[DSRP Evidence](https://dsrpevidence.org/)

# Distinctions Organize Information in Mind and Nature (D)

## Details

**Authors** Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Cabrera E

**Year** 2022

**Publisher** Systems 10(2):41

**Kind of work** article

[Read it at the publisher](https://doi.org/10.3390/systems10020041) 
10.3390/systems10020041

## In authors' words

### Abstract

The transdisciplinary importance of distinctions is well-established as foundational to such diverse phenomena as recognition, identification, individual and social identity, marginalization, externalities, boundaries, concept formation, etc., and synonymous general ideas, such as thingness, concepts, nodes, objects, etc. Cabrera provides a formal description of and predictions for identity–other distinctions (D) or “D-rule” as one of four universals for the organization of information that is foundational to systems and systems thinking, as well as the consilience of knowledge. This paper presents seven empirical studies in which (unless otherwise noted) software was used to create an experiment for subjects to complete a task and/or answer a question. The samples varied for each study (ranging from N = 407 to N = 34,398) and were generalizable to a normal distribution of the US population. These studies support—with high statistical significance—the predictions made by DSRP theory regarding identity–other distinctions including its: universality as an observable phenomenon in both mind (cognitive complexity) and nature (ontological complexity) (i.e., parallelism); internal structures and dynamics; mutual dependencies on other universals (i.e., relationships, systems, and perspectives); role in structural predictions; and efficacy as a metacognitive skill. In conclusion, these data suggest the observable and empirical existence, universality, efficacy, and parallelism (between cognitive and ontological complexity) of identity–other distinctions (D).

### What they found (results)

Subjects identified an object at 100% but its complement at 52.13%, and whitespace at 83.42% against its complement at 89.57% — the same subjects, so the asymmetry is within-study. Negated shapes were identified at above 90%. Free description of an ambiguous form fell into three categories for 93% of responses.

## Commentary

### Response

Establishes that identity and other are separately addressable rather than one undifferentiated act, and that the same region can serve as either — the only pattern for which interchangeability has been demonstrated rather than asserted.

**Patterns it shows** D

## Studies reported in this

- Dog–Tree–Burger (n = 346)
- Orange Polyhedra (N = 374)
- Rorschach Inkblot
- Shape / Not-Shape

## Questions it bears on

- Q1. [What is thinking (T)?](https://dsrpevidence.org/question/what-thinking)
- Q2. [What is organization (O)?](https://dsrpevidence.org/question/what-organization)
- Q3. [Does this organization (O) exist in the mind, and in what minds produce?](https://dsrpevidence.org/question/completeness-mind)
- Q6. [Does the organization (O) constrain anything, and does it predict anything?](https://dsrpevidence.org/question/forbids-anything)
- Q26. [Can mental fitness and its mechanisms be measured?](https://dsrpevidence.org/question/fitness-measurable)

**How to cite this** Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Cabrera E (2022). Distinctions Organize Information in Mind and Nature (D). Systems 10(2):41.