Validity of g- Qualities in Creativity
Background
Each internal level in the 28 Groups of a Structural Hierarchy has the formula g# and appears to have its own distinctive quality. The result is that there are 7 distinct qualities corresponding to g1 to g7. These «g-qualities» need to be determined as part of any inquiry involving this form.
The g-qualities are significant in two ways:
- practically: they help in designing choices or activities or analysing errors
- theoretically: they provide validity via internal structural corroboration
Nothing in a Structural Hierarchy is easy to identify and formulate and this applies to the 7 g-qualities also. In the initial Structural Hierarchies, the Framework was covering areas intensively studied over many years. So, in retrospect, the formulations seemed relatively straightforward—even if they may yet be proved wrong or insufficient.
Discovery of Two THEE-Inquiry Principles
Over time and following discoveries, two «THEE-inquiry principles» were identified to assist investigation of the g-qualities. Here they are in their order of discovery.
Principle of «Monad Correspondence»
The first discovery, made a long time ago in relation to levels of work-responsibility, was that the g-quality was related in some way to the Level in the originating hierarchy and visible in the G1-Monads. This has proved itself as a useful principle.
Of course, this principle is rarely simple to apply. The Monads in most cases, including here, cover a vast area; and knowledge is limited, fragmentary and uncertain. However, the principle can still guide the imagination (which can access otherwise unknown parts of THEE), and this may even feed back to reveal something new.
See this principle applied to creativity in work-RsH
by clicking here:
- g1-quality, in all Groups, fits with Taking Action-RG11
- g2-quality, in all Groups, fits with Focusing Inquiry-RG12
- g3-quality, in all Groups, fits with Targeting Change-RG13
- g4-quality, in all Groups, fits with Intensifying Experience-RG14
- g5-quality, in all Groups, fits with Intensifying Communication-RG15
- g6-quality, in all Groups, fits with Being Ever Purposeful-RG16
- g7-quality, in all Groups, fits with Being Fully Willing-RG17
Principle of «Grouping Correspondence»
As reported, following posting of the Politics frameworks, it has become evident that each Grouping in a Structural Hierarchy (or at least those derived from a Spiral) has a particular affinity for a particular Root Level &/or its Primary Hierarchy &/or possibly its Primary Structural Hierarchy.
The pattern was initially identified in two Spiral-based Structural Hierarchies, political participation and expectations and obligations of employment, as shown here:
More.
Additional checks on Frameworks not yet posted seem to confirm this correspondence for all Structural Hierarchies. Furthermore, other inquiries suggest that this correspondence is the underpinning THEE framework for what is currently termed «Appreciative Inquiry
». In short, I believe there is something solid in this correspondence: albeit poorly understood.
This ordering is now emerging as an investigative principle during examination and formulation of new Structural Hierarchies. In practice, its main impact appears to be in determining the nature of the Groupings, whose Groups possess g-qualities in accord with their internal Levels. The new Grouping is fundamental for the Framework and distinct from lower Groupings due to the additional internal Level and its g-quality. The Grouping, itself, appears to have the g-quality of the highest internal Level.
See this principle applied to the present Framework by clicking here:
- G1-identity links with Purpose-RL6/PH6/sPH6 & has a g1-quality.
- G2-identity links with Communication-RL5/PH5/sPH5 & has a g2-quality.
- G3-identity links with Action-RL1/PH1/sPH1 & has a g3-quality.
- G4-identity links with Inquiry-RL2/PH2/sPH2 & has a g4-quality.
- G5-identity links with Change-RL3/PH3/sPH3 & has a g5-quality.
- G6-identity links with Experience-RL4/PH4/sPH4 & has a g6-quality.
- G7-identity links with Willingness-RL7/PH7/sPH7 & has a g7-quality.
This principle is somewhat easier to apply to g-qualities, so long as its use has not inappropriately distorted identification of the Grouping and its Groups.
Qualities in Creativity-RsH
Creativity posed particular issues due to its fundamental nature at the Root of THEE. So many possibilities emerged that it dragged out the investigation as first one then another was tested to destruction, often by being applied and leading me up the garden path. In this webpage, each of the qualities selected will be briefly reviewed and the basic thinking indicated with reference to the two THEE-Inquiry Principles above.
