Language, as a medium for thought, may not be as precise as mathematics. But when thought deeps beyond the appearances to capture the essential elements of phenomena, some precision is achieved, according to the observed consistency of the person. For people who are consistent, the appraised return on investment, ROIApp and the soul, S would be equal, for ROIApp = S; subject to C1 = Cb and C2 = Cp, as well as F4p = F4b. This basis for the establishment of the above thesis is consistent with the requirement that two, 2 parts of thought, Pc and C would be equivalent to one, 1 part of behavior, √n for √n = 1/C Pc^2. Thus at one level, C1 and C2 define thought and F4 defines behavior; while at another level, C and F4 define thought, while S defines behavior.

1. The Measure of Faith:
Optimization of the Human-Power Resource Quality
By
Peter Anyebe
0.0 Preamble
Language is fundamental for the expression of thought, to communicate ideas between people.
It is not as precise as mathematics, which is accessible only to a few in the elite class of
intellectuals. But it is available to most people, old and young, as well as babies. For instance the
mathematical expression that connects thought, f0 to behavior, Po is f0 = 2Po – 1. This simple
formula gives the following two, 2 fundamental information, about the connectivity that it
expresses:
Firstly the connection between thought and behavior would be analytic, for (-1) so that
something is always lost in the process
Secondly, twice as much energy would be required for thought, as for behavior, for f0 =
2Po
This means that for every act of behavior, two, 2 acts of thought would be required. Recall from
the behavior model in psychology that behavior is actually a response, R to stimulus, S, for R =
f(S, P). Thus the responses to stimuli would be appropriate, for R = S only when the person, P
has interpreted the stimuli correctly, for P = 1. In this work, stimuli would have been interpreted
correctly only when they have been reduced into the four, 4 strategic objectives that need to be
accomplished, for goal attainment. This defines the procedure to be followed at behavior, in
four, 4 items. Notice therefore that thought accomplishes two, 2 things as follows:
It derives the procedure by which behavior is to be carried on
Then it directs the behavior, as it progresses from beginning to end, when the task would
have been accomplished
These fulfill the double portion of thought to behavior. And the itemization of procedure reduces
a variable that is continuous, into a discrete equivalent, to define the loss of information.
Compare the simplicity of the formulation that connects thought with behavior, to the
complexity of explanation that has followed. When I sought to find a single term that connects
thought to behavior therefore, the task was herculean. But I found the term, ‘deliberate’! This
word is at once an adjective, as well as a verb. As a verb, the emphasis is on the action of
thought. As an adjective however, it describes a form of behavior that has been thoroughly
thought out. Moreover, the concept captures the three, 3 processes that are involved in the
translation of thought into behavior as follows:
Agape Consultants
8, De-Bangler Street
Gboko, Nigeria
+234(0)703-430-2486
anyebepeter@yahoo.com

2. Deliberation reduces the idea into a procedure
Deliberateness at once refers to the behavior, as well as the intentionality that drives it
Despite the imprecision of language however, when thought goes beyond the appearances to
seek the essential components of phenomena, like with mathematics, some agreements can be
reached between individuals with minimum errors and therefore differences. Recall that unlike
appearances that are always in flux, essentials are changeless, because they give being to the
phenomenon. Recall also that measurement requires that the essentials are identified, which are
then mapped into the number line, according to the relationships between them. This is the basis
for mathematical precision; that it is able to reach beyond the appearances and to nose into the
essentials of phenomena. Could this be the reason that; the only things that can be known for
sure are those that can be measured? Thought at the level suggested in this work raises
language to a level of precision that is akin to that of mathematics. The items involved are few,
and they capture the being of the phenomenon.
1.00 Character
This preamble has been necessary, to clarify the reduction of character, into its two, 2
fundamental components that include thought and behavior. Given these two, 2 variables
therefore, character would be determined. But because behavior can be predicted from it, it
would be sufficient to get a hold on thought, to define character. Einstein reduced thought into
the two, 2 fundamental components that include intuition, Pc and rationality, Rn in the
following quote:
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift,
And the rational mind is a faithful servant.
We have created a society that honors the servant,
And has forgotten the gift
Serially:
Like character and thought, intuition also comprises
two, 2 fundamental components that include waves and
forms. Waves are adequately defined by the two, 2
features that include location and size. With forms however three, 3 features would be required,
which include the work, L that is to be done, the energy, F with which it is to be accomplished,
and the exhaust, A with which to keep track of the desired progress. Then the waves principle is
applied to the forms, to derive the six, 6 items on the standard procedure series, SPS as follows:
3. Intuition, Pc Character, C
2. Thought, f0 6. Waves
1. Behavior, Po 5. Forms
4. Rationality, Rn

