In one of his writings Konrad Lorenz called the internal structure of effects of an organism "causal felting". A very apt description. If you look at a piece of felt through a magnifying glass, you see a immense unsystematic entanglement of threads running throughout. Looking at the inside of the organism and trying to understand the causal connections you find a network which is just as unsystematic. It seems pointless to try and detect regularities in this jumble.

Enterprises and state systems are created by human beings. There we deal with every causal network, we try to foresee every interaction or at least to understand it in retrospect. But also in this case the jumble is such that even the best planning meets with surprises. To date, it has also seemed hopeless to find a generally valid scheme for disentangling the individual threads of this causal "felting".

In the following I would like to demonstrate that there is common aspect according to which this mess can be disentangled. This is not a universal key, but it shows the way how this mess can be sorted out. These are circular processes which recur continuously in the evolutionary process: The connection of cause and effect which succeed each other regularly. Even in the lowest protozoa you can clearly prove that. They characterise the whole evolutionary process up to giant corporations and gigantic state systems.

We have already talked about the first part of these circular processes: functional "expansion" (Fig. 18 a).

a) Functional expansion. W is an functional unit inside an energon (for instance in an animal body or in a company). By means of its structure it produces a required effect within the framework of this entity based on division of labour: the function f. In the course of the individual or evolutionary development of the energon the functional unit assumes additional functions (first g, then also h and i).In most cases certain structural changes or additional patterns of function are necessary for that. This can therefore lead to a functional overload in effective agents (for example in an organ of an animal or in an employee of a company).

b) Sharing of functions. An functional unit (W) is overloaded with functions (a-d). The individual acts of carrying out a function hamper each other. A new functional unit (X) takes over one of these functions (b). In the course of the further development also function c is passed on to a third functional unit (Y). This development often occurs if energons increase and consist of more and more units. This leads to an increased division of labour, to a more precise "differentiation". In organisms as well as in human acquisitive structures more and more functions switch over to specialised individual units.

c) Change of function. This change of function starts with a functional expansion according to type a. An functional unit takes over an additional function (g). In the further individual or evolutionary development the original function f becomes redundant and degenerates. So the functional unit finally has a different function from the original one. In this way some organs have taken over other tasks in the evolution of animals and plants, and also in business it is not rarely the case that some units assume another new function. In this way new functional units emerge out of already existing ones.

Examples for all three forms of functional change see text.
 

Every assessment of energons always has to consider that these structures all in all consist of effects. The latter only can be exerted by material structures, with the energy itself having to be considered as well – according to findings of modern physics – as something concrete, as "material" in the widest sense. In a simple case an functional unit exerts just one function, but it can happen, however, that it offers some more functions "for free". In the majority of cases changes are necessary however, if the number of outputs is to be increased. The structure has to be changed – just as a flat roof must be if it is supposed to become a tool for collecting water. Or an additional behaviour pattern has to cause a controlling mechanism – just as in the case of our hands, which are capable of carrying out so many activities. As to the balance it is decisive that such functional extensions have to lead to improved results. Otherwise they are meaningless or even a hindrance, and are not maintained and developed any further. The controlling factors of natural selection consequently eliminate them.

The circular processes we are talking about here start with an functional unit which by modification produces additional outputs supporting the energon. The example of the blood circulation illustrated how in this way more and more effects can join the original one. Just as well as in a company or a state system a unit – a human being or a department – can take over more and more tasks. The consequences, however, are the same in both cases. Gradually the functional unit is overloaded, overstrained. One duty interferes with the other. As it performs much too many tasks, it cannot do justice to any of these. In the blood circulation this stage has not yet been reached.: its main function – to create a circulation for the distribution of energy and substance – is so simple that it can be used for a lot more additional tasks as well. In our central nervous system – this is what I finally want to demonstrate - such an overburdening has already taken place. An analogous process is illustrated by the employee who sees his boss and says, "I’m sorry, I can’t make it any more! It is not that I lack the will, but there are simply too many tasks, too great in variety and in number!"

The solution to this is already known, it is "sharing of functions" (Fig. 18b). The task of the overburdened organ is taken over by two or three others each of them now having a more strictly defined task. The precondition – in organisms as well as in any human acquisitive structure – is, however, again that also this change has an effect favouring the energy balance. Only in this case is the sharing of functions justified; only then can it be lasting. So the boss says, "Mr. Meyer, from now on you will only do this and that. You can fully concentrate on this now. I will transfer the remaining tasks to somebody else".

