The inquiry into the nature of science has long been a topic of discussion. In his work, A Scientific Method in Brief, Hugh Gauch presents a conventional modernist perspective on science, suggesting that it is characterized by a set of foundational assumptions. These include concepts like scientific objectivity, the correspondence theory of truth, the validity of reason, and realism. With these frameworks, scientists employ empirical techniques to collect data and evaluate models. While the truth is never absolute, this methodology enhances our confidence that the created models accurately reflect reality.

Gauch notes that, despite varying worldviews among scientists, there is significant debate regarding topics such as emergence versus reductionism, the essence of the mind and consciousness, and the interplay between scientific and social knowledge. This lack of consensus suggests that a unified scientific worldview is elusive.

From the perspective of the Unified Theory of Knowledge (UTOK), this gap is understandable. Traditional “MENS” knowledge carries the Enlightenment Gap, leading to challenges in psychology. The UTOK addresses these psychological issues and effectively bridges the Enlightenment Gap, establishing a scientific worldview that promotes the pursuit of wisdom.

The Theory of Knowledge (ToK) System, a fundamental component of the UTOK framework, serves as both a reality theory and a model of scientific knowledge mapping. It proposes that reality can be categorized into four planes—Matter, Life, Mind, and Culture—each corresponding to distinct scientific domains: Physical, Biological, Basic Psychological, and Social sciences.

Behavior is a pivotal concept in the ToK System's scientific knowledge theory. It makes three fundamental assertions. First, behavior is a crucial yet often overlooked concept present in all basic sciences. Second, it is essential to scientific epistemology, shaping how we acquire knowledge. Third, behavior is integral to scientific ontology, informing our understanding of what is real.

To illustrate the universality of behavior in science, the Lexico-Oxford dictionary defines science as “the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.” If we define behavior as changes in entities and their relationships over time, it logically includes their structure, though the reverse isn’t true. Thus, we can interpret the modern scientific definition as the systematic study of the natural world's behavior through observation and experimentation. Physics exemplifies this, often described as the study of “the behavior of matter and energy” and how the universe operates at various scales. Furthermore, it is common to refer to particle physicists examining the behavior of subatomic particles while cosmologists investigate the behavior of galaxies. This suggests that defining psychology merely as “the science of behavior” is overly simplistic, despite its persistence in some contemporary textbooks.

The second assertion emphasizes that behavior frames scientific epistemology, wherein scientists adopt an external, third-person perspective grounded in observation and measurement to substantiate their knowledge claims. Ken Wilber’s epistemological quadrants illustrate this, highlighting the scientific view of entities' behavior and their surrounding systems. These quadrants also clarify why science struggles to address the first-person perspective encompassing individual subjective experiences.

The third assertion concerns ontology, positing the existence of various types of behavior in nature. Specifically, it argues that distinct behavioral patterns manifest across different levels and complexities in nature. This is represented in the following diagram.

An important aspect missing in the previous diagram is the concept of emergence over time, which the ToK System addresses. It suggests that two types of emergence exist in nature. The first, termed “weak emergence,” occurs within the same plane of existence, such as the interaction between hydrogen and oxygen molecules leading to the emergent properties of water. The second, “strong emergence,” happens between different planes of existence, illustrated by the difference between a water molecule and a living cell, highlighting qualitative changes driven by information processing and communication.

The ToK theory further suggests that each dimension comprises primary units of behavior, which can be analyzed at three levels: 1) parts; 2) wholes; and 3) groups.

When we integrate this understanding with the four separable planes of existence, we arrive at a 3 x 4 Periodic Table of Behavior.

The Periodic Table of Behavior (PTB) indicates that we can trace the development of behavioral complexity across these four levels, beginning with what could be termed a “pure energy singularity” and culminating in global society. The arrows in the PTB below illustrate this progression.

The interlinked nature of these claims leads to a significant conclusion: we should observe the organization of scientific knowledge reflected in this classification of behavioral patterns. The PTB outlines 12 distinct “levels” of science, where each level corresponds to the behavioral frequencies at the intersection of the analytical level (i.e., part, whole, group) and dimension (Matter, Life, Mind, and Culture).

The initial dimension is Matter, encompassing scales from the quantum level to the universe itself.

The first “level” on the PTB is particle physics, which covers foundational concepts such as space, time, particles, waves, and the principles of matter and energy.

The second level pertains to the atomic structure, as represented by the Periodic Table of Elements and atomic physics.

The third level relates to chemistry, which focuses on the behavior of molecules (groups of atoms functioning as unified entities).

We then transition to the second dimension of behavioral complexity, Life, where living behavior differs significantly from Matter. While Matter is intricate, Life comprises complex adaptive systems driven by information processing and communication.

The fourth level is genetics, rooted in molecular biology, which serves as the foundational informational unit of living processes.

The fifth level is cytology, focusing on the basic unit of life, the cell.

The sixth level examines multicellular organisms, including botany and mycology.

Next, we move to the “Mind” dimension, which in the ToK refers to the spectrum of animal-mental behaviors mediated by the brain and nervous system, encapsulating basic psychology (as opposed to human psychology).

The seventh level is neuroscience.

The eighth level can be referred to as either “basic psychology,” “ethology,” or “cognitive behavioral neuroscience,” covering both natural and experimental animal behavior sciences. This area of study is often muddled due to the Enlightenment Gap and its inadequacy in portraying the science of the mind clearly.

The ninth level is sociobiology, social ethology, or group-level behavioral ecology.

We then transition to the “Culture-Person” plane, which represents a fundamentally distinct behavioral dimension characterized by language, justification, self-awareness, and the evolution of cultural ideologies.

The tenth level is human cognitive science.

The eleventh level encompasses human psychology, including developmental, personality, and social psychology.

The twelfth level consists of the social sciences, which incorporate anthropology, political science, economics, and sociology.

The twelve levels illustrated by the Periodic Table of Behavior validate the effectiveness of the ToK System in organizing scientific knowledge and demonstrating how this knowledge maps onto ontic reality, while maintaining appropriate relations between matter and mind.

With this foundation, we can now begin to contemplate the possibility of a thirteenth level, exploring transcendence and the pursuit of wisdom.