3. Thus in the same way that given thought, character
would be determined; given forms, thought would
also be determined. The first four, 4 items on the
series represent the strategic objectives that outline
the process to be followed, for goal attainment. The
first item, work, L1 defines the minimum requirement,
for the phenomenon to exist. The second, work, L2
defines the optimum nature of the phenomenon,
beyond which it would be futile to attempt any further optimization. These two, 2 points define a
continuum, along which optimization (work?) is to progress. And the energy terms define the
source from which energy is to be derived, to fund the process. While energy, F2 funds work, L1,
energy, F1 funds work, L2. In general however, the energy-items define the source, F1 and sink,
F2 terms of the continuity principle. And these items would be subject to the work-items, which
define the conservation principle for corroboration. Continuity demands that at the end of every
process, the energy that is available should be equal to the energy at the beginning, for F1 = F2.
But this would be possible only when conservation is fulfilled, for L1 = L2.
For instance without behavior, it would be impossible to keep track of character. Ultimately
however for optimality, thought would represent the feature from which to define character. This
is achieved via forms and waves, which provide the items with which to evaluate intuition, Pc
and rationality, Rn. Then Pc and Rn would be energy terms that fund thought, f0 and behavior,
Po respectively. But they would also be source and sink items respectively, which need to satisfy
a certain definite relationship, for continuity. And the relationship would have to be corroborated
by f0 and Po, for conservation. Like f0 and Po therefore (f0 = 2Po - 1), Pc and Rn are related by
Rn = 2Pc – 1. Notice the inversion in the relationships, which satisfy the relativity principle that
governs natural processes, to reduce ideas into objects. Inverses define an aperture, which
effects the required reduction. Given these observations, the following four, 4 conclusions are derived:
Given forms as represented by the factor-Pc, character, C would be determined, for C =
(3Pc + 1) / 4. Pc actually describes phenomenological compression, which reduces the
infinite number of items that constitute phenomena into a few handfuls.
But character comprises two, 2 wave features, including the thought pattern and the
behavior pattern, for C / 2.
Thirdly recall that for every portion of behavior, C two, 2 portions of thought, Pc would
be required, for Pc2
/ C.
Moreover at the reduction of thought into behavior, something is lost; which limits
behavior to 70%, at the optimum.
These conclusions are established on the following model:

4. PfI = 1 – (√n’’ / √n),
√n’ = (4√n’’ - 1) / 2
√n’’ = (4√n3 + 1) / 5
√n3 = √ (√n2 x √n1)
√n2 = C1 / 2
√n1 = 1/C1 PC
2
C1 = (3Pc + 1) / 4
Notice that when thought is best at a unity, for Pc = 1, behavior would be 0.7071, for √n3 = 0.71.
Then the expressions that define √n’’ and √n’ would be attempts to appreciate the optimum
score of 70%, into a unity, for √n’ = 1.03. These are derived empirically when actual behavior,
defined as the performance at task by the standard procedure, √n is predicted from the optimum
score on the factor-√n3. The prediction is effected twice, first as a synthesis for √n’’ = (4√n3 + 1)
/ 5 and then as an analysis, for √n’ = (4√n’’ - 1) / 2. But the performance index is derived from
the 1st
approximation only, for PfI = 1 – (√n’’ / √n). In this case the expected performance, √n’’
is expressed as a ratio of the actual, √n. Both iterations would however be required, to define the
efficiency of the above conclusions, at 1 / 1.03 = 0.97.
2.00 Soul as product of Mind
So far it has been possible to predict behavior from thought, both theoretically as the factors Po
and f0, and empirically as the factors √n and Pc respectively. In both cases the factor-C, which
defines character, also defines the continuum that connects the two, 2 features. But thought is
carried on in the mind, F. And the soul, S is conceptualized as the concatenation of all behaviors,
from the 1st
breath at birth to the last breath at death. Then character would still be the link that
connects mind and soul, as the factors F and S respectively. This makes the soul the product of
the mind, from which it can also be predicted. To confirm this 5th
conclusion, both factors are
evaluated, also theoretically and empirically. The two, 2 evaluations are correlated over 90%, at r
> 0.9. Empirically the factor-F is evaluated as the measure of faith, for F = ScT + PfI where
ScT = f0b. And the soul is evaluated as S = PoTt, where the factor-Tt measures temperament as
follows:
Tt = 1/dc
dc = 1/3 x Dc
Dc = C + N
N = 2NR – 1
NR = √ (L/A)
L = n/F4
A = S/R
n = R / F4: Derived on the simulation of PMM
PfI = Performance Index
C1 = Character Index
Pc = Phenomenological Compression Index (Intuition)
√n = Performance at task by the standard procedure
3. Creativity, n Temperament, Tt
2. Soul, S 6. Character, C
1. Mind, F4 5. Normality, N
4. Relativity, R

