UTOK’s Three Philosophical Pillars:

Weaving Together the Subjective, Objective, and Intersubjective Vectors of Knowing

UTOK, the Unified Theory of Knowledge, can be thought of as a cathedral that organizes our knowledge. This is because it has many different elements that interlock to form a whole. Building from this analogy, one way to grasp UTOK’s architecture is to frame it via the following three-layered structure: a) its philosophical grounding is made up of three major pillars that coherently interrelate the objective, subjective, and intersubjective ways of knowing; b) its core theoretical structure consists of eight key ideas that frame and bridge the science of psychology and the practice of psychotherapy (e.g., see here for UTOK being framed as 8 key ideas); and c) a zoomed-out whole called the UTOK-20 that makes up the entirety of the language system (e.g., see here for a video on the UTOK-20).

The Three Knowledge Vectors

The purpose of this blog is to clarify the first layer of UTOK’s structure, which are the three philosophical pillars and how they frame the three major knowledge vectors. To set the stage for this claim, we can begin with a quote that helps us understand the current state of our knowledge. In Subjective, Intersubjective, and Objective, the famous philosopher Donald Davidson summed it up as follows:

I want, first of all, to stress the apparent oddity of the fact that we have three irreducibly different varieties of empirical knowledge [i.e., the subjective, the objective, and the intersubjective]. We need an overall picture which not only accommodates all three modes of knowing, but makes sense of their relations to one another. Without such a general picture we should be deeply puzzled that the same world is known to us in three such different ways.

What exactly are the three knowledge vectors? They refer to the primary epistemologies that frame our knowledge. In other words, they refer to the processes and methods by which knowledge is generated and applied. The objective vector is framed by the knowledge generated by the natural sciences. The subjective vector is framed by the perspective of the individual person. And the intersubjective vector is framed by the socially constructed knowledge systems that coordinate groups of people in context. (Note, there is a fourth viable knowledge vector, called the “transjective.” John Vervaeke and I highlight this vector our series on Transcendent Naturalism. One way to frame the transjective is to consider it as the dynamic relations between the other three vectors over time).

Unlike modern philosophy, UTOK’s core structure is built on three pillars that allow the subjective, intersubjective, and objective perspectives to come together in a mutually inspiring dialectical dance. These three philosophical pillars are the Tree of Knowledge System, the iQuad Coin, and the UTOK Garden. The ToK System frames the objective knowledge vector, the iQuad Coin frames the subjective knowledge vector, and the UTOK Garden frames the intersubjective knowledge vector. (Note, these frames bridge UTOK to the quadrants in Integral Theory.)

Let’s extend these three vectors out a bit and then align them with UTOK’s structure. We can begin with the objective vector and frame it by the way Galileo developed modern science. He framed science as the mathematical description of behaviors in the world that could be measured by an instrument that could then be interpreted by any trained observer. This process is designed to remove the perspective of the unique, particular, qualitative subject and yield a generalizable, quantifiable description of the unfolding wave of behavioral change. To give a full description grounded in modern knowledge, we can frame it as the generalizable quantifiable modern empirical exterior objective behavioral science vector. UTOK’s ToK System and Periodic Table of Behavior provide us ways to organize this vector of knowing into a coherent naturalistic ontology that stretches from physics to sociology. In addition, it is worth noting that the domain of Mind1 on UTOK’s Map of Mind help clarify the bridge between behavior and mind, which has perplexed many in psychology and related disciplines.

We can characterize the subjective vector by first considering it as the perspective of each, unique, individual particular person. Thus, it is made up of the subjective conscious experience of every human being that is a conscious subject. In terms of more refined, modern knowledge, it is the vector of phenomenology, by which I mean a more refined, analytical analysis of subjectivity and experience and its relationship to the “exterior” world. To name it in full, we can call this the unique, particular human interior subjective phenomenological psyche vector. UTOK’s iQuad Coin and the experiential self on the ESP-A Updated Tripartite Model of human consciousness help frame this vector. In addition, it is framed as the domain of Mind2 on the Map of Mind.

The intersubjective vector can be generally characterized as the shared beliefs and values that coordinate groups of people. It is made up of the justification systems that have been built by and then shaped human persons since we had propositional language and generated roles, rules, and worldviews that characterize what UTOK calls the Culture-Person plane of existence. In terms of more refined, modern knowledge, it is the vector of the social construction of knowledge, and it is framed by the sociology of knowledge and the post-structural turn in continental philosophy. To name it in full, we can call this the micro-meso-macro socially constructed intersubjective justification narrative vector. UTOK’s Garden and Justification Systems Theory frame this vector. And it corresponds to the domain of Mind3 on the Map of Mind.

A Picture to Place the Puzzle Pieces Together

A core mantra in UTOK is: Marry the Coin to the Tree in the Garden under God. It refers to the process of placing your psyche (i.e., your unique, subjective experience of being in the world), as framed by the iQuad Coin, alongside the map of reality, as given by the ToK System. This process enables you to see the world in a complementary way from both the “inside out” subjective vector and the “outside in” objective vector. Doing so enables us to clarify what is the case. The Garden represents UTOK’s “mythos” for wise living, and it resides under the concept of God, which represents the transcendent. Ultimately, being in the Garden means being oriented toward loving truth, goodness, and beauty. Thus, when you marry the Coin to the Tree in the Garden under God, you are clarifying what is the case subjectively and objectively, and then placing yourself in an intersubjective collective and orienting toward cultivating wisdom across time.

Here is a picture that puts the puzzle pieces together:

Here is another way to represent the saying:

What does this mean? It means that, with UTOK’s Tree, Coin, and Garden formulation, we now have a general picture of human knowledge that enables us to weave together the objective, subjective, and intersubjective vectors of knowing into a mutually inspiring dialectical-into-dialogos generative dance for the 21st Century.