State of Knowledge

The page is mainly a re-statement of material already published in The Hub and relevant Satellites or academic papers. It is included here to provide a quick review and clarity about where inquiry has reached because later Topics necessarily treat naming as if it is definite in order to focus on the main concern: what is going on between the Root Hierarchy and the Typology Complex?

A historical perspective is relevant, because early findings influence later findings.

The first THEE Typology to be developed was decision (PH'1) in the early 1980's. The work built on the pioneering efforts of a colleague, Jimmy Algie. I was simultaneously working on what was to become the Primary Hierarchy of Inquiry (PH2), and came across the work of C. West Churchman. He had identified 5 universal systems and I was soon able to add the missing two inquiring systems-PH'2. However, I only recently (2012) realized that my hierarchic ordering of PH2 and Churchman's hierarchic ordering of PH'2 were taxonomically incorrect.

By the mid-1980's, I realized that psychoanalytic theoretical disputes were similar to scientific disputes over proper research (Inquiry-RL2 domain) and managerial disputes over proper decision-making (Action-RL1 domain). This led to discovery of the identity development systems (PH'4) (now called mental stabilization methods). Shortly after, I commenced working systematically on purpose-PH6, and clarified ethical choice methods (PH'6), drawing heavily on knowledge of the Primary Hierarchy. These two Typologies were finalized by the early 1990's and both appear in Working with Values (1995): download Ch.6 and Ch.7 here.

In communication-PH5, the methods for using language-PH'5 were roughly intuited in the mid-1980's. However, they were only investigated and developed in meaningful detail after 2000, and are now posted her.

The final two Principal Typologies are not yet posted due to the level of uncertainty and other issues. I had the good fortune to stumble upon a framework of modeling systems (PH'3) while studying political ideologies in the late 1980's. However, continuing misunderstanding of the relevant Primary Hierarchy bogged down progress. Only very recently have I begun considering the Principal Typology required for Willingness-PH7, tentatively viewed as dealing with methods for enhancing capability. Preliminary findings in both these frameworks are used in this inquiry without further explanation.

An Extended Structure: The Typology Complex

It is now known that every THEE Typology is part of a complex of linked structures. In the case of a Principal Typology, it consists of

  • The Principal Typology: PH'•—with its TET pattern.
  • The Principal Spiral: PH'•C—based on the TET pattern.
  • The Spiral-derived Tree: PH'•CHK—based on two Cycles in the TET.

The Principal Typology (PH'•), or Typology-Proper, is a hierarchical set of Types, which correspond in practice to specific methods or systems for getting an optimum result in relation to use of Primary Hierarchy Levels in the service of the Root Level function. (As explained in the next Topic.)

These Types can be plotted on a TET, whose axes are an executing duality specifying the relevant features of psychosocial reality when using the Type. The 7 Types form two complementary sets lying along the two diagonals: the approach duality.
ClosedMore on the TET

The Principal Spiral (PH'•C), or Spiral of Growth, is a development process evident from the TET. The Types are viewed as Modes i.e. needs rather than methods (or paradigms). It is then possible to observe 7 distinct Stages and two Cycles as Modes progressively cumulate and additional contributions to success are enabled.

The Spiral-derived Tree (PH'•CHK) emerges from viewing the Modes as forming a THEE hierarchy with Stages as Levels. This hierarchic relation becomes significant if viewed as a Tree that maps influences in practice between essences of the Modes. The result is a snapshot-map of what determines the Primal Need at any point in time i.e. independent of the Stage of development.

The Principal Typology Complex will be examined in more detail in what follows.

Terminology

The quest for certainty, confidence, validity in human action has led thoughtful people over the ages to reflect on their own decision-making, inquiry, communication &c so as to determine what is needed for «the best» outcome.

The result was discovery of core principles and then whole systems for ensuring «the best way». These systems are referred to variously within the literature as: methods, systems, doctrines, schools, paradigms, principles, theories.

In the Satellite postings I have standardized on two terms: mentalities and approaches.

  • Mentality refers to the mindset around a system or method that often merges with personal identity because it is a result of socialization.
  • Approach refers to a theoretical formalization to aid teaching and socialization in use of a system or method.

In this investigation, I will use the term method to emphasize the notion that there is a proper procedure to be followed to get the «best » results.

  • Insofar as each method is a coherent consistent system, each has a coherence and power that is unmistakable.
  • Insofar as each method derives from a distinctive principle, it conflicts and may be incompatible or even antagonistic to other methods within the Typology.

Experts and Ordinary People

Experts are typically expert in a THEE-method as well as being expert in a particular activity or social arena. Teachers have to believe in what they teach, and their students have to became socialized. It is then only a small step to argue that any system that is held to give «the best» outcome is also viewed as «the right» way, and therefore obligatory.

However, for most people, arcane battles about the basics of human functioning and the best method are irrelevant, if not ridiculous. If there is no issue of commitment (for success, for preferment, for peer acceptance), then any of us are likely to use any and every method in an expedient or haphazard way, with a bias to those that feel congenial.

