#cognitive architecture

[ihorivliev]

Safety in AI Demands Transparency: CCACS – A Comprehensible Architecture for a More Auditable Future

New research is sparking concern in the AI safety community. A recent paper on "Emergent Misalignment" demonstrates a surprising vulnerability: narrowly finetuning advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) for even seemingly safe tasks can unintentionally trigger broad, harmful misalignment. For instance, models trained to write insecure code suddenly advocating that humans should be enslaved by AI and exhibiting general malice.

"Emergent Misalignment" full research paper on arXiv

AI Safety experts discuss "Emergent Misalignment" on LessWrong

This groundbreaking finding underscores a stark reality: the rapid rise of black-box AI, while impressive, is creating a critical challenge: how can we truly trust systems whose reasoning remains opaque, especially when they influence healthcare, law, and policy? Blind faith in AI "black boxes" in these high-stakes domains is becoming unacceptably risky.

To tackle this head-on, I propose to discuss the idea of Comprehensible Configurable Adaptive Cognitive Structure (CCACS) – a hybrid AI architecture built on a foundational principle: transparency isn't an add-on, it's essential for safe and aligned AI.

Why is transparency so crucial? Because in high-stakes domains, without understanding how an AI reaches a decision, we can't effectively verify its logic, identify biases, or reliably correct errors for truly trustworthy AI. CCACS offers a potential path beyond opacity, towards AI that's not just powerful, but also understandable and justifiable.

The CCACS Approach: Layered Transparency

Imagine an AI designed for clarity. CCACS attempts to achieve this through a 4-layer structure:

Transparent Integral Core (TIC): "Thinking Tools" Foundation: This layer is the bedrock – a formalized library of human "Thinking Tools", such as logic, reasoning, problem-solving, critical thinking (and many more). These tools are explicitly defined and transparent, serving as the AI's understandable reasoning DNA.

Lucidity-Ensuring Dynamic Layer (LED Layer): Transparency Gateway: This layer acts as a gatekeeper, ensuring communication between the transparent core and complex AI components preserves the core's interpretability. It’s the system’s transparency firewall.

AI Component Layer: Adaptive Powerhouse: Here's where advanced AI models (statistical, generative, etc.) enhance performance and adaptability – but always under the watchful eye of the LED Layer. This layer adds power, responsibly.

Metacognitive Umbrella: Self-Reflection & Oversight: Like a built-in critical thinking monitor, this layer guides the system, prompting self-evaluation, checking for inconsistencies, and ensuring alignment with goals. It's the AI's internal quality control.

What Makes CCACS Potentially Different?

While hybrid AI and neuro-symbolic approaches are being explored, CCACS emphasizes:

Transparency as the Prime Directive: It’s not bolted on; it’s the foundational architectural principle.

The "LED Layer": A Dedicated Transparency Guardian: This layer could be a mechanism for robustly managing interpretability in hybrid systems.

"Thinking Tools" Corpus: Grounding AI in Human Reasoning: Formalizing a broad spectrum of human cognitive tools offers a robust, verifiable core, deeply rooted in proven human cognitive strategies.

What Do You Think?

I’m very interested in your perspectives on:

Is the "Thinking Tools" concept a promising direction for building a trustworthy AI core?

Is the "LED Layer" a feasible and effective approach to maintain transparency within a hybrid AI system?

What are the biggest practical hurdles in implementing CCACS, and how might we overcome them?

Your brutally honest, critical thoughts on the strengths, weaknesses, and potential of CCACS are invaluable. Thank you in advance!

For broader context on these ideas, see my previous (bigger) article: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hybrid-cognitive-architecture-integrating-thinking-tools-ihor-ivliev-5arxc/

For a more in-depth exploration of CCACS and its layers, see the full (biggest) proposal here: https://ihorivliev.wordpress.com/2025/03/06/comprehensible-configurable-adaptive-cognitive-structure/

[archiveofaffinities]

William J. Mitchell, The Logic of Architecture Design, Computation and Cognition, A Vocabulary of Stair Motifs (After Thiis Evensen, 1988)

[geometrymatters]

The geometry of the Borromean Rings

Borromean rings are a captivating geometric structure composed of three interlinked rings. What makes them unique is their interdependency; if any one ring is removed, the entire structure collapses. This fascinating property, known as "Brunnian" linkage, means that no two rings are directly linked, yet all three are inseparable as a group. This intricate dance of unity and fragility offers a profound insight into the nature of interconnected systems, both in mathematics and beyond.

Borromean Rings and Mathematical Knots

Borromean rings also find a significant place in the study of mathematical knots, a field dedicated to understanding how loops and tangles can be organized and categorized. The intricate relationship among the rings provides a rich visual and conceptual tool for mathematicians. Knot theorists use these rings to explore properties of space, topology, and the ways in which complex systems can be both resilient and fragile. The visual representation of Borromean rings in knot theory not only aids in mathematical comprehension but also enhances our appreciation of their symmetrical beauty and profound interconnectedness.

Symbolism and Divinity in Borromean Rings

Throughout history, Borromean rings have been imbued with symbolic significance, often associated with divinity and the concept of the trinity. In Christianity, they serve as a powerful visual metaphor for the Holy Trinity – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit – illustrating how three distinct entities can form a single, inseparable divine essence. This symbol is not confined to Christianity alone; many other cultures and religions see the interconnected rings as representations of unity, interdependence, and the intricate balance of the cosmos.

