Depiction v Reality

The Map is not the Territory

Alfred Korzybski's famous aphorism in his now obsolete discipline of general semantics attempts to keep us aware that our representations of reality are not the reality itself, that abstractions are not reality, that theory is not reality, that mental models are not what is actually there. Indeed any depiction is a part of the reality being represented: a fully detailed map would show the map as a tiny detail on that map and that tiny detail would also show the map...and so on ad infinitum.

Relevant Taxonomic Discovery

The assumption throughout this website adheres to the scientific convention that it is not possible to know reality, even if we often think or act as if we do.

This almost unshakeable sense that we can and do grasp reality is a regular expression of our human functioning. That means it cannot be just dismissed as an illusion. In the spirit of this Taxonomy, this phenomenon needs to be validated and explained.

Studies completed in 2013 revealed that THEE provides a useful practical response to the question of "what is reality?". The findings, explained in detail in the Architecture Room, propose that each of the lower 5 Root domains has its own specific approach to reality with accounts having a distinctive associated truth quality. We embrace them all.

The discovery is summarized in the table below.

L	Primary Domain	Psychosocial Pressure	Primal Need via Primal Means	Reality Form	Dominant Attitude	Truth Quality	Example Output
RL5	Communication	Understanding	Association via a shared reality	Group	Conformist	Given	Journalistic
RL4	Experience	Well-being	Individuality via a sense of self	Subjective	Private	Idiosyncratic	Confessional
RL3	Change	Acceptability	Fitness via depiction	Constructed	Self-interested	Perspectivist	Narrative
RL2	Inquiry	Certainty	Knowledge via conjectures	Unknowable	Skeptical	Provisional	Scientific
RL1	Action	Performance	Achievement via management	Practical	Pragmatic	Inevitable	Actual Result

What about the Purpose-RL6 and Willingness-RL7 Domains?

These top two domains were found to be geared to selecting the most suitable form of reality and truth in accord with the outcome desired. In the Purpose domain, the Domain choice is political and serves relevant interests. In the Willingness domain, the Domain choice is selfless and aims to meet impersonal requirements.

In the Change Domain, this schema proposes that reality is constructed and truth is a function of the perspective that is taken. The present investigation can now add details to these bare bones by indicating the paradigms used to construct reality.

It seems that each quadrant in the Depiction TET addresses one of the Domain approaches to truth and reality, with the fifth Domain, Change, possibly represented by the TET-as-a-whole. This result is shown in the lowest diagram on the right. To reach that layout, we must focus more on the benefit provided by each depiction paradigm. This will also enable an appreciation of what the quadrant paradigms are used for.

Benefits affect Application

No paradigm would be preferentially used if it did not provide some unique benefit. We will consider the paradigms and their benefits via the quadrants, looking for affinities and checking for a relationship to the THEE forms of reality tabled above.

LR Quadrant: Causal

Benefit: The Causal paradigm forces attention on causal links between selected components. These links are sometimes extended to chains of causation or handled statistically where many factors are relevant. The result is to enable predictions that reduce the uncertainty and fears associated with change initiatives. The use of reason and evidence helps build consensus.

The proposed benefit is prediction.

Effect: The application of the Causal paradigm results in the generation of knowledge, which happens to be the primal need of the Inquiry Domain-RL2. Here, despite being provoked by a wish for certainty, reality is viewed as difficult to know if not inherently unknowable, and any conclusions are therefore provisional.

The implication is that this paradigm will be used for analyses and wide consensus.

UL Quadrant: Dualistic & Unitary

Benefit: The Unitary paradigm provides for a simplification of the situation with the goal of total control and domination. Individualization is rejected and conformity demanded. Change is also rejected, but if unavoidable, then the environment is targeted. The outcome and justification appears to be peace and stability.

The proposed benefit is stability.

Benefit: The Dualistic paradigm has just two opposing components, which are usually easy to determine. Dichotomizing to create an opposing pair is almost reflex when faced with the need to depict complex situations. This dualism is reductionist, but the result is very easy to communicate and grasp.