This procedure becomes relevant particularly when energons increase or specialise in a certain acquisitive form.
 
 

In the evolution of animals and plants the sharing of functions plays a decisive role. In almost every structure and every behaviour this process has left its traces. The bodies of animals and plants – as we see them individually – are just a momentary sectional view of a very slow process. It is not birth, maturing, and death that matter, but the processes that which develop over hundreds or thousands of generations. In the single organism all we see is the momentary form of co-ordination of the individual elements. What we cannot see, however, is the dynamics on which these co-ordinations are based.

The protective outer skin in smaller animals living in water, for example, can – without any problems – also partly take over the function of breathing and excretion. If such creatures, however, move to the land – as was the case in the history of the earth – this is no longer possible. A conflict of functions arises. The cells are not able to protect the body from dying of thirst or desiccation and at the same time keep up their breathing and excreting activities. Thus, only those animals can live on land – a process that is significant for us, as we are descended from one of these pioneers in our long line of ancestors – in whom these functions had split off. Special units that end at single points had to take on the breathing function, others were responsible for excretion. Only that allowed the rest of the outer skin to keratinise and offered protection from the dehydrating effect of air.

Another even more vivid example for the process of the sharing of functions are our intestines – the central structure of every animal energon. In the simple multi-cell organisms – such as in coral polyps or jellyfish – there is only one opening. The prey has to be taken in and the unusable rest has to be excreted via this opening. The intestinal cells have to perform three different functions here: excrete digesting enzymes, taking in food, and storing it. Even in worms a second opening took on the task of excretion – thus making a continual acquisitive process possible. Accordingly, muscular movements now pushed the food through the intestines, always in the same direction. This was the precondition for further sharing of functions.

The cells at the front end formed functional units for the grinding of the food: jaws and teeth. Other cells specialised in the production of enzymes. By forming small sacks opening out into the intestines, they could prevent injury from the often sharp-edged food. One section of the intestines was specialised in the intake of larger amounts of food: the stomach. Particularly in cases when the source of food can be opened up only on rare occasions, it becomes vital to make full use of it. The glandular secretion already sets in behind the teeth (salivary glands), in the stomach the prey is subsequently ground up efficiently. In the small intestine that follows the substances are absorbed and passed on to the blood. The function of storage also was eventually carried out by a special organ: the liver. There were several artificially added units: for instance, the "chewing stones" in the birds and crocodiles, which help grind the food in the stomach. Or the digestive strategies – as in insects or ruminants.

Within the insect empires a similar differentiation took place, though at a higher stage of integration. Here, sharing of functions did not take place between cells or organs but between organisms. The empires of ants, bees, and termites, too, are energons: though here only a very limited sharing of functions has developed. Special units perform the function of protection: the "soldiers". The "queen" is in charge of the business of procreation for all the others – a considerable relief for all of them. The bumblebees form peculiarly shaped honey-pots out of wax for the storage of food in times of need. In the American ant species Myrmecocystus melliger several members of the colony took over the same function. All others feed them with the nectar gathered, making the hind part of their bodies swell enormously. They cannot walk any more. They hang down from the top of the "honey chamber" as living "honey pots". Hungry members of the hive approach them and take food from out of their mouths. Here, too, the efficiency of the "people" –the energon –is increased by function sharing.

The fact that the central nervous system took over the development of formulas increased the possibility of function sharing in human beings enormously. Every community is based on this process. If the individual had to take care of everything, it would be overburdened. One activity would interfere with the other. Within an organised community, however, one can specialise in one thing, while another may specialise in something else.

It was Adam Smith who realised the special possibilities of selective function sharing in the economy. Taylor subsequently revolutionised modern production technology by his "Funktionsmeistersystem" and created the foundation for the now extremely well-developed technology of scientific plant management. The sharing of tasks among executives has turned out to be of great importance here. Production and administration have to be separated. ("Managers off the production floor!") It is also not good if, for instance, personnel recruiting is part of the responsibilities of the finance department – for the letter is used to economising which may have an adverse effect on the employment of good staff. If the top executive keeps research and development under his own authority, this is bad, for he in most cases sticks to his own field and does not recognise other possibly unsatisfied demands.