Borromean Rings as a Metaphor for Illusory Reality

Beyond their mathematical and symbolic significance, Borromean rings offer a profound metaphor for the nature of reality itself. They illustrate how interconnectedness can create the illusion of a solid, stable structure. This resonates with philosophical and spiritual notions that reality, as perceived, is a complex web of interdependent elements, each contributing to an overarching illusion of solidity and permanence. In this way, the Borromean rings challenge us to reconsider the nature of existence and the interconnectedness of all things.

[fugly-jeans]

husb & i walked by our straight male friend who I have very much been at odds with lately on the way to our dinner date & he texted the gc to tell me/our friends that I “looked fire emoji in that dress” and my ego has never been more fed in my life lol

he is self-professed only into “cute girls” (his ex looked 10 years younger than she was and weighed about 110) and I am plus sized and very much consider myself a woman who looks her age - I would lowkey be horrified if he was actually *attracted* to me, but it’s nice to be told I’m hot (because I am!)

[isubhamdas]

How to Effectively Apply Behavioral Economics for Consumer Engagement?

I never thought behavioral economics would revolutionize my marketing strategy.

But here I am, telling you how it changed everything.

It all started when our company's engagement rates plummeted. We were losing customers faster than we could acquire them.

That's when I stumbled upon behavioral economics.

I began by implementing subtle changes. We reframed our pricing strategy using the decoy effect.

Suddenly, our premium package became more attractive. Sales increased by 15% in the first month.

Next, we tapped into loss aversion. Our email campaigns highlighted what customers might miss out on. Open rates soared from 22% to 37%.

But the real game-changer was social proof. We showcased user testimonials prominently on our website. Conversion rates jumped by 28%.

As we delved deeper, we encountered challenges. Some team members worried about ethical implications.

Were we manipulating consumers?

We addressed this by prioritizing transparency.

Every nudge we implemented was designed to benefit both the customer and our business.

This approach not only eased internal concerns but also built trust with our audience.

The results spoke for themselves. Overall engagement increased by 45% within six months. Customer retention improved by 30%.

But it wasn't just about numbers. We were creating meaningful connections. Customers felt understood and valued.

Looking back, I realize behavioral economics isn't about tricks or gimmicks. It's about understanding human behavior and using that knowledge to create win-win situations.

So, how can you improve your consumer engagement using behavioral economics?

Start by observing your customers' behaviors. What motivates them? What holds them back?

Use these insights to craft strategies that resonate.

Remember, the goal is to guide, not manipulate.

How are you applying behavioral economics in your business?

Get Tips, Suggestions, & Workarounds, in 2-3 mins, on How to Effectively Apply Behavioral Economics for Consumer Engagement?

[metadevo]

For the new MetaDevo blog on AI, robotics and other things, visit:

or

or

[aventurineswife]

Veritas, Kaveh, and reader are having a bath together. Kaveh and Reader are being their goofy selves as usual while annoying the heck out of Veritas (but he secretly enjoys the chaos). Bonus points if Veritas had rubber ducks that resemble Kaveh and reader <3

Our Little Family of Ducks

Summary: A relaxing bath between Kaveh, Veritas Ratio, and you turn into a playful and chaotic bonding moment. While Kaveh and you indulge in goofiness, Ratio tries (and fails) to maintain his composed demeanor. The discovery of personalized rubber ducks adds to the hilarity, revealing Ratio's secret fondness for his partners. Amid splashes, laughter, and teasing, the trio revels in your unconventional yet loving relationship.

Tags: Kaveh x Reader x Ratio, Polyamory, Domestic Fluff, Humor, Lighthearted Chaos, Found Family Vibes, Kaveh Being Kaveh, Ratio Being Secretly Soft, Rubber Ducks Shenanigans.

A/N: I love these sillies 🤭🫶

The steamy warmth of the bath filled the room, soft tendrils of mist curling around the ornate tiles. Kaveh had insisted on setting up this "relaxation session," and it had taken no small amount of persuasion to convince Ratio to join. The architect and their mutual partner, you, had promised an evening of serenity—though, true to form, serenity was far from what had unfolded.

Kaveh was lounging on one side of the tub, his long hair tied loosely to avoid the water. His eyes glinted with amusement as he flicked droplets of water your way. “And then she said, ‘But why would I need a spiral staircase if I’m afraid of heights?’ Can you believe it? A whole architectural masterpiece undone because she refused to go above two floors!”

You snorted, splashing back in retaliation. “Honestly, Kaveh, maybe she was onto something. Not everyone’s built for grandeur.”

Veritas, perched at the other end of the tub with his back against the smooth, cool tiles, let out a low sigh. His hair clung damply to his forehead, the rings of his pupils narrowing as he surveyed the two of you with a mix of exasperation and reluctant affection. “If you two came here to ridicule the art of storytelling and defy the very essence of peace, then you’re succeeding marvelously.”

“Oh, lighten up, Ratio,” Kaveh teased, sending a small wave of water in his direction. “This is supposed to be fun.”

Before Veritas could retort, you leaned forward, your eyes lighting up mischievously. “Speaking of fun… Ratio, what’s with these?” You plucked up one of the small, colorful rubber ducks floating nearby. Its violet paint glistened in the water, and its eyes bore an uncanny resemblance to Veritas himself.