Suggest further alternatives for any of the levels in the Comments section.
g7 = wholehearted
A suitable challenge-RG7 assumes that you give yourself heart and soul to finding a creative resolution. This process produces positivity RG71. So the extra Level, being fully willing, needs to be wholehearted, for courage to be evoked.
In this case, both the Grouping Principle and the Monad Principle reveal Willingness PH7/RHL7 as the key. This then repeats the essence of the extra Level which is being fully willing-RL7.
Alternatives
However, perhaps other terms might be preferred e.g. authentically to emphasize the inner nature, or unwaveringly to emphasize the continuing nature. In this case, and unlike elsewhere, there is no further internal testing, because RsHG717 is the only internal Level with this g-quality: see diagram.
g6 = deliberate
Having chosen the challenge wholeheartedly, the task of rising to it creatively depends on allowing immersion-RG6 in it. The challenge has numerous difficult aspects, each of which may require a creative breakthrough-RG6. So one or more must be selected at any time and fully engaged with. Immersion can be frightening, and time and energy are the creator's most precious resources, so choices here must be imagined and then a preoccupation or an experiment must be deliberately identified and attempted.
Grouping Correspondence: Experience-PH4
Using the term deliberately seems to include the experience generated in maintaining immersion.
Monad Correspondence: Purpose-RHL6
The deliberate qualifier seems highly congruent with the nature of purpose-RHL6 in THEE. In the case of Experimentation-RG61, the highest internal Level is purpose-RG611, and this must deliberately control all trials. In the case of Preoccupation-RG62, providing willingness deliberately captures your need to focus on things that may feel alien, be disliked, or simply demand effort.
Alternatives
As well as qualifying the top components of the two Hexads, the qualifier must suit the 6th internal Level of the Heptad (be purposeful).
I wondered about other terms: like calculated and considered, but these seem to draw on inquiry-PH2 rather than experience-PH4, and are not purpose-like. Also: imaginatively, but that seemed too heavily weighted to experience and seems wrong in relation to being purposeful in the Heptad.
g5 = adaptive
Mustering perseverance-G5 in the face of blocks, failures, difficulties and set-backs of all sorts must be realistic. Persevering mindlessly is neither wise nor creative. Your regimens for vantage-RG5 require you to look at what is going on, and what is possible for you and relevant to the challenge. Then you must focus energy there. I used adaptively to capture this orientation to effort.
Motivation requires adapting of your communications. Justification requires adapting of your purposes. Determination requires adapting your willingness.
Grouping Correspondence: Change-PH3
Using the term adaptively directly relates to change because perseverance requires changing your thinking or your focus as the situation evolves so you are still in the game.
Monad Correspondence: Communication-RHL5
The adaptive qualifier also is highly congruent with the nature of Communication- RL1 in THEE.
Alternatives
As well as qualifying the topmost components of the three Pentads, the qualifier must also suit the 5th internal Level of the Heptad (intensify communication), and of the Hexads (intensify communication & be purposeful).
However, perhaps others terms might be preferred,
g4 = reflective
Channeling commitment-RG4 to activate and amplify capability-RG4 is not something that is implicit or automatic. You are exposed to risk of course, but that was always the case. So being open, exposed and vulnerable becomes part of the creativity process here. For this to occur safely, there is a requirement that channeling commitment occur reflectively.
Grouping Correspondence: Inquiry-PH2
Reflection is a form of inquiry that is directed internally.
Monad Correspondence: Experience-RHL4
The reflectively qualifier also relates to Experience in that it is an experience for becoming aware of experiences.
Alternatives
As well as qualifying the topmost components of the four Tetrads, the qualifier must also suit the 4th internal Level of the Heptad (intensify experiencing), the Hexads (intensify experiencing & intensify communicating), and the Pentads (intensify experiencing, intensify communicating, and be purposeful).
