Functional systems of consciousness: the Basic Language of Living Results

From Reflex to Functional System

The classical picture from which the physiology of behavior began looked very simple: there is a stimulus, a reflex arc, and a response. The world "presses" on the organism, and the organism reacts. This scheme works reasonably well when we talk about simple, stereotyped reactions, but it explains poorly most real actions of a living being.

A human being does not simply react to what is happening now. A person anticipates, chooses among several options, takes into account experience, memory, motivation, consequences, risks, and the social context. The same is true for an animal: it does not just "jump at a sound"; it evaluates whether this is prey, a predator, or something indifferent and neutral. The linear formula "stimulus → reflex → response" turned out to be too simple to describe this complexity.

P.K. Anokhin proposed a different view. At the center he placed neither the stimulus nor an isolated reflex arc, but the useful result — that for the sake of which the organism organizes its activity at all. Not "sound → jump", but "need → system of actions → result that satisfies it". This is how Functional Systems Theory emerged.

In this framework, a functional system is not a part of an organ and not a simple sum of reflexes. It is a self-organizing, dynamic configuration of heterogeneous elements (neural, humoral, autonomic, motor), united not by anatomy but by a shared result. What matters is not where a particular component is located in the brain or body, but how these components are recruited together when the organism is solving a specific task.

Once the result is placed at the center, our way of thinking about the person also changes. It is no longer enough to say "there is a hunger center, a movement center, a fear center." One must examine which systems assemble each time a person, for example, prepares food, goes to a meeting, makes a risky decision, avoids a conflict, or postpones an important examination. This is precisely where Functional Systems Theory becomes the basic language for everything that in this book will be called the architecture of decisions.

The Stages of a Functional System According to Anokhin

To prevent this language from remaining abstract, it is worth briefly examining what the classical functional system looks like in Anokhin's school. In general terms, several key stages can be distinguished.

1. Afferent synthesis.
   At this stage, the organism gathers the “input” data:
• current needs and motivations
• information from memory (what happened previously in similar situations)
• signals from the environment via the sensory organs
• possible action programs that are "on the shelf"

1. What matters is that this is not just an additive sum, but precisely a synthesis: different afferent streams merge into a specific configuration.
2. Decision-making.
   On the basis of afferent synthesis, the system “chooses” which action program will be launched. This is not necessarily a conscious choice; but in human behavior there is often room for conscious participation precisely at this stage.
3. Formation of the acceptor of results.
   The organism "tunes" an internal image of the expected result: what the situation should be like when the action has been successfully completed. This is a kind of internal template for comparison with what actually turns out.
4. Construction of the action program (efferent synthesis).
   A sequence of commands is formed for the effector organs — muscles, organs, systems — that will implement the decision.
5. Execution of the action.
   The system carries out the program, ranging from a simple muscle contraction to complex behavior.
6. Re-afference and evaluation of the result.
   Signals from receptors, sensory organs, and internal systems return and are compared with the acceptor of results: has what was “intended” been achieved? If yes, the system can wind down or transition into a latent state; if not, the program is modified, the model is refined, and sometimes the reference point itself is changed.

All of this can be clearly seen in simple examples, such as walking on uneven ground or regulating breathing under physical load. But the same logic operates in more complex actions as well: from solving a problem to taking part in professional selection. In every case, there is a need, information gathering, a choice, an expected result, an action, and an evaluation.

A Bridge to Contemporary Decision Frameworks

When people talk about decisions today, they usually refer to other frameworks:

• Dual-process / System 1 – System 2: fast, automatic, intuitive thinking versus slow, controlled, reflective thinking.
• The cognitive-behavioral model: “situation — automatic thought — emotion — behavior — consequence.”
• COM-B: behavior as the result of an interaction between capability, opportunity, and motivation.
• Evidence-to-Decision frameworks in evidence-based medicine: structured steps from evidence to recommendation (balance of benefits and harms, values, resources, acceptability, and so on).

All of these models are useful in their own ways. Each highlights a particular aspect:

• the cognitive component (thoughts, appraisals, scenarios)
• the behavioral chain
• the role of context and motivation
• or the procedure of decision-making in groups and institutions

But they all operate at the level of a “cross-section” — as if we were looking at a functional system at a single moment or from a single side. Functional Systems Theory provides a deeper level: a complete cycle in which all these components are already present, but ordered in time and structure. There is a need, there is synthesis, there is a decision, an expected result, a program, an action, and feedback.

This is why the present book uses functional systems as its foundational framework, but does not stop at the classical schema. For the practical diagnosis of decision architecture in a living person, the full functional-system diagram is too detailed: a physician, psychologist, educator, or manager cannot, in each conversation or observation, operate with six to eight technical nodes. A more compact but still structurally faithful language is needed.

Why This Book Works with Three Nodes

For the diagnostics of decision architecture in a living person, it has proven practically useful to distinguish three integrated nodes that:

• reflect the key stages of the functional system
• align well with other contemporary models (dual-process, CBT, COM-B, evidence-to-decision)
• remain simple enough to be used in real dialogue, observation, and intervention design

These three nodes are:

1. Reference point (orienting anchor).
   Integrates needs, motivation, values, the criterion of a useful result, and part of the afferent synthesis. It answers the question: “What counts as good or bad here for me? What am I actually trying to achieve?”
2. Model (internal model).
   Integrates situational information, the person’s image of the world, themselves, and others, as well as their notions of time, risks, probabilities, and possible consequences. It answers: “How do I see this situation? What do I expect?”
3. Action / learning.
   Includes the action program, its execution, and the feedback that can modify both the reference point and the model. It answers: “What am I doing? What comes out of it? What am I learning from the result — consciously or unconsciously?”

In the full functional system schema, these three nodes unfold into more detailed components. For example, the reference point includes motivation and result criteria, which in Anokhin’s terms lie partly in the domains of afferent synthesis and the acceptor of results; the model covers situational analysis and the image of the expected state; action/learning unpacks into the program, execution, and re-afference.

A researcher who wishes to work at a more detailed level can always return to the full functional system schema and expand each of the three nodes into five to seven subcomponents. However, for a shared diagnostic language across clinical practice, psychology, education, management, and AI design, the three-node framework provides sufficient depth while preserving practical simplicity.

In the following chapters, we will first expand the full architecture of the functional system in its classical form (need, afferent synthesis, acceptor of results, action program, execution, re-afference). When we then turn to functional systems of consciousness and practical diagnostics, these three nodes — reference point, model, action/learning — will become the main points of reference. Through them we will examine functional systems of consciousness in a wide range of domains: from everyday micro-decisions to professional actions, from symptoms to institutional architectures.

More about this topic can be found in our book "Functional systems of consciousness: how we make decisions and how to diagnose them"on Our Books on Google Play and related articles in the Index.

Mykola Iabluchanskyi together with Andriy Yabluchanskiy