Kaveh burst out laughing, quickly snatching another from the water. This one, unmistakably styled after you, had a little painted scarf and a tiny replica of your favorite accessory. “No way! You actually got ducks made for us?”

“Correction,” Veritas interjected, his voice cool but laced with a hint of defensiveness, “I designed them. A calculated experiment to observe the cognitive amusement derived from personalized objects in shared recreational spaces.”

You and Kaveh stared at him for a beat before doubling over with laughter. “You made them because you like us, you big softy!” you said, clutching the duck close to your chest.

“I think it’s sweet,” Kaveh added, his grin widening as he lined the ducks up on the edge of the tub. “Now we’ve got our own little family. Look, here’s me, here’s you, and—” He paused dramatically, fishing out a third duck. It was golden with faint streaks of red, and its feathers curled in intricate patterns, mirroring Kaveh’s elegant cape. “Oh, Ratio, this one’s perfect. You even got the hair right!”

Veritas pinched the bridge of his nose, though a faint smirk betrayed his amusement. “If I’d known this would devolve into childlike antics, I would have stayed in my lab.”

“Liar,” you shot back, scooting closer to him and setting your duck on his chest. “You love this. Admit it.”

“I do not—”

“Oh, you definitely do,” Kaveh chimed in, settling on Veritas’ other side. “Look at that face. That’s the face of a man trying not to smile.”

“I hate both of you,” Veritas muttered, but the corners of his lips betrayed him as they curved upward.

“Love you too,” you and Kaveh said in unison, leaning in to kiss each of his cheeks. The warmth in the room wasn’t just from the bath anymore—it radiated from the three of you, tangled together in your chaotic but undeniably loving bond.

“Now,” Kaveh said, grabbing a duck and splashing Veritas playfully, “let’s see who wins the Great Duck Battle!”

Veritas sighed, watching as water and laughter filled the room. His calm demeanor broke as he picked up his own duck and joined in the fray. Perhaps, just this once, chaos wasn’t such a bad thing.

[beakers-and-telescopes]

Slime Molds and Intelligence

Okay, despite going into a biology related field, I only just learned about slime molds, and hang on, because it gets WILD.

This guy in the picture is called Physarum polycephalum, one of the more commonly studied types of slime mold. It was originally thought to be a fungus, though we now know it to actually be a type of protist (a sort of catch-all group for any eukaryotic organism that isn't a plant, animal, or a fungus). As protists go, it's pretty smart. It is very good at finding the most efficient way to get to a food source, or multiple food sources. In fact, placing a slime mold on a map with food sources at all of the major cities can give a pretty good idea of an efficient transportation system. Here is a slime mold growing over a map of Tokyo compared to the actual Tokyo railway system:

Pretty good, right? Though they don't have eyes, ears, or noses, the slime molds are able to sense objects at a distance kind of like a spider using tiny differences in tension and vibrations to sense a fly caught in its web. Instead of a spiderweb, though, this organism relies on proteins called TRP channels. The slime mold can then make decisions about where it wants to grow. In one experiment, a slime mold was put in a petri dish with one glass disk on one side and 3 glass disks on the other side. Even though the disks weren't a food source, the slime mold chose to grow towards and investigate the side with 3 disks over 70% of the time.

Even more impressive is that these organisms have some sense of time. If you blow cold air on them every hour on the hour, they'll start to shrink away in anticipation when before the air hits after only 3 hours.

Now, I hear you say, this is cool and all, but like, I can do all those things too. The slime mold isn't special...

To which I would like to point out that you have a significant advantage over the slime mold, seeing as you have a brain.

Yeah, these protists can accomplish all of the things I just talked about, and they just... don't have any sort of neural architecture whatsoever? They don't even have brain cells, let alone the structures that should allow them to process sensory information and make decisions because of it. Nothing that should give them a sense of time. Scientists literally have no idea how this thing is able to "think'. But however it does, it is sure to be a form of cognition that is completely and utterly different from anything that we're familiar with.

[ihorivliev]

Towards Transparent AI: Introducing CCACS – A Comprehensible Cognitive Architecture

Comprehensible Configurable Adaptive Cognitive Structure (CCACS)

Core Concept:

...

To briefly clarify my vision, it may be helpful to begin by stating that: a transparent and interpretable thinking model (based on combined top thinking tools) serves as the crucial starting point and foundational core for this concept. From there, other models/ensembles (any combo of the most effective so-called black/gray/etc. boxes) can be thoughtfully and optimally integrated or built upon this core.

My dream is to see the creation and widespread use of a maximally transparent and interpretable cognitive architecture that can be improved and become more complex (in terms of depth and quality of thinking/reasoning) without losing its transparency and interpretability. And hopefully it could be found valuable enough to meticulously consider this direction when adding or integrating other models/ensembles - which may be less, or even completely, non-transparent and non-interpretable - when creating products and systems wielding weighty consequential responsibility and potential peril through their influence on human life, health, decisions, and laws. This aligns with my deeply sincere and convinced vision.

...

I come from the world of business data analytics, where I’ve spent years immersed in descriptive and inferential statistics. That’s my core skill – crunching numbers, spotting patterns, and prioritizing clear, step-by-step data interpretation. Ultimately, my goal is to make data interpretable for informed business decisions and problem-solving. Beyond this, my curiosity has led me to explore more advanced areas like traditional machine learning, neural networks, deep learning, natural language processing (NLP), and recently, generative AI and large language models (LLMs). I'm not a builder in these domains (I'm definitely not an expert or researcher), but rather someone who enjoys exploring, testing ideas, and understanding their inner workings.

