Basics of Human Being Theory

Slow introduction by Jacob Feldman - click to expand the chapter needed


I LIVE here and now.

This "here-and-now" is situation

I FEEL that "situation" could be "right" or "wrong"

I FEEL that "situation-1" could be "better" or "worse" than "situation-2"

I KNOW when "situation-1" and "situation-2" are the same

Class of "the same situations that are all wrong" IS a problem

Action at situation of class A usually transforms it in some situation of class B

Action in problem A could transform it into problem B that is better than problem A. It is practical solution

Action in problem A could transform it in situation S that is not a problem anymore. It is complete practical solution


Model is human-made construction that has mapping to the problem.

Mapping is corrspondens of elements from problem to model.

Mapping has one and only one inverse mapping.

Both mappings work on actions. Actions on problem correspond to virtual actions on model and vice versa

Model has virtual situations

Virtual situation could be "right" or "wrong"

Wrong virtual situation is a virtual problem

Virtual situation A could be better or worse than virtual situation B

Mapping keeps "right", "wrong", "better", "worse" when points from problem to model and back

Mapping has all these features by definition

Virtual action that transform virtual problem to better virtual situation is theoretical solution


Knowledge is problem + model + mapping

Imagine problem.

Imagine we cannot find practical solution for it.

Imagine we have model and mapping for this problem

It means we have knowledge

So we can map problem into model and get by mapping a virtual problem V

Imagine we can find theoretical solution for this problem

Now we can map this theoretical solution T into action A of original problem P

Consider all theoretical solutions we can find in model for V

Knowledge is TRUE if all theoretical solutions on V produce by mapping practical solutions on P

Knowledge is FALSE if some theoretical solutions produce by mapping actions that are not practical solutions

I mean they make situation worse if we apply them

Word meaningless knowledge some philosopers use

means for us "something that look like knowledge but miss some of the features defined"

Theory is a system ob true knowledge items


Imagine we have knoledge = problem + model + mapping

but the knowledge is false

What should we do?

We should change something

  • mapping or may be
  • model or may be
  • problem

repeat changing (a circle) until getting a true knowledge

I call this loop-until-true-knowledge a spiral

Is the spiral (in some specific case) infinite?

If NO consider the knowlege found

I call it final circle

Imagine many independen spirals with the same final circle

When number of spirals is big enough (it depends) I call the final circle a TRUTH


After milleniums of scientific research around the globe we are sure that two separate universums exist:

PU = P-Universum of physical objects and MU = M-Universum of mathematical objects

Every ovject we could know exists either in PU or in MU

Noone object we could know exists simultaneously in PU and in MU

There is very simple criterion how to learn in what universum the object given exists

If the object has boundaries in space and time it exists in PU

If the object has no boundaries in space and time it exists in MU

That's why Human Beings exist in PU but God exists in MU


Some PU-objects have special functionality in human society

They are important not by itself but only as pointers to some other objects (from PU or MU)

Such PU-objects I call symbols

People invent symbols, copy them, distribute them.

During this process symbols unite in symbolic systems or SS

We use SS to operate with MU objects because we have no direct access to MU

We use SS to define our problems because every problem is a class of similar situations

and we could define such a class only through SS

We use SS to build models because models need mapping

and PU-object which is used for mapping is a symbol by definition

Some SS are private - like a brain contents

Some SS are not private but accessible for specific group of people - like cultures

Some part of specific culture is used for everyday communication - like languages

For our purpose we say the ARE brain contents, cultures and languages

When symbols are part of culture they merge into classes of equivalence.

That's why symbol standing alone lives and dies with its physical body

But symbol in culture lives and dies with this specific culture

Once again, symbol could point to mathematical object

as well as to physical object including other symbols and classes of symbols

There is a permanent exchange of symbols - between cultures and brains

Symbols are being born in brains during model building

They live some time in culture

They are used hereafter by other brains for other problems' solving


Imagine for a while

that you are personally responsible of all knowledge

human kind have

and of all researches running today

If so

you can easily grasp

that some researches are in good state

and other are not

And if you try to draw the line

between good and bad reserch practices

you immidiately found where the line goes

It goes between problems without human being

when human being has no impact at all

or impact is so tiny

that you may ignore it

and problems

where human being presence and impact are essential

and cannot be ignored or eliminated by any means


HBT-space could be splitted into some natural areas

Studies in every area usually have a name well known


Ego-area is in the center of HBT-space

In this area Ego is the only important factor and only criterion

Typical problem of this area sounds like I am not as happy as I should be

Study = Ego-logics (Edmund Husserl)


Far away from the center at the horizon there is area of Rules and Regulations

or RR-area. In this area ego is the last and the least acting factor and criterion

Study = I use word Regulatorics

And I do not consider Regulatorics (with its problems) as a part of philosophy (which has its own problems)



The area between the center and the horison has a form of ring.

Problems in the ring could be split into areas with the same type of generalisation

Consider problem description as consisting of two parts (definitions 1 and 2):

  • situation given (what happens) and
  • procedure of evaluation (what is better and what is worse)

Both definitions could be specific or generic

Philosophy studies generic situations with generic evaluation

Psychology studies specific situation with specific evaluation

Social sciences study specific situations with generic evaluation

Education studies generic situation with specific evaluation


Horizontal mobility means yuor ability to use

the same mental tools in different areas of study


Vertical mobility means that there are different stages of generalizations


Facts or events are items of lowest generalization (of zero degree)

Situation (see above) is a specific kind of event - with option to us to get in

It means that

On situation we usually can ask

Is it good to you personally?

On fact we usually cannot

Instead we can usually ask

Did it really happened in space and time described?


Classes of events (first degree of generalization) I usualy call generalization for short

Generalizations could be linked to some boundaries in space and time

but these boundaries are more diffused comparatively to facts


Concepts or notions are next second degree of generalization

They could point to facts or generakizations but

they could survive without such pointing

supporting one another as symbolic system inside the culture


Sense is third and last degree of generalization

It points to facts, generalizations and notions and is intermediate symbol

while we built new models from old ones


Vertical mobility is your ability to link together relevant items of all degrees of generalizations

and to travel easily from one degree to another


To study objects we put them in specially constructed situations and look what happens

When we have little or no control on the object (like on the stars in the sky)

we invent physical tools (like telescopes)

and mathematical tools (like integrals)

to build situations anyway

and in most cases it works


To study individuals we put them in the specially constructed situations like exams or interview

I call situation a primary task if you can put individual in the situation

and after some time you can estimate his/her reaction

as good or bad


I call secondary task any situation with primary task inside

Six types of secondary tasks


Gunfire is a stream of primary task coming to individual who have to react

After some time of observing

you can count the score (success vs. failure)


Meal is situation when you can accept task or you can reject it


Shopping is a situation when you choose a task from a list given

Empty choise could be an option


Project happens when you have tasks loosely defined

and before choosing and solving you must define them on your own


Ladder is a task B you do not choose but

because you choose task A

solving the task B is mandatory


Trap is a task B not in general mandatory for task A you have choosen

but because of your own qualities and you previous actions

it is now mandatory for you


Every task to be completed

demands from an actor something special


I divide those demands into three groups


Complexity. Some tasks have more complex structure to work with

than other tasks have


Modality. Some tasks includes special forms of information to work with


Timing. Some tasks must be solved urgently, other need extra long attention etc.


Levels (L) is model to deal with complexity

Encoding (E) is model to deal with modality

Warming up (W) is model to deal with timing

Cards (C) is model combining models L+E+W to make important decisions for the individuals