This is the second process within the evolutionary cyclical processes. At first, functional expansions lead to overburdening. That again leads to function sharing¹. Later on, functional expansions may also arise in the newly developing functional units – leading to further overburdening and further sharing of functions. The cyclical processes which always start out with one function in functional units and finally lead back to functional units with one function thus continue.

They may, however, also proceed differently and take their course via a change of functions.
 
 

This process, too, starts from functional expansion. In addition to an original function one functional unit takes on a second, secondary one. This, however, gradually gains more and more importance – and eventually the original function is lost (Fig. 18 c).

Goethe discovered this process in plants. On 17 May 1788 he wrote to Herder, "Forward and backward, the plant is just a leaf." He spoke of a "metamorphosis" of the leaves. The quotation that was put at the beginning of this book was taken from a poem that Goethe had wrote on this subject².

Later research fully confirmed Goethe’s discoveries. This is true in peas, for example, where the tendrils are transformed leaves. As well as in the berberries. where the thorns have developed out of leaves by functional change. The same applies to the pitchers of the pitcher plants in which they catch insects. And the same also applies to all stamen and pistils in flowering plants (Fig.19).

By change of function the organisms were able to achieve new formations relatively easily. It only took minor changes in the genetic code to produce them. Each intermediate stage thus has a positive selection value, and thus increases the competitiveness. A new function is added to an original one. The new one subsequently proves – maybe in a changed environment – to be more and more important, and by the controlling effect of the selective factors the new function is developed further. The original one loses its significance. In this case the superfluous energy does not regress any more. It has turned into another form of energy, one that enhances acquisition.

The plants thus could acquire new important functional units by modification of some leaves. This may be compared to the legs of insects. Some turned into cleaning instruments, others into eating instruments; some species of insects even developed a suction tube. In the porcupine some spines developed into organs of sound production. They are extended into a hollow tube and look like organ pipes. By clicking them together a sound is produced that can be heard from afar. In sharks some of their thorn-like placoid scales turned into teeth. At the rim of their mouth they become correspondingly longer. This development can be seen in every shark up to this day.

At the time when the progeny of the primary sharks left the sea and went on to live on land, the body scales became superfluous, the scales that had turned into teeth, however, were preserved and developed further according to their new function. The teeth of all higher-developed vertebrates –including our own –have their evolutionary origin in the placoid scales of primary sharks.

a) Rosebush. Pistil and stamen of the blossom are (like in most phanerogams) transformed leaves. The ability to photosynthesise regressed, and other functions dictated their required form.

b) Teeth of a shark. They are placoid scales (p), which developed more strongly at the rim of the mouth and there they became function carriers of food acquisition. When the offspring of the primary sharks moved to land, the body scales regressed, the "teeth" were differentiated further. Human teeth, too, have their evolutionary origin in the shark’s placoid scales. (Even in the shark species existing today, you can see how the teeth emerge from the placoid scales.)

c) Swords and other "antiques" are often used to decorate apartments – and are even reproduced for this purpose. A completely new function replaces the original one: they become functional units of display and the conveyance of aesthetic pleasure (in this case to elements of luxury items).
 

When the fish proceeded to live on land, their fins gradually transformed into toes and fingers. We can see changes of this kind even up to this day in various fishes, such as the mudhopper. For a long time it was generally believed lungs had developed from the swim bladder. The context here, however, is far more complicated – as more precise research showed. The exact opposite is true. In some fishes living in fresh water under unfavourable conditions as regards oxygen supply a lung was formed by invagination at the top of the intestine. However, not only the vertebrates living on land but the bonefish as well descend from the latter. It was the lung that came first. It was only from the lung that the "swim bladder" regulating buoyancy developed by means of functional change.

The gills that had become superfluous regressed only very slowly. How difficult it is for the genetic formula to get rid of such ballast is illustrated by the fact that the human embryo forms branchia at an early stage of its development (at the beginning of the fourth week) even up to this day. The shark’s air vent developed into the middle ear. The upper part of the front gill arches turned into the auditory ossicles called stirrups.

This process of development mentioned above is referred to as a perfect example for functional change in zoology. It is cited in almost every textbook, though it is exactly this example that is not appropriate. For in this case, at first a gradual regression of these bones took place. For millions of years they had no function at all. Only later did these rudimentary units became useful again and develop further within the scope of a new function. There was no actual change from one function to the other taking place in this case. Here a rudiment – useless waste – was integrated into the formation process of a new functional unit.