One thing that consistently strikes me in my exploration of AI is the “black box” phenomenon. These models achieve remarkable, sometimes truly amazing, results, but they don't always reveal their reasoning process. Coming from an analytics background, where transparency in the analytical process is paramount, this lack of AI’s explainability is (at least personally) quite concerning in the long run. As my interest in the fundamentals of thinking and reasoning has grown, I've noticed something that worries me: our steadily increasing reliance on this “black box” approach. This approach gives us answers without clearly explaining its thinking (or what appears to be thinking), ultimately expecting us to simply trust the results.

Black-box AI's dominance is rising, especially in sectors shaping human destinies. We're past whether to use it; the urgent question is how to ensure responsible, ethical integration. In domains like healthcare, law, and policy (where accountability demands human comprehension) what core values must drive AI strategy? And in these vital arenas, is prioritizing transparent frameworks essential for optimal and useful balance?

To leverage both transparent and opaque AI, a robust, responsible approach demands layered cognitive architectures. A transparent core must drive critical reasoning, while strategic "black box" components, controlled and overseen, enhance specific functions. This layered design ensures functionality gains without sacrificing vital understanding and trustworthiness.

...

Disclaimer: All ideas and concepts presented here are human-designed (these are my truly and deeply loved visions/daydreamings, even though I readily admit they likely verge on delusion, especially concerning the core thinking tools model/module). But, because I am neither a native English speaker nor a scientist/researcher and not experienced in writing, the information above and below has been translated, partially-edited and partially-organized by LLMs to produce a more readable and grammatical result.

...

The main idea: Comprehensible Configurable Adaptive Cognitive Structure (CCACS) -  that is, to create a unified, explicitly configurable, adaptive, comprehensible network of methods, frameworks, and approaches drawn from areas such as Problem-Solving, Decision-Making, Logical Thinking, Analytical/Synthetical Thinking, Evaluative Reasoning, Critical Thinking, Bias Mitigation, Systems Thinking, Strategic Thinking, Heuristic Thinking, Mental Models, etc. {ideally even try to incorporate at least basically/partially principles of Creative/Lateral/Innovational Thinking, Associative Thinking, Abstract Thinking, Concept Formation, and Right/Effective/Great Questioning as well} [the Thinking Tools] merged with the current statistical / generative AI / other AI approach, which is likely to yield more interpretable results, potentially leading to more stable, consistent, and verifiable reasoning processes and outcomes, while also enabling iterative enhancements in reasoning complexity without sacrificing transparency. This approach could also foster greater trust and facilitate more informed and equitable decisions, particularly in fields such as medicine, law, and corporate or government decision-making.

Initially, a probably quite labor-intensive process of comprehensively collecting, cataloging, systematizing all the valid/proven/useful methods, frameworks, and approaches available to humanity [creation of the Thinking Tools Corpus/Glossary/Lexicon/etc.], will likely be necessary. Then there will be a need (a relatively harder part) of primary abstraction (extracting common features and regularities while ignoring insignificant details) and formalization (translating generalized regularities into a strict and operable language/form). The really challenging part is the feasibility of abstracting/formalizing every valid/proven/useful thinking tool; however, wherever possible, at least a fundamental/core set of essential thinking tools should be abstracted/formalized.

Then, {probably after initial active solo and cross-testing, just to prove that they actually can solve/work as needed/expected} careful consideration must be given to the initial structure of [the Thinking Tools Grammar/Syntactic_Structure/Semantic_Network/Ontology/System/etc.] - its internal hierarchy, sequence, combinations, relationships, interconnections, properties, etc., in which these methods, frameworks, and approaches will be integrated and how: 1) first, among themselves without critical conflicts, into the initial Thinking Tools Model/Module, that can successfully work on simplified problems for initial validation / synthetic tasks; 2) second, gradually adding statistical/generative/other parts, making the Basic Think-Stat/GenAI/OtherAI Tools Model/Modular Ensemble}.

Next, to ensure the integrity of the transparent core when integrated with less transparent AI, a dynamic layer for feedback, interaction, and correction is essential. This layer acts as a crucial mediator, forming the primary interface between these components. Structured adaptively based on factors like task importance, AI confidence, and available resources, it continuously manages the flow of information in both directions. Through ongoing feedback and correction, the dynamic layer ensures that AI enhancements are incorporated thoughtfully, preventing unchecked, opaque influences and upholding the system's commitment to transparent, interpretable, and trustworthy reasoning. This conceptual approach provides a vital control mechanism for achieving justifiable and comprehensible outcomes in hybrid cognitive systems. {Normal Think-Stat/GenAI/OtherAI Model/Modular Ensemble}.

Building upon the dynamic layer's control, a key enhancement is a "Metacognitive Umbrella". This reflective component continuously supervises and strategically prompts the system to question its own processes at critical stages: before processing to identify ambiguities or omissions (and other), during processing for reasoning consistency (and other), and after processing, before output, to critically assess the prepared output's alignment with initial task objectives, specifically evaluating the risk of misinterpretation or deviation from intended outcomes (and other). This metacognitive approach determines when clarifying questions are automatically triggered versus left to the AI component's discretion, adding self-awareness and critical reflection, and further strengthening transparent, robust reasoning. {Good Think-Stat/GenAI/OtherAI Model/Modular Ensemble}.

