By: Alireza Hejazi

One of the most important questions that has occupied many futurists’ minds is that “How is theory different from other concepts in Futures Studies (FS)?” Theory can refer to validated theory, usually from positivist schools— something which FS has reacted against, along with prediction, given its narrow assumptions, in the micro. So we would have to make good distinctions.
 
This is one reason why Dr. Gary an expert futurist and professor of Strategic Foresight at the School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship (GLE), Regent University once described FS as “layered, Philosophy, Frameworks, Theory and Methods” in one of his impressive articles. In his point of view theory must be tested quantitatively, or grounded qualitatively in its mix.
 
Basing our debate on strategic thinking, and the individual, group and organizational theory; we may need a better theory of FS, at all these levels. It is the multi-level aspect that has confounded most researchers, in both strategy and foresight. Also, we need a clear approach of thinking. Foresight theory, to become theory, must move from conceptual level to operational, and then back to conceptual, once it is empirically tested. Empirically tested theory is not the only way to arrive at a theory base, but it is most trusted by disciplines, complemented by qualitative studies.
 
A sound theory of FS may not be all we need today; rather we need to work out new ways to review our past perspectives on FS. Perhaps it is needed to put our old glasses aside and look the matter from a new angle. We need a new approach leading us from theory to action. This is why I’ve suggested Futures Metacognition as a new approach in understanding how futures cognition works. It cannot be separated from trying to understand how a futurist applies consciously his knowledge in futures work and research. This requires a higher level of cognition—“metacognition”.

Futures Metacognition deals with philosophical, psychological, and neurological aspects of futures thinking. My recent article: “Futures Metacognition: A Progressive Understanding of Futures Thinking” which is accepted at the coming International Research Conference on Foresight and Futures, Istanbul, Turkey (August 24-26, 2011) deals with an individual's knowledge about his/her futures thinking processes, self-awareness, self-regulation and control and his/her beliefs about all of these matters constitute the main field of study. That is, Futures Metacognition has to do with the why, when and how an individual uses consciously what he/she knows or wants to know in thinking about the future and how he/she feels about it.

Conscious application of futures knowledge shapes within a conceptual framework composed of philosophical, psychological, and neurological components. A futurist must be able to differentiate three mentioned aspects of futures thinking from each other in the contexts of his/her work and research. Meanwhile, monitoring the metacognition process towards a goal that is an evolved understanding of the future along with knowing why, when and how to apply his/her futures knowledge leads a futurist through a progressive path of futures comprehension.

But further researches are needed to develop a reliable unified approach. As the futurists we may study diverse systems of thinking which can co-operate to produce a unified approach based on Futures Metacognition. We should also work on building conditions under which this unification shapes. Conscious experience of the futurists may be used in a synergic manner so that our desired unified approach may be formed against all intellectual and personal differences. It requires deep study and hard work and can be realized through constructive co-operation among the futurists.  

The advances that FS needs, at least in this regard, must come from more research, data gathering, and not just conceptualization.