In the energons created by humans the significance of the functional change receded strongly. In our new formations we are no longer dependent on the fact that each transitional stage has a positive selection value. With us, improvements do not depend on gradual transitions.

After all, the process still exists here, too. Some buttons on our clothes no longer serve the function of fastening but only of decoration. These functional units thus have gone through a radical functional change. The differential which is so important in a car was not invented for the car as such but rather for the loom at a much earlier point in time. In this case, a unit not only changed its meaning but also its energon. This is a kind of functional change which is only possible with human beings – as our artificial organs can be used by various energons.

Each functional change leads to a new functional unit –and the cyclical processes may then also continue in this very functional unit: functional expansion, overburdening, sharing of functions, functional change, and so on.

Or the cyclical process may lead to a bundling of functions (Fig. 20 c).
 
 

This process mentioned above may be observed in the artificial organs of man more easily than in the natural ones of animals and plants.

The development of all technical devices – particularly of all machines – took place along these lines. If an engineer wanted to improve an already existing device (functional unit) by adding auxiliary units, he would at first consider those already existing, invented by others. Even if he cannot take these over the way they are, he at least takes over the principle they are based on. He copies it and adjusts it to the given requirements.

Here, we see the eminent significance of human language and writing. Every plant and every animal has to – in its evolutionary development – make every new invention itself. If the energon dung beetle attains an improvement, there is no way at all for the energon poplar to benefit from that improvement. Up to the human species, each of the innumerable branches of the development of life could only make headway by own progress. In the energons created by humans, however, it became possible for an energon to benefit from improvements made by others.

To an already existing functional unit others are allocated which virtually are fief to it. This allocation leads to a bundling of functions, to the development of functional units of a higher stage of integration. Just as every energon consists of subordinated units, these now also in turn consist of subordinated units.

In the development of animals and plants such an accumulation of already existing functional units was not possible in most cases. A mutation in the genetic formula could hardly cause an already existing unit to move over from one part of the body to another and to combine with a functional unit as an auxiliary unit there. However, there was an analogous process that took place in another way.

The component of all multi-cell organisms, the cell, is capable of a wide range of functions and differentiation. This is an inherited quality of their independent past as protozoa. In the multi-cell organism only either one or the other abilities of individual cells are activated at any given time, and many cells remain undifferentiated: as a back-up, so to speak. Mutations made it possible that such cells next to a functional unit received orders to differentiate themselves and to form an auxiliary unit. If, therefore, an accumulation of already existing units was not possible in most cases – in this totally different way it was possible to achieve such an accumulation. Hence, here, too, ever more complex organs of a higher stage of integration could successively develop.

This extremely important process – for the first part of evolution – ultimately also comes under the principle of functional expansion. It is not the functional unit itself that increases the number of its abilities in this case, but rather it is undifferentiated reserve units that are activated to perform functional expansion and that combine with the functional unit as auxiliary units.

Even this form of development has a parallel in human evolution. Just as the undifferentiated cell is capable of development so is the undifferentiated human being. If the need for an auxiliary unit should arise in one department, then even unskilled workers may be hired and trained for the job that has to be done. Numerous enterprises apply this method. In humans this process is carried out consciously and purposefully – and thus can lead to quick results. The multi-cell organisms, on the other hand, were dependent on appropriate changes in the genetic formula.

Another possibility to achieve an accumulation of auxiliary units – i.e. a bundling of functions – is the transformation of environmental units into functional units. This brings us to one of the central problems in evolution. How is it possible for something totally functionless to turn into something functional?
 
 

I call this process –for want of a better term – birth of function (Fig. 20 d). Such a process can take place in very different ways.

As already discussed, a functional unit can eo ipso be capable to of performing several functions (double function). Equally, also every functional expansion constitutes a birth of functions. In both cases, however, it is not that something really functionless acquires some sort of functionality, but an already functional unit is capable of performing further achievements.

Waste products, on the other hand, are absolutely functionless. They are handicaps, yes, even damage in the body and have to be excreted. Quite often organisms have succeeded in transforming such waste products into useful auxiliary units. Some single-cell algae retain the gasified products of metabolism in their body – they thus become an organ of buoyancy. The buoyancy of this gas levels out the weight of the cell in the water. Other algae form analogous functional units by producing fat drops. The method of using waste substances for this purpose seems to be significantly cheaper.