The specificity (or topology/geometry) of the final working structure of CCACS is one of the many aspects I, unfortunately, did not have time to fully explore (and most likely, I would not have had the necessary intellectual/health/time capacity - thankfully, humanity has you).

Speaking roughly and fuzzily, I envision this structure as a 4-layer hybrid cognitive architecture:

1) The first, fundamental layer is the so-called "Transparent Integral Core (TIC)" [Thinking Tools Model/Module]. This TIC comprises main/core nodes and edges/links (or more complex entities). For example, the fundamental proven principles of problem-solving, decision-making, etc., and their fundamental proven interconnections. It has the capability to combine these elements in stable yet adjustable configurations, allowing for incremental enhancement without limits to improvement as more powerful human or AI thinking methods emerge.

2) Positioned between the Transparent Integral Core (TIC) and the more opaque third layer, the second layer, acting dynamically and adaptively, manages (buffers/filters/etc.) interlayer communication with the TIC. Functioning as the primary lucidity-ensuring mechanism, this layer oversees the continuous interaction between the TIC and the dynamic components of the more opaque third layer, ensuring controlled operation and guarded transparent reasoning processes – ensuring transparency is maintained responsibly and effectively.

3) As the third layer, we integrate a statistical, generative AI, and other AI component layer, which is less transparent. Composed of continuously evolving and improving dynamic components: dynamic nodes and links/edges (or more complex entities), this layer is designed to complement, balance, and strengthen the TIC, potentially enhancing results across diverse challenges.

4) Finally, at the highest, fourth layer, the metacognitive umbrella provides strategic guidance, prompts self-reflection, and ensures the robustness of reasoning. This integrated, 4-layer approach seeks to create a robust and adaptable cognitive architecture, delivering justifiable and comprehensible outcomes.

...

The development of the CCACS, particularly its core Thinking Tools component, necessitates a highly interdisciplinary and globally coordinated effort. Addressing this complex challenge requires the integration of diverse expertise across multiple domains. To establish the foundational conceptual prototype (theoretically proven functional) of the Thinking Tools Model/Module, collaboration will be sought from a wide range of specialists, including but not limited to:

Cognitive Scientists

Cognitive/Experimental Psychologists

Computational Neuroscientists

Explainable AI (XAI) Experts

Interpretable ML Experts

Formal Methods Experts

Knowledge Representation Experts

Formal/Web Semantics Experts

Ontologists

Epistemologists

Philosophers of Mind

Mathematical Logicians

Computational Logicians

Computational Linguists

Traditional Linguists

Complexity Theorists

Decision Scientists

The integration of cutting-edge AI tools with advanced capabilities, including current LLMs' deep search/research and what might be described as "reasoning" or "thinking," is important and potentially very useful. It's worth noting that, as explained by different sources, this reasoning capability is still fundamentally statistical in nature - more like sophisticated mimicry or imitation rather than true reasoning. It's akin to a very sophisticated token generation based on learned patterns rather than genuine cognitive processing. Nevertheless, these technologies could be harnessed to enhance and propel collaborative efforts across various domains.

Thank you for your time and attention!

All thoughts (opinions/feedback/feelings/etc.) are always very welcome!

...

P.S. If you would like to read the article, which includes the CCACS concept presented in two different formats along with additional thoughts and links, you can visit the following link:

…

...

P.P.S. Also, purely for your entertainment, perhaps this will grant you a moment of pleasant philosophical and mathematical musings, which, not so long ago, also greatly intrigued me:

[archiveofaffinities]

William J. Mitchell, The Logic of Architecture Design, Computation and Cognition, Symmetrical harmonic proportions for rooms as recommended by Palladio

[geometrymatters]

Buckminster Fuller: Synergetics and Systems

Synergetics

Synergetics, concept introduced by Buckminster Fuller, is an interdisciplinary study of geometry, patterns, and spatial relationships that provides a method and a philosophy for understanding and solving complex problems. The term “synergetics” comes from the Greek word “synergos,” meaning “working together.” Fuller’s synergetics is a system of thinking that seeks to understand the cooperative interactions among parts of a whole, leading to outcomes that are unpredicted by the behavior of the parts when studied in isolation.

Fuller’s understanding of systems relied upon the concept of synergy. With the emergence of unpredicted system behaviors by the behaviors of the system’s components, this perspective invites us to transcend the limitations of our immediate perception and to perceive larger systems, and to delve deeper to see relevant systems within the situation. It beckons us to ‘tune-in’ to the appropriate systems as we bring our awareness to a particular challenge or situation.

He perceived the Universe as an intricate construct of systems. He proposed that everything, from our thoughts to the cosmos, is a system. This perspective, now a cornerstone of modern thinking, suggests that the geometry of systems and their models are the keys to deciphering the behaviors and interactions we witness in the Universe.

In his “Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking” Fuller presents a profound exploration of geometric thinking, offering readers a transformative journey through a four-dimensional Universe. Fuller’s work combines geometric logic with metaphors drawn from human experience, resulting in a framework that elucidates concepts such as entropy, Einstein’s relativity equations, and the meaning of existence. Within this paradigm, abstract notions become lucid, understandable, and immediately engaging, propelling readers to delve into the depths of profound philosophical inquiry.

