∞ ⋈ ∞ ∞ ⋈ ∞ ∞ ⋈ ∞ ∞ ⋈ ∞ ∞ ⋈ ∞ ∞ ⋈ ∞ ∞ ⋈ ∞ ∞ ⋈ ∞ ∞ ⋈ ∞

Intellectual Creations Management

Research about Intellectual Creations Management (ICrM) or in other words, Accounting for ideas, started during 2009. The research to date is based on personal experience and literature studies.

Currently own ideas are common property, unless protected by trade secret law, and securing remuneration or ownership benefits to flow from own ideas are difficult if not employed by the right organisation or if not part of the right group.

ICrM aims to find ways to benefit from own ideas.

Relevant Documents

The links below are to a relevant document and a paper about ICrM.

Intequity.html: This was the first file uploaded to the Internet, which used the word “Intequity”. Before the file was uploaded, Google’s search engine had no results for a search of “Intequity”.

Pienaar; M.D. 2011. Intellectual Creations Management Accounting. PDF download. This file is a paper about Accounting of ideas, which was uploaded to the Internet in pdf format, after academic research of 2 years, and 12 years of practical experience. The paper was however not officially supported by an academic institution, until, at the end of 2011, when Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sciences decided to publish a reworked paper.

Some of the hyperlinks in the research files might link to advertisements (Africahead has no influence on the advertising links)

ISBEFA Symposium

An invitation was received to read the paper linked to above at the 1st International Symposium on Business, Economics & Financial Applications, Argostoli, Kefalonia, Greece from 1-2 June 2012. (Ref: ISBEFA122251011)

Funding to attend the symposium was not forthcoming and the symposium was not attended.

The anomaly of Plato? © 2012.10.15

“Like the philosophies of Heraclitus and Plato, and like those of Comte and Mill, Lamarck and Darwin, they are philosophies of change, and they witness to the tremendous and undoubtedly somewhat terrifying impression made by a changing social environment on the minds of those who live in this environment. Plato reacted to this situation by attempting to arrest all change.”¹

ICrM and Intequinism postulate that creativities and changes are dependent on truths and that truths cause changes. From the quote above it can be seen that Karl Popper’s opinion was that Plato tried to stop changes. There seems to have been anomaly in Plato’s reasoning because changes and truths are interdependent. Plato put much emphasis on truths as a value but he tried to “arrest all change”. [14 June 2013: See next blog entry for a different view.]

Note 1: POPPER; K. The Open Society and Its Enemies, p. 419. London and New York: Routledge Classics. 2011. (Quoted with permission from the Karl Popper Library, Klagenfurt University)

The anomaly of Plato? 2

According to Tarnas, Plato’s opinion is not clear because sometimes “Forms” were absolute stabilities, with changing immanent things substantially inferior to “Forms”. Elsewhere Plato seemed to have posited created immanent things to be of noble origins because of “divine” origins of creativities.¹ [See previous blog entry for an opinion by Karl Popper]

The uncertainty, that Tarnas identified, and Popper also referred to, is investigated as an intequism of intequinism. The intequism is referred to as The anomaly of Plato?.

Tarnas wrote: “.. a number of ambiguities and discrepancies remained unresolved in the corpus of Plato's work. At times Plato seems to exalt the ideal over the empirical to such an extent that all concrete particulars are understood to be, as it were, only a series of footnotes to the transcendent Idea. At other times he seems to stress the intrinsic nobility of created things, precisely because they are embodied expressions of the divine and eternal.”¹

Note 1: TARNAS; R. 1991. The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas That Have Shaped Our World View, p.11. (New York: Ballantine Books, 1st Ballantine Books edition, 1993) - Permission for quotation received from Random House.

Feyerabend opined the requirement of "stability" was the basis of Aristotle's philosophy.² This opinion opposes the hypothesis of Popper that Plato's requirement was unreasonable stability, when conjuncted with the idea that Plato and Aristotle had opposing philosophies, which at base levels differed. This statement of Feyerabend shows his definition of rationality, he opposed, related to Aristotle's rationality. Feelings that Feyerabend was maybe more in line with Plato, than Aristotle could be right. In Plato's The laws at 711a the “Athenian” (‘Plato’) says, the reason a “single supreme ruler” institutes the best government and an oligarchy the least best is because a ‘single benevolent leader’ can allow the "rapid and trouble-free transition", which is needed when progress is required.³ Currently it seems as if Aristotle required more unreasonable stability than Plato, at their time, and, antique Greek philosophy as a whole, required unreasonable stability in today’s context. More than one benevolent leader are better for a territory than one benevolent leader, because benevolent leaders do not quarrel unreasonably, and they can resolve differences with reference to logic and reason, without using force. Intequinism rejects the antique Greek hypothesis of Plato about The one, as well as the modern idea about The savior, but recognizes the emphasis of those beliefs on truths. Aristotle’s theses are not currently regarded viable as a starting point, by Intequinism, because Aristotle motivated functional lies, which remove trust. Plato’s, Aristotle’s and modern religious ideas cause societal Caiaphas syndrome with the illogical psychological social behavior accompanying Caiaphas syndrome.