I initially formulated this quality as consciously, which has associations with both inquiry and experience. But that quality seemed possibly too weak. I then consider terms like overtly or even blatantly or nakedly but these severed the link with inquiry. I then considered self-consciously and that lead to the final choice: reflectively.
g3 = shrewd
Enthusiasm-RG3 must be used to foster progress of the creative resolution, whatever it may be. It can provide a charge that gets you going and generates support-RG3 from others too. But everyone has their own personality and agenda—even you do. So you have to work on yourself and others in a way that is viable and fits with personal experiences, social situations and ongoing activities. That requires a minimum of penetrating insight and so enthusiasm must be focused shrewdly
Grouping Correspondence: Action-PH1
Using the term shrewdly fits with Action insofar as Decisions commit and consume resources of all sorts. Action potentially creates social states that cannot be easily untangled. This must be anticipated, in principle if not in detail, and handled. Shrewdness seems a necessity.
Monad Correspondence: Change-RHL3
The shrewd qualifier also is highly congruent with change- RL3 because change forces a focus on reality. The Framework provides for a deeper implicit order-PH3L6 that provides the map that we use as we try to produce change.
Alternatives
As well as qualifying the topmost components of the four Triads, the qualifier must also suit the 3rd internal Level of the Heptad (target change), the Hexads (target change & intensify experiencing), the Pentads (target change, intensify experiencing, intensify communicating) and the Tetrads ( (target change, intensify experiencing, intensify communicating & be purposeful.
Initially I chose adaptively, but although this related to change, I was not comfortable with the link to action (cf. adaptive for g5). For a time, I played with realistically, but this was too similar to sensibly-g2. Then I tried prudently which does relate well to action-PH1 and change-RHL3, but felt it lacks the punch required by creativity. So then I tried wisely, but this resonated with a virtue that we know is rather rare. I moved from that notion to shrewdly which should be possible for anyone.
g2 = sensible
Conviction-RG2 in regard to possibilities, however desirable, is hazardous because it so easily leads to enthusiasm-RG3 and commitment-RG4, with all that those states entail in terms of precious time and energy. So you must take into account what is known and recognize unknowns, and you must use sound judgement about how things are, what might work and what is simply not feasible. To develop credibility, you must do all this in a way that is sensible.
Grouping Correspondence: Communication-PH5
Formulating the quality required as sensible relates to how you express confidence-RG2. So there is a link here to communication: you must talk sense and show good sense as you explore, understand and interact.
Monad Correspondence: Inquiry-RHL2
The sensible qualifier is congruent with the nature of Inquiry- RL2.
Alternatives
As well as qualifying the topmost components of the five Dyads, the qualifier must also suit the 2nd internal Level of the Heptad (focus inquiry), the Hexads (focus inquiry & target change), the Pentads (focus inquiry, target change, & intensify experiencing) the Tetrads ( focus inquiry, target change, intensify experiencing, & intensify communicating and the Triads focus inquiry, target change, intensify experiencing, intensify communicating & be purposeful).
Other terms considered included realistic, but this seemed too general; and also see g3 alternatives above.
g1 = meaningful
refers to: ensuring significant movement in the status quo relevant to the challenge. Every action should be meaningful, and every one of the 28 Groups should be handled meaningfully.
Grouping Correspondence: Purpose-PH6
Using the term meaningfully in relation to the challenge directly expresses the sense of intention and agreed purpose. So the term fits well. It also seems highly beneficial for creativity that every one of the 28 Groups in the framework should have a meaningful quality for its g1 base component. That certainly helps make it possible to be positively and always purposeful-G716
Monad Correspondence: Action-RHL1
The meaningful qualifier also is highly congruent with the nature of action. Action- RL1 in THEE) is distinguished from «behaviour» in being thought about and actively chosen rather than being automatic, reflex, or habitual. For creativity, it is particularly important that actions mean something.
Alternatives
This qualifier must suit the lowest Level of every single component (Group) in the Framework.
I explored some synonyms for naturally, other terms like beneficially or gainfully which would relate to Purpose-PH6. In this case and unlike elsewhere, there is no further testing, because RsHG717 is the only internal Level with this g-quality.
Originally posted: 17-Feb-2012
