ToK FAQs...
![]()
What is the Tree of Knowledge System?
The Tree of Knowledge (ToK) System is a new unified
theory of knowledge that maps the pieces of the scientific puzzle in a novel way
that connects Quantum Mechanics to Sociological processes and everything in
between into a coherent whole. The most novel aspect of the ToK is its visuo-spatial
depiction knowledge as consisting of four dimensions of complexity (Matter,
Life, Mind, and Culture) that correspond to the behavior of four classes of
objects (material objects, organisms, animals, and humans), and four classes of
science (physical, biological, psychological, and social).
Crucially, each dimension of complexity is connected to the dimension beneath it
via a theoretical "joint point." A joint point provides the causal explanatory
framework how the dimension of complexity evolved. For example, the modern
synthesis (which is Darwin's theory of natural selection operating on genetic
combinations through time) offers the conceptual framework for the evolution of
life. A major and novel feature of the ToK System is the proposition that there
are four such fundamental joint points and, correspondingly, four dimensions of
complexity. Ultimately, the ToK System is a proposal for the theoretical
unification of scientific knowledge.
Why is it called the Tree of Knowledge System?
One reason is that the metaphor of the tree is used to
illustrate how various branches of complexity emerge over time from more basic
beginnings. Another reason is that the name conveys a holistic, organic and
systemic view of knowledge. Finally, the most basic reason is that scientific
knowledge has a story to tell about humanity and it is crucial that such
knowledge is presented in the context of a meaningful narrative that explicitly
emphasizes a moral component. It is in that spirit that the ToK is so named, as
it is a reference to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Bible. Of
course, in the traditional Genesis story the message is clear: obey God with
blind faith and paradise will be delivered—challenge God’s authority and all
hell breaks loose.
In contrast, the message of the ToK System is that humanity has matured to the
point where it is clear that we must take charge of our own destiny, and to do
so we must be committed to asking questions about who we are and where we have
come from and be committed to developing rational answers. Thus, metaphorically
speaking, we must eat heartily from the Tree of Knowledge if we are to flourish.
Yes, eating from the Tree comes with some existential burdens. But it is our
best hope. For it is only by acquiring such knowledge can we successfully and
deliberately coordinate our actions and move humanity away from Evil toward
Good.
Why is the ToK System Needed?
Viewing the world from the bridge of a unified theory
makes one realize just how desperately we humans require a shared general
understanding of the way the world works. The most intractable and destructive
of human conflicts involve at their root fundamentally different assumptions,
and the absence of a shared general frame makes communication regarding those
assumptions enormously difficult. Oliver Reiser was a philosopher keenly aware
of the need for integrating our knowledge. The following quote from his book,
The Integration of Human Knowledge, passionately describes this issue.
In this time of divisive tendencies within and between the nations, races,
religions, sciences and humanities, synthesis must become the great magnet which
orients us all…[Yet] scientists have not done what is possible toward
integrating bodies of knowledge created by science into a unified interpretation
of man, his place in nature, and his potentialities for creating the good
society. Instead, they are entombing us in dark and meaningless catacombs of
learning. (Reiser, 1958, p. 2-3, italics in original). Reiser argued
cogently for a global worldview that would ultimately lead to a “world sensorium”
in which individual humans, groups, societies and nations were all much more
harmoniously in tune with one another.
Although this is perhaps the most important and noble
role of the academy, Reiser pointed his finger at the academy in general and
science in particular and basically said, for shame. The foundational task of
synthesis has been woefully neglected and the obsession with technical,
specialized knowledge is entombing us in dark and meaningless catacombs. Without
the beacon of organized, integrated, holistic knowledge, we will find ourselves
further and further adrift, awash in enormous technical know-how, but ultimately
guided by primitive, partially correct, local justification systems that condemn
us to internecine conflicts and myopic actions.
No unified theory or model has succeeded to date in providing a
universally accepted frame for the academy. Why might the ToK succeed where so
many others have failed?
The primary reason the ToK will succeed is that it
finally offers a much needed macro-level map that defines key concepts (e.g.,
Life, Mind, Culture) and defines them in relationship to one another.
Related to this is the fact that the ToK System suggests a fundamentally new
epistemology and ontology. That is, the dimensions of complexity argument is
completely novel and it is the needed piece of the puzzle to see the whole.
Much of what has been published on the ToK System has been concerned
with the theoretical unification of psychology. What is the connection?
As scholars of the field know, unlike its sister
disciplines of physics and biology, the discipline of psychology is an
incredibly amorphous, pre-paradigmatic field. There are disputes on how to
define the field, there are many incommensurate perspectives, and there is not
even agreement as to whether the field is a natural science, social science or
even a science at all.
It turns out that the discipline of psychology exists on the fault lines of many
of our most basic questions. As Gordon Allport observed way back in the sixties,
more than any other discipline psychology is connected to and intertwined with
the three great branches of learning (the natural and social sciences and the
humanities).
As has been articulated in several papers, the ToK
System demonstrates that psychology has traditionally spanned two separate but
intimately related problems: (1) the problem of animal behavior, and (2) the
problem of human behavior. Accordingly, the solution offered divides the field
into two broad, logically consistent domains. The first domain is psychological
formalism, which is defined as the science of mind, corresponds to animal
behavior, and consists of the basic psychological sciences. The second domain is
human psychology, which is defined as the science of human behavior at the
individual level and is proposed as a hybrid that exists between psychological
formalism and the social sciences.
By solving the problem of psychology, a new path emerges for consilient
connections to be developed between the natural and social sciences and
humanities