The dog uses its excreted urine for marking its territory. The urine thus becomes a quite important functional unit. In many companies waste is also used nowadays, if necessary after additional treatment.

In some cases these waste products later on even became the main product.

We see a further developmental stage when the remains of the prey which never entered the body of the predatory energon is turned into a functional unit. This is what the aphis lion (a predatory larva of a fly) does, for example, when it covers itself with the skins of the plant aphids that it has sucked out previously. It turns them into functional units of camouflage. From here it is only a small step to the transformation of environmental units into artificial organs –as applied by the amoeba Difflugia when it builds a protecting armour out of grains of sand.

Both in the algae as well as in the aphis lion and in this amoeba inherited formulas are the precondition for taking the respective functionless units into service. As regards the principle, it is irrelevant whether these functionless units are the final result of respiration (air bubbles), of a predatory process, (skins of dead aphids), or of any process in the environment (grains of sand). Here, too, we witness the direct transition from "natural" to "artificial" functional units. In any case, however, we see a birth of functions.

As long as such additional units could only be acquired via a change in the genetic formula, there were limits to this development. However, as soon as the human central nervous system acquired the ability to form and use artificial organs as a result of individual experience and direct passing on of information, a completely new path of development opened up.

In his imagination human beings design ideas of how a functional unit suitable for a specific task has to look like. They then look for such a functional unit – if their search is successful we talk about organ finding. Or they produce a functional unit designed like that –in this case we speak of organ forming.

Primitive human beings learned what a stone has to look like in order for it to be used as a chisel – they created the celt. Today’s industry giants are on the lookout for products or specialised people that they can integrate in their effect structure: for organisations or companies that they may influence and change in such a way that they enhance/further their own goals. A seemingly huge gap: here the celt, there the alteration of existing products or organisations. In principle, however, the process is the same. Both are about the ability to find an organ, to picture an organ, and to form an organ out of an external structure.

In fact, this ability exists even in the lowest organisms – yes, it is a basic function of the process of life as such.

For every plant and every animal takes up inorganic substances – and assimilates them. This means: transforms them into endogenous structure. Thus, however, external substances are turned into functional units. The hierarchical structure of the "useful" (in the sense of enhancing the acquisition of energy) carries on throughout the inner hierarchical structure of the energons right down to the smallest components. Every inorganic molecule and atom that is integrated in the effect structure of an energon thus turns into something functional – into a functional unit. The entire evolutionary process is eventually based on a transformation of the "inorganic" into the "organic".

By combining with already existing functional units and by activating functioning units (such as undifferentiated cells) or by integrating functionless "material" a functional unit of a higher stage of integration may arise. Furthermore, a "complex organ" formed in that way may take over additional functions in the course of evolution, become overburdened in the course of time, go through a new sharing of functions or a new change of functions, or take part in another bundling of functions.

Functional partnership. W and X are functional units in the same energon and have different functions (f, g). A partial merger of their structures leads to savings. Example: kidney and gonads share the same exit canal for excreting their products. Or: in an enterprise two departments replace their secretaries by a joint secretary.

Combining functions. Several functional units of an energon (V-Z) have the same function (f), two of them have additional ones (g, h, i). This double-track process is done away with by the fact that one functional unit takes over function f for all of them. This may be one of the already existing ones (W) but also a newly formed one. Example: establishing a central repair department in a company.

Bundling of functions. The functional power of the functional unit X is increased by combining of the functional units W and Y leading to a joint, improved function g_2. If further functional units are added, an organ of a higher integration stage can develop the function (g₃) of which is composed of numerous subordinated functions. This is most probably how most of the complex organs of animals and plants have developed, and equally, with humans, most of the machines.

Birth of functions. E is an energon, U is a unit of the environment that has no function. The energon integrates this unit in its effect body (E₂ ) and transforms it into a functional unit. Something functional is born of something functionless. For example: animals and plants take up substances, make functional structures out of them – thus turning them into functional units. Or: waste products are made utilisable – and thus transformed into functional units. The most important example: the entire production of "artificial organs" and their integration in human professional entities and business organisations.
 

