The Universal-Particular (UnP) problem addresses a fundamental tension that exists across all domains of human thought and action: how do we navigate between broad, abstract principles that apply across contexts (universals) and specific, concrete situations that demand unique responses (particulars)?

This tension manifests in countless ways. In law, judges must apply general statutes to specific cases. In ethics, we balance universal moral principles against situational complexities. In cognition, our minds constantly shift between abstract categories and specific instances. Even in everyday decision-making, we toggle between general rules of thumb and the unique demands of the moment.

What makes this problem so pervasive is that neither approach alone is sufficient. A system based purely on universal principles would be too rigid and disconnected from reality, while one based solely on particular cases would lack coherence and predictability. What is required is a constant dialogue between abstractions and concrete decisions.

Understanding this fundamental tension helps us develop more nuanced approaches to reasoning across disciplines, recognizing that wisdom often lies not in choosing between universal principles and particular cases, but in skillfully navigating their interplay.

Universals serve several critical functions in human cognition and social systems:

• Generalizability: They provide patterns that can be applied across multiple situations

• Normative Function: Most establish standards for what "should" or "ought to" be done

• Cognitive Efficiency: They serve as mental shortcuts that reduce decision complexity

• Social Coordination: They facilitate shared understanding and collective action

• Abstraction: They exist at a level above specific instances or particular cases

These universals operate on a spectrum from highly formalized (laws, rules) to more implicit (cognitive heuristics, values), and from externally imposed (laws) to internally adopted (morals, values) that may be externally enforced.

See some examples here: https://sapien.institute/examples-of-universals

The UnP framework provides a structured approach to understanding the dimensions of abstract principles interacting with concrete situations.

1. Formalization Level
   The degree to which a framework is explicitly codified and defined.
   Spectrum: Highly formalized systems with precise rules ↔ Informal, implicit understandings

2. Origin
   The source from which the framework emerges.
   Spectrum: Externally imposed by authorities or social groups ↔ Internally developed through individual cognition and experience

3. Scope
   The breadth of application across different contexts.
   Spectrum: Individual (personal) ↔ Group (cultural/organizational) ↔ Universal (cross-cultural/species-wide)

4. Primary Function
   The main purpose the framework serves.
   Types: Regulatory (governing behavior), Cognitive (organizing thought), Meaning-making (creating understanding), Procedural (guiding processes), Evaluative (assessing worth)

5. Flexibility
   How adaptable the framework is across different contexts.
   Spectrum: Fixed (rigid, unchanging) ↔ Highly adaptable (context-sensitive, evolving)

6. Temporal Orientation
   The time dimension the framework primarily addresses.
   Focus: Past (historical, traditional) ↔ Present (current, operational) ↔ Future (aspirational, predictive)

7. Conscious Awareness
   The level of explicit recognition required.
   Spectrum: Explicit (consciously recognized and articulated) ↔ Implicit (operating below conscious awareness)

8. Abstraction Level
   The conceptual hierarchy at which the framework operates.
   Levels: Instance-level (specific cases) ↔ Pattern-level (recurring structures) ↔ System-level (organized wholes) ↔ Meta-level (frameworks about frameworks)

Understanding these dimensions helps us:

• Develop more nuanced legal and ethical systems

• Design AI that can balance rule-following with contextual adaptation

• Resolve conflicts between competing principles

• Create policies that are both consistent and responsive to unique situations

Our research applies this framework to challenges in:

• Legal reasoning and judicial decision-making

• Policy development and implementation

• AI ethics and decision systems

• Cross-cultural understanding of norms and values

• Automated and algorithmic decision making

• Trust, Agent coordination, and cooperative intelligence

See some examples here: https://sapien.institute/examples-of-universals