A collection of critical analyses, satirical essays, and scholarly examinations of DSRP theory, its institutional apparatus, and the gap between what it claims and what it is.
DSRP — Distinctions, Systems, Relationships, and Perspectives — began as a genuinely useful pedagogical heuristic. The four prompts help students and workshop participants organize their thinking. As a teaching tool, there was nothing to argue about. That was useful. That was enough. That was honest.
But that is not what DSRP became. It became a "universal theory of cognition," a "cognitive law," a "structural ontology," and a discovery that its creator placed alongside Darwin's theory of evolution, Turing's theory of computation, and Shannon's information theory — in a registry he created and scored himself.
This website collects the critical analyses and satirical essays that examine the distance between what DSRP claims and what the evidence supports. They are written with care, with humor, and with the conviction that a field as important as systems thinking deserves better than self-referencing institutional capture.
In which Shakespeare is revealed to have been performing D-moves, Tolstoy is diagnosed with metacognitive inefficiency, and Kafka's Metamorphosis is reduced to a single R-move.
In which Homer and Heraclitus are revealed as colleagues, Tolstoy's War and Peace is proven formally identical to Carnot's thermodynamic cycle, and Jobu Tupaki is diagnosed as needing a belt certification program.
In which the 2008 financial crisis is a $12,000 consulting engagement that never happened, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is solved in forty-five minutes using ThinkBlocks, and the author awaits Nobel Prizes in all six categories.
A systematic comparison of DSRP against systems science and second-order cybernetics. DSRP erases the observer, lacks feedback, emergence, requisite variety, autopoiesis, and boundary judgment.
The Cabreras' own framework applied to the Cabreras' own mess. DSRP works beautifully — not as a theory of cognition, but as a tool for mapping self-referencing systems with no external validation.
What the self-assigned rankings reveal about DSRP's epistemological commitments. It must be universal, complete, observer-independent, and naturally ordered — all at once.
After removing self-citations from the Journal of Systems Thinking (which Cabrera owns, edits, and is the most-published author of) and MDPI citation loops, the h-index drops from 22 to 8.
STSI does not appear in the IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search, despite presenting itself as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and using the NSF logo with "Supported by" language.
Derek and Laura Cabrera placed themselves in the same tier as Darwin, Turing, Shannon, von Neumann, Wiener, and Ashby. They scored the registry themselves.
STSI claims "35 years" of investigation. In 1991, Cabrera was a 21-year-old Outward Bound mountain guide. The research lab wasn't founded until 2007.
The STSI website states it is "a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization." It displays the National Science Foundation logo with "Supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF)." These representations appear on the same page where consumers are directed to purchase certifications, training, and merchandise. Here is what the IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search shows — then and now.
Replace with screenshot:
IRS search — 2025
Save as: images/stsi-irs-2025.png
A search for "Systems Thinking Standards Institute" on the IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search (apps.irs.gov/app/eos/) in 2025. STSI did not appear in the database of organizations recognized as tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3).
Replace with screenshot:
IRS search — April 2026
Save as: images/stsi-irs-2026.png
A current search for "Systems Thinking Standards Institute." The reader may verify independently at apps.irs.gov/app/eos/.
STSI's website states: "STSI is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization." This representation appears on pages where consumers purchase belt certifications ($2,400–$4,800), Training Camp enrollment, and DSRP merchandise.
The STSI website displays the official NSF seal with "Supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF)." NSF grants were awarded to Cabrera personally or to Cornell — not to STSI. The use of "supported by" on a commercial website creates a consumer impression of federal endorsement.
STSI is incorporated in Montana while operating entirely from Ithaca, New York. Corporate filings list Ithaca addresses. AST's filing lists an Ithaca zip code under "MT." Montana incorporation avoids New York's more rigorous nonprofit regulatory framework.
If an organization represents itself as a 501(c)(3) while not appearing in the IRS database, questions arise under federal and state law — including whether donors can claim tax deductions, whether the NSF logo usage complies with federal guidelines, and whether the nonprofit representation constitutes a deceptive business practice.
| Tier | Criterion | Selected Members | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | "Architectural, field-shaping impact" | Darwin, Turing, Shannon, von Neumann, Wiener, Ashby, Bertalanffy, von Foerster, Bateson, Prigogine, Maturana, Varela, Derek Cabrera, Laura Cabrera | Self-placed by the registry's creator |
| Tier 2 | "Significantly advanced or extended" | Gerald Midgley, Peter Senge, Donella Meadows, John Sterman, Stephen Wolfram | Scholars who developed alternative methodologies |
| Tier 3 | "Promising, emerging, or popularizing" | Michael C. Jackson, Ranulph Glanville, Stuart Umpleby, Raúl Espejo, Werner Ulrich, Fritjof Capra | Scholars whose work most directly challenges DSRP's universality |
Rankings determined by Cabrera, using criteria developed by Cabrera, applied to a scale designed by Cabrera, published in a journal owned by Cabrera, and validated by Laura Cabrera. The methodology is rigorous. The methodology is always rigorous when you control every step of it.