5. ScT, f0, and Po are evaluated as follows:
And the theoretical factors F, C and S are evaluated as follows:
3.00 The Measure of Faith
In the 6th
conclusion, self-containment, ScT is equated to the motive factor-f0b, for ScT = f0b,
as required by conservation. This is demonstrated on the series below:
3. ScR
2. ScT
1. f0b
4. RtN
These are the four, 4 strategic features that define the content of character. If self-control, ScR is
to predict retention, RtN for continuity therefore, f0b and ScT need to be equal, for conservation.
The distinction between f0b and f0p is outlined in the models below:

6. They are both measures of thought, f0 rooted in the factor-C. But while one is behavioral, for f0b; the
other is phenomenological, for f0p. As the evidence for consistency, given the factor-f0 from both
thought and behavior, the factor-F that is derived on the simulation of the perception model of mind,
PMM presented above would be equal, for Fb = Fp. This is demonstrated on the data below:
Given the observed efficiency of 0.97 in the instrument, whatever inconsistencies are observed here
would be from the individuals. For corroboration, the measure of faith is presented in the data below:

7. Notice that for consistency, the error term, Er would be equal to the observed measure of faith,
F, for Er = F. This is because observed inconsistencies would usually point to the lack of
dependability, which dependability is what the measure of faith quantifies. The isolation of the
instrument and measurement errors mean that the observed deviances in the data, between the
appraised return on investment, ROIApp and the soul, S for ROIApp ≠ S would be due to
individual inconsistencies in the persons that have been measured, as presented below:
Recall the conclusion that the universe is an investment into the human character, C with the
quality of soul, S that emerges as the expected return on investment, ROIApp; subject to the
commitment to the task of soul building, which commitment would be evident in the motive, f0b.
Notice from the above data that S = ROIApp for those who are observed to be consistent.
4.00 The Natural Order
Following Einstein, relativity would be the fundamental principle that underlies the universe. It
creates an aperture, through which phenomena are reduced. The photographer’s camera is based
on the same principle. It reduces three, 3 dimensional, 3d objects into their 2d equivalents. The
same principle is adopted in the thought pattern that is discussed in this work. Thus ideas are
infinite dimensional, but are reduced into a mere four, 4 dimensions as the strategic objectives
that need to be fulfilled for goal attainment. And as is required with the universe, the principles
of continuity and conservation are satisfied. While the two, 2 work items are basis to observe
conservation, the two, 2 energy items serve to observe continuity. The work items actually
describe the path for the optimization of the phenomenon. This is typical of a growth process.
Then the energy items, which also define the source and sink terms for continuity, would fund
the process. Funding would be achieved in the form of the mitigations of the associated