By each of the paths mentioned above the respective energons acquire new functional units. These require care, repair work, and possible renewals – some even need energy supply and waste disposal. Altogether this may thus lead to one or the other double-track process – to energy expenses which could be avoided, or the reduction of which would increase competitiveness.
 
 

The first possibility for achieving a rationalisation effect is what I call functional partnership (Fig. 20 a).

This is when two functional units partly combine their structures, thus achieving an economising effect. One example would be the fact that in some animals (also in us human beings) the kidneys and gonads have the same exit canal – whereas this is not the case in other species. In companies it may occur that two departments have the same functional units (for example one secretary each) who is not fully occupied in either of the departments. By functional partnership economising effects may be achieved here. The function is combined – from now on the two departments share the functional unit.

This process is even more far-reaching in the combination of functions (Fig. 20 b) which constitutes a radical removal of the double-track situation. If the same function occurs in one energon at several places, competitiveness would increase if these individual functions are replaced by a joint specialised functional unit.

This is a process that can be frequently seen in companies. If they reach a certain size or achieve a certain number of units, a radical shift takes place. For instance, a joint car pool is formed, a construction department, a legal department, a research department, centralised places for logistics and repair, a test area, a department for energy supply, a department for co-ordinating appointments, and many more.

In the production process the combination of operations of a kind leads to "workshop manufacturing". Single production processes (I, II, III, and so on) are split up into sections (a, b, c, d). If, for instance, operation c in production process I is similar in kind to operation a in production process III, both will be carried out in a common "workshop". Practically speaking, this means, that, for example, all lathe work is carried out in a lathe shop, all casting work is done in a foundry, and so on.

The fact that there was only a very limited number of such combinations of functions in the evolution of animals and plants is very revealing. Every secondary re-ordering constitutes severe interference and shifting within the inner organisation: however, this rarely arises from changes of the hereditary formula occurring here or there. If a supernatural power aiming at some order had controlled evolution, such shifts within the structures could very well have occurred as well. Left to themselves and exposed to the manifold influences of strongly varying powers, the animal and plant organisms could not achieve any drastic changes, even if their competitive value (selection value) would thereby have increased significantly.

The multi-cell organisms have remained extremely federal organisations. Each of their cells is still largely an independent undertaking. Thus, each cell, for instance, produces its own ADP (adenosine-diphosphate) and charges the latter itself to turn it into ATP (adenosine- triphosphate). In human beings, this means a total production of substances of not less than 70 kilograms per day³. This process which constantly remains the same is carried out in every single cell – i.e. in human beings in billions of "undertakings"; everyone has special functional units designed for this purpose: the mitochondria. Considering the extent of such a multi-tracked character must be a hair-raising affair for a person thinking in commercial terms.

Furthermore, each cell keeps the difference of concentration difference vis-à-vis the surrounding environment constant level to itself. For this purpose, every single one of them has so-called "ion-pumps". Measurements in the blood cells show that they have counteract a thirty-fold gradient Here, too, the multi-cell organism shows a practically gigantic multi-tracked character which gives rise to extremely significant expenses for the body as a whole.

There is no doubt that the independence of their elements offers the multi-cell organisms many important advantages⁴. It is, however, important also to consider the deficiencies and constructional limits which result from this federative structure. Only at the developmental stage the "human species" could evolution free itself from this restriction. In the acquisitive structures as formed by human beings, no longer irrevocably intermeshed, and no longer emerging from a germ cell, any conceivable combination of functions became possible.

Here, the possibility arose that the even same functional unit could be active for totally different energons. Every bookkeeper working on an hourly basis who does the balances and files the tax return for different smaller enterprises illustrates this fact. This process has to be looked at from the point of the individual energon making use of such services.

The respective enterprises need this effect. They are, however, too small to hire a functional unit especially for this purpose – i.e. a bookkeeper or a tax consultant. This usually means that these energons have somehow to get along with the given situation. One of the employees – even if he may not be that perfect at this job – then has to carry out this function. Now, however, the possibility arises of renting a special organ. Practically, we are talking about combination of functions here between totally different, yes even often competing energons.

The same process can be seen in the EEC⁵. Each of the European states has a government of its own, its own customs and police body, its own jurisdiction, and its own research institutes. If it were possible to achieve a combination of functions here (as is partly the case within the EEC), each of the states would be spared significant expense.