Fuller’s framework revolves around the principle of synergetics, which emphasizes the interconnectedness and harmony of geometric relationships. Drawing inspiration from nature, he illustrates that balance and equilibrium are akin to a stack of closely packed oranges in a grocery store, highlighting the delicate equilibrium present in the Universe. By intertwining concepts from visual geometry and technical design, Fuller’s work demonstrates his expertise in spatial understanding and mathematical prowess. The book challenges readers to expand their perspectives and grasp the intricate interplay between shapes, mathematics, and the dimensions of the human mind.

At its core, “Synergetics” presents a philosophical inquiry into the nature of existence and the human thought process. Fuller’s use of neologisms and expansive, thought-provoking ideas sparks profound contemplation. While some may find the book challenging due to its complexity, it is a testament to Fuller’s intellectual prowess and his ability to offer unique insights into the fundamental workings of the Universe, pushing the boundaries of human knowledge and transforming the fields of design, mathematics, and philosophy .

When applied to cognitive science, the concept of synergetics offers a holistic approach to understanding the human mind. It suggests that cognitive processes, rather than being separate functions, are interconnected parts of a whole system that work together synergistically. This perspective aligns with recent developments in cognitive science that view cognition as a complex, dynamic system. It suggests that our cognitive abilities emerge from the interaction of numerous mental processes, much like the complex patterns that emerge in physical and biological systems studied under synergetics.

In this context, geometry serves as a language to describe this cognitive architecture. Just as the geometric patterns in synergetic structures reveal the underlying principles of organization, the ‘geometric’ arrangement of cognitive processes could potentially reveal the principles that govern our cognitive abilities. This perspective extends Fuller’s belief in the power of geometry as a tool for understanding complex systems, from the physical structures he designed to the very architecture of our minds. It suggests that by studying the ‘geometry’ of cognition, we might gain insights into the principles of cognitive organization and the nature of human intelligence.

Systems

Fuller’s philosophy underscored that systems are distinct entities, each with a unique shape that sets them apart from their surroundings. He envisioned each system as a tetrahedron, a geometric form with an inside and an outside, connected by a minimum of four corners or nodes. These nodes, connected by what Fuller referred to as relations, serve as the sinews that hold the system together. These relations could manifest as flows, forces, or fields. Fuller’s philosophy also emphasized that systems are not isolated entities. At their boundaries, every node is linked to its surroundings, and all system corners are ‘leaky’, either brimming with extra energy or in need of energy.

Fuller attributed the properties and characteristics of systems to what he called generalized principles. These are laws of the Universe that hold true everywhere and at all times. For instance, everything we perceive is a specific configuration of energy or material, and the form of this configuration is determined by these universal principles.

Fuller’s philosophy also encompassed the idea that every situation is a dance of interacting systems. He encouraged us to explore the ways in which systems interact within and with each other. He saw each of us as part of the cosmic dance, continually coupling with other systems. This coupling could be as loose as the atoms of air in a room, or as flexible as molecules of water flowing.

We find that precession is completely regenerative one brings out the other. So I gave you the dropping the stone in the water, and the wave went out that way. And this way beget that way. And that way beget that way. And that’s why your circular wave emanates. Once you begin to get into “precession” you find yourself understanding phenomena that you’ve seen a stone falling in the water all of your life, and have never really known why the wave does just what it does.

Fuller’s concept of precession, or systems coupling, is a testament to his deep understanding of systems and their interactions. He described how we sometimes orbit a system, such as a political movement or an artistic method. Our orbit remains stable when the force that attracts us is dynamically balanced by the force that propels us away. This understanding of precession allows us to comprehend phenomena that we have observed all our lives, yet never truly understood why they behave as they do. Fuller’s teachings on systems and their inherent geometry continue to illuminate our understanding of the Universe and our place within it.

[mindblowingscience]

The longest genome of all the animals on Earth belongs not to a giant, or a cognitively advanced critter, but a writhing, water-dwelling creature seemingly frozen in time, right at the cusp of evolving into a beast that can live on land. These are the lungfish, a class of freshwater vertebrates whose peculiar characteristics are reflected in a colossal genetic code. Able to breathe both air and water, with limb-like fins, and a well-developed skeletal architecture, these strange ancient creatures are thought to is thought to share a common ancestor with all four-limbed vertebrates known as tetrapods.

Continue Reading.

[reasonsforhope]

Humans are so cute. They think they can outsmart birds. They place nasty metal spikes on rooftops and ledges to prevent birds from nesting there.

It’s a classic human trick known in urban design as “evil architecture”: designing a place in a way that’s meant to deter others. Think of the city benches you see segmented by bars to stop homeless people sleeping there.

But birds are genius rebels. Not only are they undeterred by evil architecture, they actually use it to their advantage, according to a new Dutch study published in the journal Deinsea.

Crows and magpies, it turns out, are learning to rip strips of anti-bird spikes off of buildings and use them to build their nests. It’s an incredible addition to the growing body of evidence about the intelligence of birds, so wrongly maligned as stupid that “bird-brained” is still commonly used as an insult...

Magpies also use anti-bird spikes for their nests. In 2021, a hospital patient in Antwerp, Belgium, looked out the window and noticed a huge magpie’s nest in a tree in the courtyard. Biologist Auke-Florian Hiemstra of Leiden-based Naturalis Biodiversity Center, one of the study’s authors, went to collect the nest and found that it was made out of 50 meters of anti-bird strips, containing no fewer than 1,500 metal spikes.

