Shaping Evolution in Practice

Each Grouping must now be considered as if it is a Level. The impact of the dynamic duality generated by real world activity can then be analysed, and the Centre(s) that result must be appropriately named and, where the level is bipolar, one Centre must be assigned due dominance.

Questioning Again

G1: Embrace Activism

Activist methods that involve destruction of property or the mindless disruption of everyday life are no more than attention getting efforts and can be categorized as irresponsible. By contrast, responsible activism is the foundation of any significant change in an institution and needs to be welcomed.

Dynamic Duality:   Politically mature societies can tolerate protests and allow individuals to express views strongly when that is in the public interest. So while activism is an activity and mindset of individuals, it is also a property of society.

So, in the Tree, this level becomes a single balanced Centre: L1B.

Without individual activism that is accepted and recognized as such in the society, nothing changes. Vested interests take advantage of public apathy and feelings of powerlessness.

We will label G1B: Responsible Activism

G2: Seek Receptivity

The lone activist or activist group achieves nothing without involvement of a wider public. Receptivity of the public to activist concerns is therefore essential if anything is to change. This requires activists to generate pressure in a rather overt way e.g. via advocacy (G21), proposals (G22), explanations (G23), illustrations (G24), questions (G25)and surprises (G26).

Dynamic Duality: Again, public attention and comprehension is simultaneously personal attention and comprehension. Similarly pressure directed to the public is the same pressure that is directed at particular individuals.

So, in the Tree, this level becomes a single balanced Centre: L2B.

We will label L2B: Pressured Receptivity

G3: Develop Stances

Stances are developed organized views on particular institutional issues and constructed by existing or emergent groups and factions within society.

Dynamic Duality:  Consolidating a stance in relation to an institution is commonly performed by an interest group e.g. a political party, a campaigning organisation, a membership body &c. But it is also something that can be done by an individual, either a thoughtful person or a dissenter in one of those groups.

This means that this level in the Tree will generate two polarized but connected Centres: L3P and L3S.

We will label L3P: Personal Stances
and label L3S: Authorized Stances

Any stance taken by a social body will suffer from the likelihood, real or apparent, of bias towards the interests of that body. Individuals will also be biassed by their self-interest and background. While any individual may promote or be expected to promote an authorized stance, if they hold a different personal stance, it is likely that this would take precedence.

So the personal Centre is dominant and placed on the right side of the Tree.

G4: Offer Scenarios

Consent has played a major role in the various frameworks intrinsic to societal institutions. Earlier it provided cohesion. Here, it shows up as scenarios for the institution that members of society are willing to accept as describing improvement.

Dynamic Duality: Scenarios that are popular and win consent are social phenomena, but those scenarios and the associated consent is also the property of individuals.

So, in the Tree, this level becomes a single balanced Centre: L4B.

We will label L4B: Consent Scenarios

Energizing Engagement

G5: Commence Debates

When institutional change is starting to happen or an issue is pressing for resolution, the crucial task is to create a debate about it that is visible and unmistakable in society. Most attention is focused on politicians and governments, but the media and citizens may also stimulate debate. The more unconventional the issue, the more likely it depends on individuals, the more unpalatable a conventional issue, the more likely it depends on the media.

Dynamic Duality: While debate may occur in public fora like a Sunday Newspaper or the Houses of Parliament (or its equivalent) and even be televised from there, debate can also take place in the local pub or around the dining table at a dinner party.

On this basis, there will be two polarized but connected Centres in the Tree: L5S and L5P.

We will label L5P: Informal Debate
and label L5S: Public Debate

These two forms of debate influence each other, but the social Centre will be dominant (and placed on the right) because such debate is far more likely to influence informal debate than the reverse.

G6: Expect Progress

The expectation of progress ideally emerges from the debate and associated momentum within society. It appears as the spreading of new awarenesses and the corresponding re-orientation of attitudes, sentiments, priorities and choices.

Dynamic Duality: On the one hand, a person may become re-oriented without that having any effect on their enterprises, and on the other hand enterprises may alter their priorities without individuals working within them desiring or agreeing to such a change.

This means that there will be two polarized but connected Centres in the Tree: L6S and L6P.

We will label L6S: Piecemeal Progress
and label L6P: Individual Re-orientation

Piecemeal progress-L6S will more easily bring pressure to bear on personal orientations-L6P than the reverse, even if how individuals think does have some effect on actual progress. So the social Centre is dominant and placed on the right side of the Tree.

G7: Make Recommendations

Societal principles emerging from values and beliefs govern every institution, providing the rationale, strength and ability to serve the public in a way that is deemed correct and appropriate. Recommendations created using these principles in a properly structured way, as in an official public inquiry, are powerful whether or not they end up being implemented.

Dynamic Duality: Such recommendations are the property of society, while simultaneously being a property of members of that society. Members may not always share all principles, but in so far as they engage with the institution, the only principles that will be relevant are those that are widely shared.

So, in the Tree, there will be a single balanced Centre: L7B.

We will label L7B: Principled Recommendations

Channels

By inspection and reflection: 

From L1: Activism will influence L2-Receptivity and L3-Stances and vice versa, but not directly affect any higher Centres.

From L2: Receptivity will influence L3-Stances and L4-Scenarios and vice versa, but not directly affect any higher Centres.

From L3: Stances will influence L4-Scenarios, and L5-Debates and vice versa, but not directly affect any higher Centres.

From L4: Scenarios will influence L5-Debates, L6-Progressand L7-Recommendations and vice versa. L4-Scenarios therefore has the most influence, affecting and being affected directly by every Centre except L1-Activism.

From L5: L5S-Public Debates will directly influence L6S-Piecemeal Progress and vice versa, but only affect L6P-Individual Reorientation indirectly. L5P-Informal Debates will directly influence L6P-Individual Reorientation and vice versa, but only affect L6S-Piecemeal Progress indirectly. Neither L5 Centre will directly influence L7-Recommendations.

From L6: Progress will influence L7-Recommendations and vice versa.

Click on the thumbnail at right to see the picture that emerges from the analysis of the dynamic duality and assuming standard channels as just explained.

Continue to:

Originally posted: 18-Mar-2024