Each of the Principal Typologies seems to have dedicated adherents.
ClosedMore

Without being comprehensive, the picture is something like the following:

PH'1-Decision methods are a preoccupation of dedicated doers, like managers in most organizations.

PH'2-Research methods are a preoccupation of dedicated inquirers, like scientists in a particular discipline.

PH'3-Depiction methods seem to be a preoccupation, mainly unconscious, of those who battle for control of a social group by asserting what its reality is.

PH'4-Mental stabilization methods are a preoccupation of dedicated psychotherapists as each aligns with teachings of a particular school.

PH'5-Using language methods are a preoccupation of dedicated communicators, like politicians and authors—again largely unconsciously.

PH'6-Ethical choice methods are a preoccupation of dedicated philosophers, like those found in academia.

PH'7-Capability enhancement methods are a preoccupation of anyone dedicated to self-improvement and systematically assisting others in a general way.

Summary Matrix

Better viewing: Use browser zoom if needed.

Primary Hierarchy Social Concern Formal Names for
Typology, Spiral, Spiral Tree
 *Confidence in Formulations
PH'7:
Willingness		 Enabling selflessness when valuinglearning-L6. Typology: Capability enhancing methods
Spiral: Developing Effectiveness
Spiral Tree: Determinants of Competence		 Provisional
Early conjectures
Early conjectures
PH'6:
Purpose		 Enabling autonomy when adhering to a value system-L6. Typology: Ethical choice methods
Spiral: Maturation of Politics
Spiral Tree: Determinants of Governance		 High confidence
High confidence
Moderate confidence
PH'5:
Communic'n		 Enabling understanding when assigningmeaning-L6. Typology: Language use methods
Spiral: Establishing a Shared Reality
Spiral Tree: Determinants of Association		 High confidence
Provisional
Provisional
PH'4:
Experience		 Enabling well-being when integrating an identification-L6. Typology: Mental Stabilization methods
Spiral: Developing of A Sense of Self
Spiral Tree: Determinants of Individuality		 High confidence
Provisional
Provisional
PH'3:
Change		 Enabling acceptability when generating a representation-L6. Typology: Depiction methods
Spiral: Advancing a Discrimination
Spiral Tree: Determinants of Adjustment		 Moderate confidence
Provisional
Provisional
PH'2:
Inquiry		 Enabling certainty when justifyingjudgements-L6. Typology: Research methods
Spiral: Establishing a Conjecture
Spiral Tree: Determinants of Knowledge		 High confidence
Moderate confidence
Provisional
PH1:
Action		 Enabling performance when determining choices-L6. Typology: Decision methods
Spiral: Strengthening Management
Spiral Tree: Determinants of Achievement		 High confidence
High confidence
High confidence

*Confidence refers to whether the framework naming, basic formulations and hierarchical order are on the right track. It should not be taken to imply full validity or absence of errors.

PH1: Action

The initial THEE Typology to be developed dealt with decision (PH'1). While the Primary Hierarchy has not been intensively investigated, the Principal Typology Complex has been developed and formulations validated with a high degree of confidence.

PH2: Inquiry

While working on what was to become the Primary Hierarchy of Inquiry (PH2), I developed the inquiring systems using the findings of C. West Churchman. As part of the present inquiry, the name is changed to research methods (PH'2). While these are well established and well-understood, the Spiral and its Tree are less certain.

PH3: Change

Identifying change as a Root Level is very recent (2007) and the Primary Hierarchy was finalized provisionally as part of the 2012-13 architectural investigations. Further studies in 2024 led to correction of errors, and confidence has improved. The depiction systems (PH'3), previously called "modelling systems", are now provisionally identified with confidence in their ordering.

PH4: Experience

Study of intense theoretical conflicts within psychoanalysis over some years led me to identify the mental stabilization systems (PH'4), but not by that name. The systems were re-worked and posted in 2014. The Primary Hierarchy was identified as the same time (late 1980's), but not the Spiral complex. Subsequently in early 2015, the Spiral has been developed in a systematic way.

PH5: Communication

In communication-PH5, the methods for using language-PH'5 were roughly intuited in the 1980's. As part of preparing for the website, a variety of frameworks, including this Principal Typology Complex, received preliminary investigations. So there has been considerable structural corroboration.

PH6: Purpose

I systematically investigated purpose-PH6, and identified the ethical choice systems (PH'6) and many other frameworks following clarification of the Primary Hierarchy. For the website, I investigated and formulated the full Principal Typology Complex.

PH7: Willingness

Willingness-PH7 has not been developed to any depth. The Primary Hierarchy and Principal Typology have been undergoing provisional formulation and analysis in recent years. Conjectures have received additional scrutiny as part of the present inquiry.

Initially posted: 30-Nov-2013. Amended 7-Apr-2015. Last updated: 2-Jan-2023.