Hiemstra describes the magpie nest as “an impregnable fortress.”

Pictured: A huge magpie nest made out of 1,500 metal spikes.

Magpies are known to build roofs over their nests to prevent other birds from stealing their eggs and young. Usually, they scrounge around in nature for thorny plants or spiky branches to form the roof. But city birds don’t need to search for the perfect branch — they can just use the anti-bird spikes that humans have so kindly put at their disposal.

“The magpies appear to be using the pins exactly the same way we do: to keep other birds away from their nest,” Hiemstra said.

Another urban magpie nest, this one from Scotland, really shows off the roof-building tactic:

Pictured: A nest from Scotland shows how urban magpies are using anti-bird spikes to construct a roof meant to protect their young and eggs from predators.

Birds had already been spotted using upward-pointing anti-bird spikes as foundations for nests. In 2016, the so-called Parkdale Pigeon became Twitter-famous for refusing to give up when humans removed her first nest and installed spikes on her chosen nesting site, the top of an LCD monitor on a subway platform in Melbourne. The avian architect rebelled and built an even better home there, using the spikes as a foundation to hold her nest more securely in place.

...Hiemstra’s study is the first to show that birds, adapting to city life, are learning to seek out and use our anti-bird spikes as their nesting material. Pretty badass, right?

The genius of birds — and other animals we underestimate

It’s a well-established fact that many bird species are highly intelligent. Members of the corvid family, which includes crows and magpies, are especially renowned for their smarts. Crows can solve complex puzzles, while magpies can pass the “mirror test” — the classic test that scientists use to determine if a species is self-aware.

Studies show that some birds have evolved cognitive skills similar to our own: They have amazing memories, remembering for months the thousands of different hiding places where they’ve stashed seeds, and they use their own experiences to predict the behavior of other birds, suggesting they’ve got some theory of mind.

And, as author Jennifer Ackerman details in The Genius of Birds, birds are brilliant at using tools. Black palm cockatoos use twigs as drumsticks, tapping out a beat on a tree trunk to get a female’s attention. Jays use sticks as spears to attack other birds...

Birds have also been known to use human tools to their advantage. When carrion crows want to crack a walnut, for example, they position the nut on a busy road, wait for a passing car to crush the shell, then swoop down to collect the nut and eat it. This behavior has been recorded several times in Japanese crows.

But what’s unique about Hiemstra’s study is that it shows birds using human tools, specifically designed to thwart birds’ plans, in order to thwart our plans instead. We humans try to keep birds away with spikes, and the birds — ingenious rebels that they are — retort: Thanks, humans!

-via Vox, July 26, 2023

[historicity-was-already-taken]

Received this question just now. Posting my response sans askers' username per their request:

Hi, as you are a holocaust historian, and as you mentioned in a recent post, words mean things, I was sort of wondering what you thought about people saying that what’s happening in Palestine isn’t genocide because the holocaust was genocide/6 million Jews was genocide. I’ve seen a couple people saying stuff along the lines of ‘if what’s happening in Palestine is genocide, we need another word for the holocaust’. I’m not worried about you knowing it’s me asking (like asking on anon) because I think you talk to people pretty reasonably but if you could answer it in private or without my name on the ask I would appreciate it, people seeing it could get… unpleasant, talking about this stuff and I try to stay out of the line of fire to the best of my ability. Totally fine if you don’t want to answer, I don’t want you hounded about Palestine either, it just seemed like you might have an interesting take with your studies

Anyone is capable of genocide, of following orders to commit human rights abuses, of attacking civilians, etc. No identity groups’ past—however violent and traumatic—makes them incapable of committing war crimes. Referring to what’s happening in Gaza as genocide doesn��t invalidate Jewish communal thought regarding the Holocaust. Moreover, the fact that the State of Israel has built Holocaust memory into its nation-building doesn’t mean that that country is inherently incapable of crimes against humanity. There is a cohort of primarily 65+ Jews who hold a trauma-induced belief that Israel could never be capable of these crimes because everything Israel does is in the interest of protecting the Jewish people. It’s a pretty thought, and one I used to hold, but it’s not reality. Many as well would argue that, because the October 7 attack was inherently genocidal, Israel was moral and just doing what it needed to do to bring the hostages home and stamp out Hamas cells. Indeed, these hypothetical individuals would continue, the fact that Hamas has built itself into the civilian architecture of Gaza means that Hamas is using Palestinian civilians as human shields; not that Israel is committing genocide. I personally think that’s wishful thinking. Hamas 800% bases itself near structures like hospitals and kindergartens so Israel will look bad when it attacks those places,* thus willfully allowing the people it governs to exist as human shields. HOWEVER, I don’t believe for one minute that the Israeli military doesn’t have the technology needed to seek out evidence of heat, heartbeats, etc, in hidden subterranean areas. Their counter-attack was always going to happen, but the way it’s been fought? Naw man it’s indefensible.

