Check Other Principal Typologies
Apply the «Obvious» Correspondence
The discovery of obvious RL correspondences for invites application to the 6 other . An identical correspondence cannot be accepted on faith: I must check to get positive confirmation and, while doing so, look for hints about its nature.
The results, listed below, have not been particularly helpful. It is not practicable to go into details and provide all the evidence for the comments. You can check the relevant publications or posts and conduct an independent investigation.
To PH'2-INQUIRY: Research Methods
(within Justify Judgements-L6)
Method Type |
THEE-Name |
Proposed Root Correspondence | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
L'7 | Contemplative | Experience-RL4 Well-being |
Possible: but other methods like analytic and formal seem to appeal to experience. Selflessness might seem more applicable. |
L'6 | Analytic | Willingness-RL7 Selflessness |
Not obvious: all methods would seem to require willingness. Understanding might seem more applicable. |
L'5 | Holistic | Change-RL3 Acceptability |
Possible in that it is often used in situations demanding change |
L'4 | Dialectic | Communication-RL5 Understanding |
Not obvious: most methods required communicating with oneself or others. Understanding seems a good fit. |
L'3 | Explanatory | Action-RL1 Performance |
Possible because most methods, except empirical, are not about doing. |
L'2 | Formal | Inquiry-RL2 Certainty |
Not obvious: all formal (axiomatic, mathematical) investigation is for inquiry. Certainty seems a good fit. |
L'1 | Empirical | Purpose-RL6 Autonomy |
Not obvious: all inquiries are purposive. |
To PH'3-CHANGE: Depiction Methods
(within Generate Representations-L6)
Method Type |
THEE-Name |
Proposed Root Correspondence | |
---|---|---|---|
L'7 | Unitary | Experience-RL4 Well-being |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'6 | Structural | Willingness-RL7 Selflessness |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'5 | Unified | Change-RL3 Acceptability |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'4 | Dualistic | Communication-RL5 Understanding |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'3 | Causal | Action-RL1 Performance |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'2 | Atomistic | Inquiry-RL2 Certainty |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'1 | Dynamic | Purpose-RL6 Autonomy |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
To PH'4-EXPERIENCE: Stabilization Methods
(within Integrate Identifications-L6)
Method Type |
THEE-Name |
Proposed Root Correspondence | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
L'7 | Transpersonal existence | Experience-RL4 Well-being |
Possible: but emotional and relational would also seem to fit. |
L'6 | Social existence |
Willingness-RL7 Selflessness |
Possibly the best correspondence: but could also be to | .
L'5 | Relational existence | Change-RL3 Acceptability |
Not obvious. Change is a significant factor in other methods. |
L'4 | Individual existence | Communication-RL5 Understanding |
Not obvious. |
L'3 | Emotional existence | Action-RL1 Performance |
Not obvious. |
L'2 | Vital existence |
Inquiry-RL2 Certainty |
Not obvious. |
L'1 | Sensory existence | Purpose-RL6 Autonomy |
Not obvious. |
To PH'5-COMMUNICATION: Language Use Methods
(within Assign Meanings-L6)
Method Type |
THEE-Name |
Proposed Root Correspondence | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
L'7 | Mythic | Experience-RL4 Well-being |
Possible: but might also apply strongly for associative or gestalt. |
L'6 | Logical | Willingness-RL7 Selflessness |
Not obvious. |
L'5 | Gestalt | Change-RL3 Acceptability |
Not obvious |
L'4 | Universal | Communication-RL5 Understanding |
Not obvious: could be argued to be an illusion of communication. |
L'3 | Conceptual | Action-RL1 Performance |
Not obvious. |
L'2 | Associative | Inquiry-RL2 Certainty |
Not at all obvious. |
L'1 | Concrete | Purpose-RL6 Autonomy |
Obvious, because no-one would ever seek use this method without a purpose. |
To PH'6-Purpose: Ethical Choice Methods
(within Adhere to a Value System-L6)
Method Type |
THEE-Name |
Proposed Root Correspondence | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
L'7 | Transcendentalist | Experience-RL4 Well-being |
Obvious because it is about looking within for guidance. |
L'6 | Legitimist | Willingness-RL7 Selflessness |
Possible: but others might also fit. |
L'5 | Communalist | Change-RL3 Acceptability |
Not obvious. |
L'4 | Individualist | Communication-RL5 Understanding |
Not at all obvious. |
L'3 | Pluralist | Action-RL1 Performance |
Possible in that action for benefit is implicit: but this fits the other teleological methods. |
L'2 | Conventionalist | Inquiry-RL2 Certainty |
Not obvious. |
L'1 | Rationalist | Purpose-RL6 Autonomy |
Possible but | applies to the other three teleological methods by definition.
To PH'7-WILLINGNESS: Capability Enhancement Methods
(within Value Learning-L6)
Method Type |
THEE-Name |
Proposed Root Correspondence |
Comments |
---|---|---|---|
L'7 | Identification | Experience-RL4 Well-being |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'6 | Education | Willingness-RL7 Selflessness |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'5 | Experimentation | Change-RL3 Acceptability |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'4 | Association | Communication-RL5 Understanding |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'3 | Preoccupation | Action-RL1 Performance |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'2 | Elucidation | Inquiry-RL2 Certainty |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
L'1 | Iteration | Purpose-RL6 Autonomy |
Too provisional to make a comment. |
Conclusion
Using simple observation, the
correspondence that seemed so obvious for does not generalize.At this point, I do not regard the correspondence as wrong, but I conclude that simple observation is insufficient. There needs to be a deeper understanding of the process.
The notion of projection suggests that re-ordered root-related hierarchy in Tree form.
correspondences should be taken as a set. This would produce an emergent hierarchy: in this case, a
However, emergent Root-related order.
are characterized by a lack of interaction and influence amongst their constituent . Each stands alone, self-sufficient, superior, and often incompatible or antagonistic to others. It is therefore extremely unlikely that the above "obvious" order of Root-Level projections is theWithout abandoning the identified order, a focus on the
may be more productive. It contrasts with the in that its have to cumulate and are expected to be compatible with each other.Observation has already revealed that any generates a Tree whose levels follow the order of . Its Centres are essences of the and naturally interact and influence each other. So this may well be the emergent framework referred to here.
So the next step in this investigation is an analysis of the
.- Continue by re-ordering the obvious correspondence in relation to the order of within a .
Initially posted: 30-Nov-2013. Last amended 2-Jan-2023.