca’ canny. Lose lose.

A highly developed value system is like a compass. It serves as a guide to point you in the right direction when you are lost.

Creativity

The role of creativity in Cat 3 problem solving is intentionally ignored. The central role of creativity in Cat 3 conditions is to produce the candidates for “appropriate selection” processing. Developing the plausible candidates list is full of creative acts and choice making and it takes time. There’s no way to tell in advance who will come up with the best candidates.

Laws of Creativity

  • Autonomy
  • Pressure-free secure work environment
  • Solitude, social isolation as required
  • Errors and failures as normal, thought provoking
  • Value system alignment
  • No losers

 

Creativity Killers
  • Zero sum
  • Fear
  • Insecurity, angst
  • Depersonalization
  • Drive management
  • Nash Equilibrium
  • Bad quality information

 

Fractal Functions

  • Trigger: event recognition
  • Knowledge development
  • Problem classification
  • Process selection
  • Engage and complete
  • Evaluate
  • Revise and repeat

 

Only MitMs can run the fractal cycle

 

Going with the grain

  • Emulate peers
  • Ignore
    • 2nd Law
    • Context
    • Responsibility
    • Value systems
  • No pushback for OTA
  • One two three →Done
  • Failure not left to chance
Taking trajectory control
  • Going against the grain
  • Cat 3 thinking
    • Entangled
    • Fractal
  • Pushback and sabotage
  • Responsibility, non-transferrable
  • Entropy extraction

 

To Think or not to Think

The centerpiece of intelligence is appropriate selection, a think-driven process. The facts of what is scientifically called “thinking” include:

  • Less that 1% of the population knows the sociotechnical scope and mechanisms of thinking
  • Less than 2% of the population knows that intuition is not thinking
  • Less than 3% of the population is aware there is a process for effective thinking
  • Less than 2% of the population knows or cares what triggers their thinking process
  • Less than 1% of the population knows how it thinks

It is well established that intelligence is a powerful predictor of life outcomes.

With this operational reality, one need not feel curious about why risen civilizations invariably fall.

The logic to thought aversion is straight forward:

  1. Everyone agrees – humans are their choices. Beyond dispute.
  2. Appropriate selection is the definition of intelligence
  3. Only “thinking” can underwrite appropriate selection
  4. Thinking is the core competency of a well-lived life
  5. Thinking is socially discouraged

 

The thinking knowledge void has been noted and recorded by prominent philosophers and “thinkers” for thousands of years. The aversion to thinking is easy to detect. It is infused by our social conditioning. Many of the choices being made and implemented by the population are obviously bad, harmful choices that deliver consequences, not expected results. It is as impossible to make good choices without thinking as it is impossible for risk-informed thinking to make bad choices.

To go from intuition, a nobrainer, into the strenuous labor of competent thinking is no small feat. It takes time and it ends with a cognitive leap, not a crawl. Think pole vault.

This page provides the best available philosophical knowledge about “What is called Thinking?” It is for reference purposes when your thoughts about thinking mature from your thinking experience. No one can learn about prudent thinking for you. For now, learning about requisite Cat 3 thinking is to appreciate just how complicated and multi-faceted making prudent choices in high-stakes conditions can be. You must wean yourself away from simple cause/simple consequence thinking – the curse of reductionism.

While Plan B is a most extraordinary gift we have proudly given to human society, our paramount gift to humanity is at a level above. It is the most awesome statement about creating a flourishing society since the ancient Greeks. It provides the practical process by which the Cat 3 issues that prevent flourishing are resolved. Its principles and rules announce that it is impossible to resolve a Cat 3 problem by a direct front-to-back approach. The only way to learn the path to Plan B success is to first solve the problem and then evaluate the material distinctions between a Plan A transposed into a Plan B ideology. It sounds crazy that you must first solve the Cat 3 to learn how to solve Cat 3s, but the brute reality of that statement is derived throughout the website. Evidence for its truth has been provided by the ancient and honored profession of philosophy – Cat 3 impotent.

What is philosophy? With this question we are touching on a theme which is very broad, that is, widespread. Because the theme is broad, it is indefinite. Because it is indefinite, we can treat the theme from the most varied points of view. Thereby we shall always hit upon something that is valid. But because, in the treatment of this extensive theme, all possible opinions intermingle, we are in danger of having our discussion lack proper cohesion. Martin Heidegger 1956

In order to discuss the philosophy, science, and art of Cat 3 thinking, it is necessary to understand as demonstrable fact that a straight line of logic of thinking to solve a Cat 3 issue, like OD, is impossible. How can there be a blazed path straight to a mythical destination? The reality of Cat 3 is the process of elimination (PoE) for both goal and method. There is no alternative to the PoE. It takes high-stakes thinking in both social and technical arenas and hard bark for absorbing failures without getting depressed. Getting to the mist-shrouded goal cannot be forced.

To an impartial observer, the basic situation with Cat 3 matters is ludicrous. As we validated in 2013, you have to first solve the Cat 3 matter before you can specify the range of particulars of cause, effect, process, and all the benefits in solving it.

The philosophers of human thinking never had a precedent of successful Cat 3 thinking to use as a standard of care. To philosophize on pieces and parts of the puzzle of thinking does not advance the PoE. It diverts thinking to lost causes. The fact there is now a standard of care for Cat 3 problem-solving is the last thing society wants to hear. You can test that statement anywhere and see for yourself. Then think, does a nation-wide refusal to think appropriately explain the current state of global affairs? You bet.

Reward?

As professional engineers, we have considerable experience in the “safety” business, working with the myriad agencies that regulate, provide insurance, and technical organizations, such as the American Society of Safety Professionals. When Plan B initialized in 2013, we discovered that Plan B cut losses to unsafety in half without ever mentioning the word or running a conventional safety program.

When we brought the news to our comrades in the safety business, we were aggressively and reflexively rejected. The consistency of the whack-a-mole reaction became a “call” for some high-stakes thinking. We found several examples in the literature where the connection was noticed. While rejection was a disappointment, we started noticing the same phenomenon in other areas, such as quality.

 

 

Views: 56