In the economy this is the basic idea described by Servan-Schreiber in his book "The American Challenge": all the European large enterprises are individually too poor to be able to afford research expenses matching those of giant US companies. If it were possible to combine these efforts, the European economy would become much more competitive.

a) The functional unit G initially only fulfils function a. Within the time interval 1 it – as a form of functional expansion – additionally takes on function b; within span 2 also functions c and d are added. This thus leads to overburdening, and within time span 3 functional sharing takes place: H takes over function c, I takes over functions a, b, and d. Within time span 4, another sharing of functions takes place. The functional unit I eventually has only one function again. There, as well as in H further cycle processes (analogous to C) may take place.

b) Within the time span 1 – 2 – 3 a functional change takes place: the original function a becomes less important, until eventually only the additional function b is left. Within the time span 4 a combination of functions takes place: the functional unit I takes over function b from H, I, and K. In time span 5 it passes on the additional function c to the new functional unit L by way of sharing of functions. Again we are left with two functional units (L and I) having only one function, in which further functional expansions and new cyclical processes may be possible.

c) Here, a functional expansion is followed by a bundling of functions. Functions a, b, c, and d taken together result in a new function e. By adding environmental units (U) that are functionless (as far as they are concerned), a complex organ (K) having only one function (f) is formed in time spans 3 and 4 which may integrate further units (L), thus increasing its function (f₂). Again, functional expansions and further cyclical processes may occur in this case.
 

After all, the combination of functions is the process by which several small energons can merge to become a larger unit – a larger energon – in human acquisitive bodies. This process was not possible – with a few exceptions (as, for instance, in insect empires) for animals and plants – for purely technical reasons.

The combination of functions, too, eventually leads to functional units with one function. There, too, the cyclical processes may continue.
 
 

The idea of cyclical processes has (re)-appeared on numerous occasions. According to the concept of the Buddhist religion, activities in one life lead to consequences in the next life, and the existence of one individual thus goes on in causal entanglement (karma) – up to the point when it finally has completely freed itself from these effects and reaches Nirvana.

Nietzsche calmed his mind in revolt by imagining "eternal recurrence". Everything has – necessarily – to recur in the end. A daring – but also quite improbable idea.

Quite a number of poets have made the continuous sequence of birth, maturing, and death the subject of their global philosophy. Oswald Spengler applied a similar idea to peoples. Their organisation is formed, becomes successful, consequently they drown in luxury, become weak, and are erased by others. Such a "decline" also threatened the West⁶.

According to the energon theory, the truly significant cyclical processes have been overlooked so far. Not the visible or the physical is what constitutes true reality. Birth, maturing, and death are practically only pulse beats in life’s development; a rather slow pulse beat is the rise and fall of peoples.

A cross-section of the energons offers a unclear, interwoven, felted network. From the viewpoint of evolutionary development, however, they changed and developed in ever recurring cyclical processes. Just as in a continually reforming vortex, the stream of development continues to flow – groping its way forward. (Fig. 21).

This is the way how the controlling effects of environmental factors determine the form of the energons and their huge number of functional units. In each of their structures – via control causality – the shaping activity of the force fields that overlap in manifold ways takes place. As regards the energy balance – as regards the energon – these effects allow a classification based on functional similarities. We have already talked about the sources of energy and sources of substances as well as about t interfering and hostile environmental forces.

There are, however, still more environmental factors that are of significance for the energons.
 
 

Back to the Table of Contents

Continue to "Horse and horseman"
 
 

Comments:

¹ Gutenberg uses the terms accumulation of functions and dispersion of functions. (“Grundlagen der Betriebswirtschaftslehre”, Berlin 1951, vol. I, p. 174.)
² „Die Metamorphose der Pflanzen“, in „Gott und Welt“, 1798.
³ This, of course, has to be considered in relation to catabolism of the same extent. Charging each ADP molecule to ATP means substance build-up, discharging means substance breakdown. The comparison is merely supposed to illustrate vividly the scope of these processes in our body.
⁴ Part of these may also be due to the fact that some chemical synthesis is generally only possible in “small undertakings”. Only in this dimension are there relatively huge surfaces occupying a minimum of space. According to observations made in the chemical industry, some processes taking place in the miniature laboratory of  the  “cell” are not possible at all in “major synthesis”.
⁵ Now EC.
⁶ “The Decline of the West”, Munich 1918