Naming a Domain's Controls

Forms of Control

Control is a complex aspect of the Taxonomy. Far more entities are devoted to Domain Controls than to the remainder of the Fundamentals.

Domains are subject to two main forms of control:

Intrinsic (i.e. Domain-based)
&
Extrinsic (i.e. applicable to all Domains and deemed obligatory/ethical).

The Intrinsic Controls can be divided into two structural types:

Principal (i.e. Typology-based)
&
Subsidiary (i.e. dependent on a Q-expansion of the Typology).

However, the details that follow reveal that the situation is not quite so simple.

1. Principal Controls

The principal controls of a Domain are to be found in the complex that is derived from the Principal Typology (or Root Typology).

These intrinsic controls are the focus of this Section.

2. Subsidiary Controls

In the Primary Domains, subsidiary controls emerge by a Q-expansion from the Principal Typology: the naming of these frameworks is complicated and requires its own Section.

It is currently conjectured that Q-structures are the way that one Domain meets (i.e. controls) primal needs intrinsic to the other Domains (including itself). Perhaps they should be considered extrinsic.

In the Root Domain, the intrinsic control over Will, the Primal Quest Typology(RH'), does not appear to have the usual subsidiary controls. At least, no Q-expansion has been identified to date.

However, the Will Vehicle-RH is subject to a Q-expansion in which the Principal Typology Complexes of the Primary Hierarchies operate as subsidiary controls. This Q-expansion clarifies the involvement of the next higher Domain within the principal controls of a Domain. The system is cyclic so the Action-RL1 Domain is involved in the control of the Willingness-RL7 Domain.

3. Extrinsic/Ethical Controls

Ethical controls over a Domain are extrinsic to the Domain. Being part of personal functioning, they cannot lie outside the Taxonomy. They were discovered in Tertiary Hierarchy complexes of the Will (Root)-RH and Purpose-RL6 Domains. (So they are not truly extrinsic as regards those two Domains.)

The presence of two forms of ethical control has been noted in the exploration of Better Self, where their nature is discussed; and in Working with Values.

See a revised naming of these complexes based on more recent analyses, but without considering psychosocial pressures (as at July-2016).

Note on other Tertiary Hierarchies

Tertiary Hierarchies in other Domains are distinctive theoretical positions claimed by proponents as properly governing use of the principal controls. In the Purpose-RL6 Domain, a Quaternary Hierarchy appears to have a similar function. Little is currently known of these hierarchies.

Principal Typology Complex

The logic of naming follows from the recent conceptualization of the taxonomic structure associated with investigation of the Root Projections.

The Principal Typology Complex includes:

• the Principal Typology — source of the complex
• the Spiral
• the Spiral-derived Tree: an originating tree
• the Spiral-derived Structural Hierarchy
• the Spiral-derived Structural Hierarchy Tree: a final tree.

as shown in the example from the Action-RL1/PH1 Domain below.

■ The Principal Typology consists of discrete incompatible methods, which are called Optimizers, because they aim, or at least are claimed by adherents, to produce the best possible way to realize the Primal Need of that Domain, especially in regard to handling its fundamental entities.
More

It seems that each Type in a Typology has an underlying simple principle and that this principle is then elaborated as a coherent paradigm or doctrine of considerable power. The paradigm can only be countered by rejecting the principle as inappropriate to the situation. Adherents, however, may refuse to accept that rejection.

Typology names have often been difficult to finalize. Type principles are not named other than by their statement. Names for Type paradigms have been commonly sourced via searches of the relevant academic and professional literatures.

■ The Spiral is a trajectory of Stages based on Modes derived from the Types as previously described. Since that study of the Root projections, it has become apparent that the Mode values are primarily about promoting the Domain's psychosocial pressure. As a result, the Spiral reveals the Primal Means by which the Primal Need is met.

The Spiral is conventionally named to include the increasing sophistication of the Means e.g. the Domain's Means is prefixed by terms like "establishing", "strengthening", "developing".

■ The Spiral-derived Tree is constructed out of the essences of the Modes i.e. distinctive ways to promote the relevant psychosocial pressure. If you take all these ways together, you end up with a structure showing what determines the Primal Need (regardless of the Stage of development within the Spiral).

The Tree is therefore named "Determinants of [Domain Need]" and it provides the main Vehicle for intrinsic control.

■ The Spiral-derived Structural Hierarchy is therefore made up of combinations of the Mode essences i.e. promoters of the psychosocial pressure. It provides the Control Effect.

Taken as a whole, this structure evidently exists for and through that pressure, and it is named accordingly with a verb chosen to focus on the pressure e.g. "Ensuring Survival" (Will Domain), "Increasing Certainty" (Inquiry Domain).

■ The Spiral-derived Structural Hierarchy Tree is constituted out of the Requirements of its Structural Hierarchy, and forms the Control Field that ensures the Primal Means serves the Primal Need.

The name consists of a reference to a Principal Controller operating on the Primal Means, which is social in nature.

---

• Role of psychosocial pressures.

Originally drafted: 24-July-2016. Posted: 4-Sep-2016.