The proposed benefit is simplicity.

Effect: Both UL paradigms minimize differentiation and shape personal identity. Stability and simplicity both support conformity to a shared reality where truth is a given. This shared reality, which happens to be the basis (primal means) for people to associate in groups of all sorts, is found within the Communication Domain-RL5. Depictions here support or emerge with informal communities, especially if large.

The implication is that these paradigms will be used in politics and social life.

LL Quadrant: Structural & Atomistic

Benefit: The Structural paradigm provides for a fixed ordering of components with defined relationships which ensure it is recognizable. This organisation determines the functioning of the entity, which in the case of people as components is often called an "organization". The purpose is to ensure it functions within its environment and is not disadvantaged in relation to other entities with whom it coexists or competes. That means it requires its own distinctive niche.

The proposed benefit is identity.

Benefit: The Atomistic paradigm provides for a compound entity amidst other similar entities where boundaries are respected and choices are as autonomous as possible.

The proposed benefit is independence or freedom (for persons)

Effect: Both LL paradigms recognize the uniqueness of the entity which must be sustained and developed. This individualization is the primal need in the Experience Domain-RL4. Entities here perceive reality in a subjective and potentially idiosyncratic way, and demand the maximum freedom. As part of sustaining their identity or sense of self, they seek privacy or confidentiality and autonomy.

The implication is that these paradigms are used to ensure order and individuality.

UR Quadrant: Dynamic & Unified

Benefit: The Dynamic paradigm provides for a system of dynamically interacting components. Identification of evolutionary tendencies means it is relatively straightforward to foster growth in a particular direction, or to get cooperation for a worthwhile outcome

The proposed benefit is development.

Benefit: The Unified paradigm provides for a complete view of systems of dynamic systems including the evolving environment. As all possible factors that can affect an outcome are explicitly included, such a representation has great power and utility.

The proposed benefit is mastery.

Effect: Both UR paradigms handle and generate complexity and take advantage of evolutionary forces. In the world of action, there is always feedback and the need for cooperation. The real world is inherently complex whether or not we choose to acknowledge this. The more relevant complexity that can be genuinely addressed the better for interventions. So, despite its complexity, intelligent systems thinking is often required to get practical results. Those tangible results are an unarguable truth that reveals and confirms the effectiveness of the thinking. So these paradigms provide a direct link to achievement, which is the primal need of the Action Domain-RL1.

The implication is that these paradigms are used in projects and ecosystem interventions to ensure effective achievement.

Conclusion

The findings in the 4 quadrants are pulled together in the diagrams at right.

The benefits of the depiction paradigms in each quadrant appear to create different worlds. Those worlds align with 4 of the Primary Domains in THEE. Starting with the UR quadrant and moving clockwise, they are in order: Action-RL1, Inquiry-RL2, Experience-RL4 and Communication-RL5. Each world-domain has its own form of reality and truth—as explained at the start of this topic.

As a result, when any paradigm is applied and accepted, it appears to be a reasonable, even accurate and perceptive, account of how reality has to be perceived regardless of any actual issues or criticisms in principle (i.e. that come from assuming a different paradigm).

The 5th Primary Domain, Change-RL5, asserts that reality is constructed in a self-interested way and its truth quality is perspectivist.

So:

• when achievement or results is what counts, you will view the world with a dynamic or unified lens and appeal to practical reality which is where we all must live.
• When social life is what has to be managed, you will view the world with a dualistic or unitary lens and appeal to group reality which can apply enormous coercive power on mind and body.
• When individuality, identity or order matters, you will view the world with an atomistic or structural lens, and appeal to subjective reality, which provides meaning and a sense of freedom.
• When consensus on predictions are called for, you will view the world with a causal lens, and appeal to rational analyses of unknowable reality, which offers an illusory sense of certainty.

---

Now:

• Return to the Review.

Originally posted: 30-Jun-2024. Amended: 18-Jul-2024.