Societal Psychosocial Pressures

As just explained, the ethical controls for society are found within the Purpose Domain (RL6), while the ethical controls for humanity are found within the Will (Root) Domain (RH).

This Domain difference leads to a difference in psychosocial pressure because of the different forms of TET structure identified and posted in the Hub in 2009.

The disposition of pressures, as shown in the diagram at right, is assumed to be a function of the deeper nature of the Spiral trajectory and therefore independent of the particular pattern of Type≡Mode correspondence.

Societal Controls

The Purpose Domain is subject to Autonomy as its principal pressure.

The Tertiary Hierarchy of Ethical Rules-RH"6 arises from the PH'6L6-Legitimist method of Ethical Choice. The Purpose Domain has a Principal Typology TET constructed as shown at right. It is evident that Type-6 corresponds with Mode-2. That, in turn, means that it is subject to the Selflessness pressure.

The Ethical Rules form a Tree-PH"6K that specifies an Upright Citizen. However, there is no Spiral involved. Each Ethical Rule derives from a correspondingly numbered Ethical Choice Method (i.e. L"1 ≡ L'1, L"2 ≡ L'2 etc). As with L'6-Legitimism, the relevant pressures can be determined from the Spiral.

Check for yourself. But, to help you see it all together in one place, the correspondences are shown in this Table:

Formula	L": Ethical Rule	L': Ethical Choice Type	Spiral Position	Psychosocial Pressure
7	Absolute	Transcendentalist	Mode-6	Well-Being
6	Law	Legitimist	Mode-2	Selflessness
5	Maxim	Communalist	Mode-7	Acceptability
4	Right/Duty	Individualist	Mode-3	Understanding
3	Tenet	Pluralist	Mode-1	Performance
2	Convention	Conventionalist	Mode-5	Certainty
1	Prescription	Rationalist	Mode-4	Autonomy

Confused? Reference to the Spiral is a bit confusing because it does not exist in relation to the Ethical Rules. The Spiral is evoked in order to assign pressures to the Types with which the Rules have a correspondence. It is presumed that the Rule will have the same pressure as the corresponding Type. The Spiral-Mode order is irrelevant to this study.

Societal Ethical Vehicle

PH"6K: The Upright Citizen is the Ethical Vehicle and now revealed to be subject to an unexpected pattern of pressures.

With regard to the internal duality, we have the identical pressure division found in the Control Field of the Domain Control Complex. In other words, this vehicle is akin to a field and sports a division of pressures into Responsibility v Integration sets. However, the order of the pressures in each set is slightly different.

Responsibilities generate Civic Constraints.

The layout of the iD-Content is shown below.  Two pressures remain in the same position, while there is a swap between Understanding and Certainty.

Tree	Any Domain's Control Field		Societal Ethical Vehicle
KL4	Certainty	RL2	Understanding	RL5
KL3	Performance	RL1	Performance	RL1
KL2	Understanding	RL5	Certainty	RL2
KL1	Autonomy	RL6	Autonomy	RL6

Detailed Analysis

Integration generates Civic Aspirations

The layout of the iD-Context is shown below.  Acceptability remains in the same KL5 position, while there is a swap between Well-Being and Selflessness.

Tree	Any Domain Control Field		Societal Ethical Vehicle
KL7	Selflessness	RL7	Well-Being	RL4
KL6	Well-Being	RL4	Selflessness	RL7
KL5	Acceptability	RL3	Acceptability	RL3

Societal Ethical Effect

Ethical rules-PH"6 are a form of disembodied authority. The numerous combinations of ethical rules that is demanded by a structural hierarchy lead to additional forms of disembodied authority. Citizens are expected to accommodate these authorities (PsH"6) as they go about their everyday life.

A detailed account of the ethical authorities is provided in Ch. 9 of Working with Values,which can be downloaded here.

Societal Ethical Field

Two Trees have been constructed here; and both can be considered Societal Ethical Fields within which Upright Citizens function.

The originally developed Tree is named a Stable Society (PsH"6K) because using the rule-derived Ethical Authorities as Centres leads to a structure suggestive of stability in a society. Click on thumbnail to see.

Building a Tree using the Groupings/Requirements leads to a framework that seems to be about a Ruling Regime (PsH"6K), which is focused on the maintenance of unity and stability in society. Click on thumbnail to see.

While neither the originating Tree nor the final Tree of this Control Complex were published previously, the Rules Hierarchy PH"6 and the Structural Hierarchy-PsH"6 were published in Working with Values as Ch. 8 and Ch.9 respectively and can be downloaded here.

Whichever Tree is regarded as most accurate or suitable, the psychosocial pressures have reverted to the pattern found in the Primal Field because it is assumed that all structural hierarchies (and therefore the Trees that emerge from them) are subject to an identical pattern of pressures.

So the iD pattern is Responsibility v Integration in both cases, as follows:

The iD Content of the Tree is about Civic Aspirations: peace, order, continuity etc for a Ruling Regime, and respect for rules, principles and standards and debating of ethical positions for a Stable Society. These are, not surprisingly, under Responsibility Pressures.

The iD Context of the Tree is about Societal Powers: either ethical frames of reference, imperatives and maintenance of order for a Stable Society; or judgement, coercion and submission for a Ruling Regime. These are, not surprisingly, under Integration Pressures.

Considering both Originating and Final Trees together, the pattern that has been developed here is shown below:

---

• Psychosocial pressures in the humane or humanity-based ethical controls .

Originally posted: 4-Sep-2016. Last updated 17-Jan-2023.