The Universal & Atomic Elements of Organization
A falsifiable scientific theory proposing that the same irreducible structures organize both thought and reality — from the quantum to the social scale.
O-Theory proposes that four irreducible structures — Distinctions, Systems, Relationships and Perspectives (DSRP) — form the universal grammar of organization. Rather than being merely useful ways of thinking, these structures are hypothesized to be the atomic elements from which every organized phenomenon emerges, whether in cognition, biology, physics, mathematics, society, or the cosmos.
| D | S | R | P |
| Distinctions | Systems | Relationships | Perspectives |
| Identity ↔ Other | Part ↔ Whole | Action ↔ Reaction | Point ↔ View |
| D := (i ↔ o) | S := (p ↔ w) | R := (a ↔ r) | P := (ṗ ↔ v) |
This is a living scientific evidence compendium: an open, continually evolving collection of independent empirical research, formal theory, mathematical proofs, cross-disciplinary analyses, applications, critiques, and proposed falsifications. Every entry is included because it supports, refines, challenges, or attempts to falsify the theory.
Scientific theories are strengthened not only by evidence that confirms their predictions, but also by surviving attempts to falsify them. This compendium brings both together: independent evidence from researchers who were not testing DSRP and proposed counterexamples evaluated against the formal theory.
One counterexample is enough to falsify O-Theory. Until then, the question remains: do the same four structures organize everything from quantum systems to human thought?
Independent convergence is one of the strongest forms of scientific evidence because researchers arrive at the same conclusion while investigating different questions for different reasons.
The number is not the point. Researchers in different fields, studying different questions with different methods, repeatedly arrived at the same structural predictions—almost always without testing DSRP or using its language.
Try a different term or clear the filters.
This compendium began as the peer-reviewed literature review “A Literature Review of the Universal and Atomic Elements of Complex Cognition,” published in the Journal of Systems Thinking with 109 studies. That paper is the peer-reviewed foundation. What you see here is its living, continuously updated version . New studies are checked before they are added, and the collection now holds and keeps growing. Open any card to see what the researchers found, why it bears on DSRP, and where the original review discusses it, the fuller account.
The collection is updated continuously, so the citation carries the date you consulted it rather than a study count — the count changes weekly, and putting it in the reference would make the same collection look like a different work to everyone who cites it. To cite a single claim or study, use its own address: every one has a permanent link.
This is the adversarial half of the compendium. Where the evidence track asks what converges on DSRP, this one asks what would end it: a single organized phenomenon whose structure needs a fifth pattern, a ninth element, or a fifth structural dynamic. It holds written up from candidates across territories, and resolutions — the general answers those cases settle against. Every case is published whether it held or failed, including the ones still open.
Cite this rather than the evidence collection when the point is what survived attack. The two are separate works with separate addresses: one asks what converges on the theory, the other asks what would end it, and a reference to the first does not support a claim about the second. Case and resolution numbers change when the record is revised, so cite a case by its own permanent link rather than by number.
This collection is meant to keep growing. Send us a study, paper, book or critique that bears on DSRP, whether it supports the theory or cuts against it, and we will read it and decide whether it belongs.
Authors Schulz and Gopnik
Year 2004
Publisher Developmental Psychology
Discipline Human Development
Read it at the publisher 10.1037/0012-1649.40.2.162
Five studies investigated (a) children's ability to use the dependent and independent probabilities of events to make causal inferences and (b) the interaction between such inferences and domain-specific knowledge. In Experiment 1, preschoolers used patterns of dependence and independence to make accurate causal inferences in the domains of biology and psychology. Experiment 2 replicated the results in the domain of biology with a more complex pattern of conditional dependencies. In Experiment 3, children used evidence about patterns of dependence and independence to craft novel interventions across domains. In Experiments 4 and 5, children's sensitivity to patterns of dependence was pitted against their domain-specific knowledge. Children used conditional probabilities to make accurate causal inferences even when asked to violate domain boundaries.
To research causal learning across domains.
Children can, “make causal judgments using patterns of independent and dependent probabilities across a range of tasks and domains.” Their research (using a screening-off technique) showed that when screening off information, preschool aged children were able to learn the causal Relationships within both biological and psychological events. Furthermore, they saw an impressive ability from the subjects (3-4 year old children) to draw causal Relationships from dependence patterns.
This data is indicative of the power and prevalence of Relationships, and how early they come into play cognitively. In particular, it shows that young children can learn to be more cognizant of the relationships they make in their mind; as a powerful tool to understand new concepts.
Yet, while we know that we have the ability to make relationships, often we make them without an awareness that we are doing so. In other words, metacognition requires recognition and explication of the relationships we make between and among things whether they are people, concepts, or other ideas. Schultz and Gopnik (2004) researched causal learning across domains. They completed five experiments that concluded that children can, “make causal judgments using patterns of independent and dependent probabilities across a range of tasks and domains.” Their research (using a screening-off technique) showed that when screening off information, preschool aged children were able to learn the causal Relationships within both biological and psychological events. Furthermore, they saw an impressive ability from the subjects (3-4 year old children) to draw causal Relationships from dependence patterns. This data is indicative of the power and prevalence of Relationships, and how early they come into play cognitively. In particular, it shows that young children can learn to be more cognizant of the relationships they make in their mind; as a powerful tool to understand new concepts.
Patterns it shows R
How to cite this Schulz and Gopnik (2004). Causal Learning Across Domains. Developmental Psychology.