A Literature Review of the Universal and Atomic Elements of Complex Cognition Derek Cabreraa,b,c, Laura Cabreraa,b,c, and Elena Cabreraa,b,c aCornell University; bCornell Human Ecology; cCabrera Research Lab 1 Abstract: This paper posits that universal atomic elements exist that 7 Conclusion 30 27 2 underlie complex cognition. At its core, constructs are born of the A Systems Thinking is a Cognitive Science.... 30 28 3 dynamics of thinking operating on information. This elemental un- B DSRP Are Not Steps In a List, But Simple 29 4 derstanding of the structural underpinnings - and the dynamics be- Rules of Complex Cognition........... 30 30 5 tween and among the elements - provides insight into the value of C DSRP Exists in Mind and Nature and DSRP 31 6 thinking and awareness of one’s thinking to everyday life and scien- are Universal Cognitive Structures....... 30 32 7 tific inquiry. Knowledge of the structural and dynamical properties of 8 human thought leads to generative, purposeful, and predictive cog- 8 References 31 33 9 nitive acts that evolve one’s thinking. As a result, our mental models A Appendix A: Table of Methods for Studies 34 10 (comprised of information and thinking) of how systems work are Cited 33 35 11 better aligned with how they exist in the real world. This alignment 12 yields better solutions, innovation and results. Continued inquiry B Appendix B: Summary Statistics of Table of 36 13 into the universality of these structural elements has significant po- Methods 39 37 14 tential to advance understanding across a wide variety of academic 15 disciplines. In other words, the study of cognition is deemed synony- C Appendix C: Summary Table of Studies Cited 40 38 16 mous with the evolution of science and knowledge itself. complex cognition | cognitive structures | universality | systems thinking 1. DSRP Theory: Simple Rules that Underlie Complex 39 Cognition 40 1 Contents DSRP theory articulates how we build meaning of concepts and 41 how knowledge is created. Additionally, DSRP highlights how 42 thinking and knowledge evolve. This paper offers two impor- 43 2 1 DSRP Theory: Simple Rules that Underlie tant and new insights about complex cognition. First, it artic- 44 3 Complex Cognition1 ulates the foundational building blocks of thoughts—cognitive 45 structures that underlie thinking and learning. These under- 46 4 2 Identity-Other Distinctions2 lying structures are identified as four simple rules detailed in 47 5 A Distinctions Exist in Both Mind and Nature..2 Table1 below. 48 6 B Real-world Examples of Distinction Making..6 7 C Distinctions have an identity↔other structure.7 The Identity-Other Distinctions Rule 8 D Metacognitive Awareness of D(i ↔ o) Structure D := (i ↔ o) A Distinction (D) is defined as an identity (i) co- 9 Matters......................9 implying an other (o) The Part-Whole Systems Rule 10 3 Part-Whole Systems 11 S := (p ↔ w) A System (S) is defined as apart (p) co-implying a 11 A Systems Exist in Mind and Nature....... 12 whole (w) 12 B Systems have a Part-Whole Structure..... 13 The Action-Reaction Relationships Rule 13 S p ↔ w C Metacognitive Awareness of ( ) Struc- R := (a ↔ r) A Relationship (R) is defined as an action (a) co- 14 ture Matters................... 14 implying a reaction (r) The Point-View Perspectives Rule 15 4 Action-Reaction Relationships 15 P := (ρ ↔ v) A Perspective (P ) is defined as a point (ρ) co- 16 A Relationships Exist in Mind and Nature.... 15 implying a view (v) 17 B Relationships Have an Action-Reaction Structure 18 Table 1. The foundational building blocks of thought. 18 C Metacognitive Awareness of R(a ↔ r) Structure 19 Matters...................... 20 These structures underlie more complex cognitive struc- 49 20 5 Point-View Perspectives 20 tures such as categories, concepts, schema, and mental models. 50 21 A Perspectives Exist in Mind and Nature..... 21 The second thing DSRP Theory explicates is the dynamics 51 22 B Perspectives have a Point-View Structure... 22 (the complex of interactions) that these 4 structural patterns 52 23 C Metacognitive Awareness of P (ρ ↔ v) Struc- of thought generate. DSRP explicates 4 simple rules that 53 24 ture Matters................... 