Changes, partly caused, research about Accounting of ideas and accounting for ideas; research about some of the root reasons of sacrifice. Truths, that cause creativities and change(s) and irrational sacrifice of creators (creatures), have not been rationally regarded, because currently, the “terrifying impression”, Popper referred to at the previous blog entry is used as motivation for sacrifices. Sacrifices are motivated by fear, and changes to privileged positions, without realizing, that, the elimination of a cause (truths) for creativities, cause eventual colonizations of territories, by other territories, that, did not sacrifice own creators to the same extent. Reason being, that territories, which were colonized, were behind with regard to technological development. Research showed a reason for lacking creativities was societal sacrifice of creators. A change thus required, to be ahead, is belief, that, allows more creativities, than, being allowed, by current beliefs.

Note 2: FEYERABEND; P.K. 1975. Against method: outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge, p.175. (London: NLB)

Note 3: PLATO. 1970. The laws, p.123. (London: Penguin, 2004 edition)


Intequinism distinguishes between utilitarian development and good creative change. ‘Utilitarian development’ is dependent on infiltrations of others’ privacies and deceits, due to conceit. ‘Good creative change’ is dependent on respect and honesties.


Since formal research started about Accounting of ideas during 2009 several new words were thought of and used during the research. The most significant of these words are intequity, fonetones and honery. The multiplication rates of the words on the Internet are too high for the multiplications to be incidental. When the words were used the first time, checks were done to determine whether the words exist or not. The words do not appear in the Collins English Dictionary nor did the words give search results with Google’s search engine. During 2012 Google’s search engine gave the following number of search results for the three words. Intequity ≈ 115 000, honery ≈ 60 000, fonetones ≈ 80 000. The meanings of the words today are as follow:

The word Intequity was derived by combining the words equity and integrity. Entrepreneurship was divided between networking related and creating related matters. Intequisms use Intequity to refer to creating related benefits and equity to refer to networking related benefits.

The word honery was thought of and first used with regard to honery testing. That is testing of the honesties levels of employees and members of management in order to determine the intequity value of a business. When the word was used the first time no search results were found for "honery" with Google's Search Engine


According to intequinism, history can be interpreted, the result of interaction between two Forms (ideas), which all people are subject to. Truth and Love, developed during different times and at different places. Truth is correspondence and coherence between reality and words, and Love is universal law, based on the idea, not doing to others like selves want not to be done to. Truth, Love, social contract theory and laws are inherently interconnected.

In China and Greece, for example, Truth developed, and after Truth, around 400 BC, Love started to develop in opposition to despotic truth. In Hebrew history Love developed with laws, when God gave the Ten Commandments. The idea, Truth was already established then, for example, in Egypt, albeit despotically.

At and around the year ‘zero’ the two supreme ideas, Truth (correspondence and coherence) and Love (universal law), were being reconciled with Christian origins. Idolatry however, ever since hid the importance of the two ideas in balance, above all people. In reality it can be seen how human circumstances deteriorate when all people do not regard themselves subject to the two supreme Forms.


All humans are subject to two ideas; Truth and universal Love. Truth means, basically, correspondence and coherence between what is portrayed and portraying. Universal Love means, basically, not doing to others like selves want not to be done to. Social contract theory and universal laws developed from Love (not-doing evil). Truth without Love causes despotism and "love" without Truth causes lawlessness and disorder. Truth tempers universal Love and universal Love tempers Truth. Sometimes it is not understood why these two ideas are above all people because, partly, it can be profitable to deceive and do to others like selves want not to be done to. The two ideas are important because compliance with the ideas causes order and creativity. Without Love, disorder reigns and without Truth, creativities do not originate sufficiently to support large populations. Currently, due to Caiaphas syndrome, which includes idolatry, people who have good ideas, because they respect the two ideas above themselves, are parasitized with utilitarian philosophy. Utilitarian philosophy promotes the development of ideas but do not promote origination of good new ideas, due to 'sacrificing' "the individual", "the stranger", "the other", in favor of groups.

According to dialectical philosophy, essence is searched for, for example only Truth, or only universal Love. Intequinism is non-dialectical philosophy, in the sense that at least two ideas, Truth and universal Love, are respected above selves. Another example to explain the difference between dialectic and non-dialectic philosophy is that Marx regarded labor, the essence of economics. He called labor "the creator". According to intequinism, Accounting for ideas is another aspect of economics, which should, at least, be regarded on par with labor.

Intequinism can be discussed at Google Groups.