8. difficulties with reduction. Then the perturbations that are associated with the 1st
and 2nd
work
terms would be mitigated by the 2nd
and 1st
energy term respectively. For instance in the example
presented earlier in this work with the series that describes character, C the difficulties
associated with reducing thought, f0 into a measurable phenomenon are mitigated by the choice
of intuition, Pc as a substitute from which thought is evaluated. Similarly behavior, Po is
inferred from rationality, Rn.
This maneuver is typical of duality, where objects and forms are equivalents. In the process of
creativity, it is forms that are reduced into objects. For measurements however, this process is
reversed. Objects are appreciated into their form equivalents, to be evaluated. The four, 4
strategic objectives represent the form of the object. Recall the dictum that whatever gets
measured gets done. This would be because with measurements, forms are discerned; which
forms give being to the phenomenon, and from which they are made in the first place.
Duality also resolves the difficulty with relativity, when it invokes normality. Relativity presents
an infinite number of alternatives from which to make choice. But normality suggests the
possibility to reduce these into one, 1 to simplify choice. Recall the normality principle in games
theory, following which a game of infinite moves can be reduced into one, 1 single move, which
is then iterated until the game ends. The duality series in operations research suggests the unit
perspective of phenomena, against which all others may be evaluated, as follows:
3. Maxima
2. Minimax
1. Maximin
4. Minima
Recall that by Einstein’s relativity principle, an object in space could be viewed from an infinite
number of positions, each of which represents the perspective of the phenomenon. But there
could only be one, 1 optimum perspective of reality, as suggested by normality and corroborated
by Feynman’s sum over histories solution to Heisenberg’s indeterminacy. The four, 4 strategic
objectives are a unique rendition of the natural order, N-O as outlined by the duality series
presented above. Selected correctly, goal accomplishment would be assured.
5.00 The Model Human
It has been argued in this work that given character, C soul, S would be determined, to predict
the appraised return on investment, ROIApp on the basis of which labor could be put on the
shelf. This would be subject to the measure of faith, F which improves with the approximation of
the N-O, for optimized human-power resource quality, HpRQ. It is Immanuel Kant who
predicted the possibility of socializing the model human in the following quote:

9. The history of mankind can be seen, in the large, as the realization of nature’s
secret plan to bring forth a perfectly constituted state as the only condition in
which the capacities of mankind can be fully developed, and also bring forth that
external relation among states which is perfectly adequate to this end.
A philosophical attempt to work out a universal history according to a natural
plan directed to achieving the civic union of the human race must be regarded
as possible and, indeed, as contributing to this end of nature.
In his comment on Charles Darwin’s natural selection presented below, Stephen Hawking
suggests the thought pattern and behavior pattern as the features that distinguish the model
human:
In any population of self-reproducing organisms, there will be variations in the
genetic material and upbringing that different individuals have
These differences will mean that some individuals are better able than others to
draw the right conclusions about the world around them and to act accordingly
These individuals will be more likely to survive and reproduce and so their
pattern of behavior and thought will come to dominate
Earlier in this work, a quote from Einstein was presented in which he reduced thought into
intuition and rationality, given which behavior could be predicted. It is reproduced below:
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift,
And the rational mind is a faithful servant.
We have created a society that honors the servant,
And has forgotten the gift
And elsewhere, it has been argued that the intellect is determined by the environment. Moreover,
recall the dictum that whatever gets measured gets done. The work culture is presented as the
enabling environment in which the model human could be socialized. It has measurement as its
kernel, to cause an attitude change in the workforce that gives the others the opportunity to play
catch up with the leadership.
6.00 Concluding
To institutionalize the appraised return on investment, ROIApp the purpose would be to put a
premium on the optimization of the human-power resource quality, HpRQ. The optimization
would be achieved against the back drop of the model human as standard, who would usually
have approximated the N-O, to perform at task by the standard procedure.

10. The performance would be evident in the observed measure of faith, F which is actually an
indication of dependability. The factor-F gives a clue as to any observed deviance between the
factors S and ROIApp, which ought to be equal, for S = ROIApp.
The observed deviance would be corroborated by the score on the facto-C, where at the least C1
and Cb would be equal, for C1 = Cb as an indication of the person’s consistency. Cp and C2 as
well as F4p and F4b should also be equal, for Cp = C2 and F4p = F4b respectively, to signify a
complete dependability of the ROIApp score.
See the tables presented above.
This conclusion is summarized on the series, as well as the chart, below:
Notice that as one expression of the relativity principle, the soul and faith factors S and F would
have been impossible to measure, without the character and natural order factors C and N-O
respectively. These equivalents provide the basis for the measurements, from which S and F are
evaluated. The N-O provides the format for the F-Scale, while the character model provides the
items for the calibration of the scale that measures Pc and Rn. The F-Scale measures thought, to
put a value on the thought pattern as the factor-f0. It is presented below:
3. Character, C ROIApp
2. Soul, S 6. HpRQ
1. Faith, F 5. Model Human
4. Natural Order, N-O