23 25 6 DSRP: Not Steps...Fractal, Recombinant, Re- 2 26 cursive, Simple Rules 25 Address correspondence to E-mail: Derek Cabrera [email protected] www.joast.org Journal of Applied Systems Thinking | June 2, 2020 | vol. 20 | no. 6 | 1–48 54 interact with one another inextricably. For example, any idea the basic forms underlying linguistic, mathematical, 109 55 is simultaneously: a distinct (D) manifested in it’s label or physical, and biological science, and can begin to see 110 56 identity; a system (S) that has parts (and can be part of a how the familiar laws of our own experience follow 111 57 larger whole; related (R) to other ideas or things around it; inexorably from the original act of severance. The act 112 58 and can be a perspective (P) on other ideas or things (e.g., is itself already remembered, even if unconsciously, 113 59 a person in a network or a concept on another concept like as our first attempt to distinguish different things in 114 60 sustainability as a perspective on a policy solution). Thus a world where, in the first place, the boundaries can 115 61 while the structures themselves are simple and easily under- be drawn anywhere we please.” 116 62 stood, the dynamics among them yield considerable power Understanding that objects have boundaries and that we 117 63 to cognition, understanding, learning, and the evolution of create borders to understand the way the world works is 118 64 knowledge itself. a powerful idea that deepens our understanding of reality. 119 Distinctions exist in the real world and in the mind. Often we 120 65 2. Identity-Other Distinctions strive for coherence between reality and the mind to align our 121 66 Distinction-making (D) is the act of distinguishing among thinking with the reality of how things exist in the world. 122 67 ideas or things. In other words, explicitly delineating a concept Theoretical physicist, Lawrence Krauss, Director of the 123 68 or thing the "identity" and therefore, often implicitly, other Origins Project at Arizona State University and author of "A 124 69 concept(s) or thing(s) become the "other." Infants show evi- Universe From Nothing" explains the reason there is something 125 70 dence of distinction-making in the womb and object-oriented rather than nothing is simply that “nothing is unstable” (2) 126 71 distinction-making as early as three months of age, while and that if one waits long enough something will emerge from 127 72 experiments with adults show the varied and sophisticated nothing. He states, 128 73 ways distinctions are made across the lifespan. A review of “Once you combine quantum mechanics and rela- 129 74 peer-reviewed journals across disciplines indicates: tivity, empty space, which apparently of course is 130 nothing, it is not so simple. It’s actually a boiling, 131 75 1. The existence of Distinctions (i.e., D as a noun); bubbling brew of virtual particles popping in and 132 76 2. The act of Distinction making (i.e., D as a verb); out of existence, in a time scale so short you can’t 133 see them. And in fact, if you wait long enough, and 134 77 3. That the relationship between “identity” and “other” (i.e., allow gravity to operate empty space will eventually 135 78 D(i ↔ o) is elemental to (1) and (2) above; and, start producing particles.” 136 79 4. That the human tendency toward identification without Ergo, something exists as part of the real world or universe, 137 80 the conscious or metacognitive recognition of the other or reality. That something is of course many things today, 138 81 (i.e., where the “other” remains implicit), leads to op- and the backdrop for either the entirety of that something 139 82 portunity costs and marginalization. Alternatively, the is nothing. At the same time, if we were to single out one 140 83 purposeful and explicit identification of the other (i.e., of the parts of that aggregate something the backdrop for 141 84 where the “other” is made explicit) can lead to marginal- any element is not only nothing, but all the other somethings 142 85 ization and stigmatization. which are not that thing. Of course, what we single out with 143 our mind’s eye may be in alignment with something real and 144 86 5. In summary, the literature shows that items 1-4 are fun- discrete in the universe, but it may also be a figment of our 145 87 damental “patterns of mind” agnostic to the content they imagination or an approximation of something real that is 146 88 are within and are seen throughout the lifespan of humans. so flawed as to be a heavily biased version of it. Regardless, 147 89 Yet, where Distinction making is concerned, the difference distinguishable entities exist—whether in the natural or “real” 148 90 between thinking (ie., cognition) and systems thinking world or in the mind (i.e., conceptual entities) or both. 149 91 (i.e., systematic metacognition) is not in the D(i ↔ o) Leonid Euler (3) incidentally discovered graph theory and 150 92 structure of cognition itself, but in the willful and pur- spawned modern day network theory during his effort to solve 151 93 poseful attempt to see (i.e., be aware of) the D(i ↔ o) one of the perplexing problems of 18th century Prussian society.