Revisiting Names for Structural Hierarchies

History

Naming frameworks has always been far more difficult than naming their constituting taxonomic entities. This is because of the lack of a conceptualization. It was necessary to investigate naming in a systematic way.

Fortunately, that investigation and the associated conceptualization has been successful. It led to a logic for naming that appears to work in practice by:

  • facilitating understanding in particular frameworks,
  • improving consistency across Domains, and
  • ensuring coherence of the taxonomic architecture as a whole.

Note: The framework names used in the posted Satellites were developed with an eye to the most appealing use of the framework under study. So, while the names used there always accord with formal names as developed within the present investigations, they are not necessarily identical.

Current Formal Names

As noted in the previous topic, structural hierarchies are best understood within their "Triplet". Current proposed names for the Domain's Fundamental sH-Triplets are shown below. Note that these are unique names, only determinable by careful observation and abstraction. Many can be viewed as provisional.

Domain Tree: 
Primal Vehicle 		sH: 
Primal Effect 		Tree: 
Primal Field
RL7: Willingness A Committed Involvement Contributing Expertise A Humane Assistance
RL6: Purpose A Worthwhile Project Realizing
Values		 A Community Evolution
RL5: Communication An Intentional Expression Creating
Discourse		 A Vibrant
Group
RL4: Experience An Authentic Perspective Manifesting Character A Motivated Presence
RL3: Change A Definitive
Stage		 Changing
Systems		 A Sustained Development
RL2: Inquiry A Rigorous Analysis Making
Discoveries		 A Scientific
Study
RL1: Action A Deliberate Activity Producing
Results		 A Credible
Course
RH: Endeavour A Personal Endeavour Being
Creative		 A Constructive Entanglement

See the section dealing with naming of domain controls.

Briefly: The Spiral name is the Primal Means. The modes at each Stage promote the psychosocial pressure and handle the social situation. The essence of each mode responds to the related pressure, and so the Tree constructed out of these 7 essences/pressures determines handling of the Primal Need (which is what relieves or realizes the pressure).

In a similar fashion, the structural hierarchy is made of up combinations of ways to respond to the principal psychosocial pressure, and is therefore appropriately named by reference to it. Finally, the final sH-Tree provides for control. The resultant set of names is shown below: again all are provisional.

Domain
Spiral		 Spiral Tree: 
Principal Control Vehicle 		Spiral-derived sH: 
Principal
Control Effect 		Spiral sH-Tree: 
Principal Control Field
RL7: Willingness
Means: Effectiveness 		 Determinants of Competence (?) Maintaining
Selflessness		 A Humane Assistance (??)
RL6: Purpose
Means: Politics 		Determinants of Governance Exercising
Autonomy		 Legitimation of Politics
RL5: Communic'n
Means: Shared Reality 		Determinants of Association Enabling Understanding Contestation of
Conceptions
RL4: Experience
Means: Sense of Self 		Determinants of Individuality Sustaining
Well-being		 Adaptation of a Sense of Self
RL3: Change
Means: Discrimination 		Determinants of Depiction Defending
Acceptability		 Categorization of Depictions
RL2: Inquiry
Means: Conjecture 		Determinants of Knowledge Increasing
Certainty		 Evaluation of Conjectures
RL1: Action
Means: Management 		Determinants of Achievement Improving
Performance		 Expectations of Management
RH: Will
Means: Coping 		Determinants of Thriving Ensuring
Survival		 Resilience of
Coping

Having clarified the conception and naming issues (without necessarily resolving them), the question of a «Root projection» can be addressed. Fortunately, as with the Principal Typology investigation, there was some initial guidance.

Initially posted: 30-Nov-2013; Last updated: 3-Jun-2015. Last reviewed 8-Jan-2023.