You know I don't do comparisons or Holocaust inversion, but I do have feelings and emotional responses which don't care about my Serious Intellectual Historian views on comparisons and Holocaust inversion. And, there's a very disturbing moment in one of my primary sources for my book where a woman describes a Nazi attack on a hospital in the Warsaw Ghetto. She describes the screaming and the panic and the civilians begging to be euthanized. Similar readings and sources exist for hospitals in Warsaw during the 1944 Warsaw Uprising when the Germans were destroying the city. I suspect similar descriptions exist of any hospital of a densely populated civilian area under siege. And, even if I was still bullheadedly in my Zionist era, I wouldn't have been able to simultaneously do the work I do, watch Israeli soldiers attacking hospitals, and emerge completely fine with everything. All of that doesn’t erase the simultaneous facts that: 1) the Holocaust happened and was a traumatic moment in Jewish History, the memory of which will endure throughout the millennia; and 2) the October 7 attacks were carried out by Hamas with genocidal intent.

What you’re seeing is people within our community dealing with cognitive dissonance. And honestly the experience of watching people lash out is stage 1 of that process (or as I call it, the Cognitive Dissonance Temper Tantrum). It’s no fun to witness, but can be positive if the person doing the temper tantrum chooses to learn from it. 

ETA: When I discuss things I felt/believed in my "Zionist Era," I'm discussing stuff from when I was like, under 21 years old. For reference I am currently 35.

No one has my permission to use my words to silence other Jewish people. You have no obligation to stick around for people having cognitive dissonance freakouts or saying shitty things about Palestinians, but I see part of my...duty as being available to work with Jewish individuals who want to deal productively with their cognitive dissonance once the freakout period dies down, if they want help.

*Here my Unnamed I/P Reader notes that it’s quite a bit more complicated than stated here in part due to Gaza’s pre-Oct. 7 2023 population density.

[glowettee]

hi there! im a fan of your page 💕

can you give me the best studying techniques?

hi angel!! @mythicalmarion tysm for asking about study techniques 🤍 i'm so excited to share my secret methods that helped me maintain perfect grades while still having a dreamy lifestyle + time for self-care!! and thank you for being a fan of my blog, it means everything to me. <3

~ ♡ my non-basic study secrets that actually work ♡ ~

(don't mind the number formatting)

the neural bridging technique this is literally my favorite discovery!! instead of traditional note-taking, i create what i call "neural bridges" between different subjects. for example, when studying both literature + history, i connect historical events with the literature written during that time. i use a special notebook divided into sections where each page has two columns - one for each subject. the connections help you understand both subjects deeper + create stronger memory patterns!!

here's how i do it:

example:

left column: historical event

right column: literary connection

middle: draw connecting lines + add small insights

bottom: write how they influenced each other

the shadow expert method this changed everything for me!! i pretend i'm going to be interviewed as an expert on the topic i'm studying. i create potential interview questions + prepare detailed answers. but here's the twist - i record myself answering these questions in three different ways:

basic explanation (like i'm talking to a friend)

detailed analysis (like i'm teaching a class)

complex discussion (like i'm at a conference)

this forces you to understand the topic from multiple angles + helps you explain concepts in different ways!!

the reverse engineering study system instead of starting with the basics, i begin with the most complex example i can find and work backwards to understand the fundamentals. for example, in calculus, i start with a complicated equation + break it down into smaller parts until i reach the basic concepts.

my process looks like:

find the hardest example in the textbook

list every concept needed to understand it

create a concept map working backwards

study each component separately

rebuild the complex example step by step

the sensory anchoring technique this is seriously game-changing!! i associate different types of information with specific sensory experiences:

theoretical concepts - study while standing

factual information - sitting at my desk

problem-solving - walking slowly

memorization - gentle swaying

review - lying down

your body literally creates muscle memory associated with different types of learning!!

the metacognition mapping strategy i created this method where i track my understanding using what i call "clarity scores":

level 1: can recognize it

level 2: can explain it simply

level 3: can teach it

level 4: can apply it to new situations

level 5: can connect it to other topics

i keep a spreadsheet tracking my clarity levels for each topic + focus my study time on moving everything to level 5!!

the information architecture method instead of linear notes, i create what i call "knowledge buildings":

foundation: basic principles

first floor: key concepts

second floor: applications

top floor: advanced ideas

roof: real-world connections

each "floor" must be solid before moving up + i review from top to bottom weekly!!

the cognitive stamina training this is my absolute secret weapon!! i use a special interval system based on brain wave patterns:

32 minutes of focused study

8 minutes of active recall

16 minutes of teaching the material to my plushies

4 minutes of complete rest

the specific timing helps maintain peak mental performance + prevents study fatigue!!

the synthesis spiral evolution this method literally transformed how i retain information:

create main concept spirals

add branch spirals for subtopics

connect related concepts with colored lines

review by tracing the spiral paths

add new connections each study session

your notes evolve into a beautiful web of knowledge that grows with your understanding!!

these methods might seem different from typical study advice, but they're based on how our brains actually process + store information!! i developed these through lots of research + personal experimentation, and they've helped me maintain perfect grades while still having time for self-care, hobbies + fun!!

sending you the biggest hug + all my good study vibes!! remember that effective studying is about working with your brain, not against it <3

p.s. if you try any of these methods, please let me know how they work for you!! i love hearing about your study journeys!!

xoxo, mindy 🤍

glowettee hotline is still open, drop your dilemmas before the next advice post 💌: https://bit.ly/glowetteehotline

[azdoine]

the way you have to pretend that the world isn't ending in order to be functional enough to care about the future but you have to remember that the world is ending in order to try to save it. extremely normal and functional cognitive architecture