Dynamics of Consent & Dissent: PH'5Q4HK
The fuller title would be: . As proposed earlier, consent is the distinctive cohesive force for .
Consent from many or most participants is required to improve institutional functioning, even if the public cannot grasp what that entails and even if much consent is by default. The attitude of many may often show up via their dissent. Such opposition appears via the media, or in complaints or protests of various sorts.
Both consent and dissent apply to outputs at any level and to interactions between entities within the institution. This shows up most obviously in the way different work-level outputs affect each other in practice. It should be immediately evident that functioning at any level of an institution potentially affects functioning at nearby levels.
The taxonomic pattern that results from mapping these influences is a Tre.
For the nature of Trees and methods of analysis, see the Hub.
In pursuing this analysis, each level will consider the following:
Dynamic Duality
Trees reflect actual personal functioning in the current socio-physical reality. As such, they operate under the influence of a dynamic duality which means that functioning may be governed by:
- personal or individual forces, potentially biassed or self-interested, labeled P.
or
- societal, communal or contextual forces, potentially impersonal and impartial, labeled S.
or
- a balance of forces, due to a synthesis or fusion of poles i.e. any activity is simultaneously responding to both individual and social forces that cannot be disentangled: labeled B.
Application of a dynamic duality to a Level converts it into one or two Tree Centres. When there are two polar opposite Centres, the more dominant one in practice is, by convention, placed on the right side of the Tree.
Psychosocial Pressure
There are three tiers of pressure affecting the Tree.
The first tier and overarching psychosocial pressure for is well-being, which must apply to all Levels. This does not assist with clarifying the internal Tree structure. See rationale for this pressure assignment here.
The second tier is the psychosocial pressure emerging from the originating as explained earlier. (Pressure assignments are discussed in the Architecture Room.)
L's 1-4 derive from which is subject to an understanding pressure.
L's 5-7 derive from which is subject to an acceptability pressure.
The Tree analysis below will therefore be presented in two sections, Initially the lower section that is about supporting the institution through understanding; and then the upper section that is about questioning the institution on the basis that something is not acceptable.
The third tier emerges from the Tree structure in which each level is aligned with pressures in the levels in the Root Hierarchy. See more here. The influence of this pressure will be discussed Level by Level.
Channels
There is a standard pattern in that:
•all Centres influence Centres at the neighbouring level,
•L's 1 to 6 influence Centres that are 2 levels away;
•L7 influences the Centre that is 3 levels away.
It will be necessary to consider whether this pattern of Channels applies to this Tree. We must also be confident that other possible Channels cannot or should not be activated.
The Tree pattern will be explained in terms of its internal duality (i.e. equivalent to the Spiral Cycles):
- L1-L4: Centres and Channels that support the institution.
- L5-L7: Centres and Channels that question the institution.
Originally posted: 19-Nov-2022. Last updated: 28-Mar-2023