Checks for Hierarchy

Levels not Types

The elemental forms of willingness are offered not as "types of willingness" (as some might say), but rather levels as shown at right.

Whereas types in a typology can be presented in any order that is convenient for a particular purpose, hierarchies resist such handling. At least in THEE, there is far too much meaning tied up in the hierarchical ordering.

During formulation of the elements from L1 to L7 it was easy to imagine a natural linkage and upward flow.

A person L1-tries to be part of an enterprise. During vetting and on joining the question of L2-beliefs emerges, perhaps about how things should be done or where the enterprise should go.

Disputes amongst L2-subgroups of believers are common. L3-facing reality is a unifier that pulls people out of their silos and integrates them in a wider group for L4-participation. Strength progressively develops within the enterprise at L2, L3 and L4.

L4-submitting to the group framework encourages members to take L5-risks as a way to progress, while being reassured the group can absorb failure.

By acknowledging L5-failure was due to a lack of skill, a person can engage in L6-learning and commence remedying weaknesses. In choosing how to learn, a person must L7-trust the methods and the teachers. On returning to the fray, L7-trust in what has been learned can be activated for a new L1-attempt.

Below are some more formal reasons for believing in hierarchy, and the oscillation discussed in the next topic is highly persuasive. since writing this page, additional frameworks(Tree, Structural Hierarchy) have been be developed on the assumption that the hierarchy is appropriate, and that provides further validation.

Stratification

The study of forms of willingness, developed here and elaborated here, commenced from an assumption of hierarchy: the levels of will (root hierarchy) and its psychosocial pressures. So the layout would be expected to be hierarchical.

However, any postulate that the result is a hierarchy needs to be backed up by examining what was developed. Do the properties of the elements identified fit what might be expected in THEE?

An initial inspection of properties laid out in 7 levels reveals three strata:

ClosedClick to see a Table of Properties

  • L's 1-3 Personal Stratum
    In THEE, these levels commonly form a detailed foundation.

    • Trying, Believing & Facing are all matters for the self to handle.
    • Fears are about the ego's internal state and potential exposure: failure, error, helplessness.
    • Intervention to assist is about providing information: feedback, evidence, accounts.

  • L's 4-5 Interactional Stratum
    In THEE, these levels typically offer a more general perspective.

    • Participating & Risking involve the social milieu.
    • Fears are relational and focused externally on demands or harms.
    • Intervention to assist is social and strategic.

  • L's 6-7 Existential Stratum
    In THEE, these levels typically set the context or enable transcendence.

    • Learning & Trusting provide for open-ended potentials.
    • Fears are about loss or change of self, even disaster for the self.
    • Intervention to assist is transformative and self-referential.

Cumulative Development

A cumulative approach is a classic signature of THEE hierarchies—each level may be self-sufficient, but it does not just replace the one below. It assumes, encompasses and transcends it by including lower level qualities while adding a distinctive new quality.

This was initially noted in levels of work (a Q-hierarchy) and subsequently used to discover primary hierarchies like this one (cf. inquiry; communication).

Based on the investigation so far, it appears that:

Trying-L1 calls for initiating some action, and all the higher forms also require some sort of action to occur as part of their process.

Believing-L2 calls for insisting on a particular belief and following through by initiating actions in some fashion, otherwise the belief would be irrelevant.

Facing-L3 calls for attending to certain facts that are important, then insisting on aspects or implications of that reality and continuing by initiating appropriate action.

Participating-L4 calls for submitting to group requirements and that requires attending to group needs, insisting on group values, and initiating actions.

Risking-L5 calls for daring to enter an undertaking, which involves submitting to its requirements, attending to its details, insisting on the likelihood of gain, and initiating a commitment.

Learning-L6 calls for changing your capabilities which requires daring to be dependent and vulnerable, submitting to the development process, attending to what the methods offer, insisting on the value of what is learnt and initiating actions based on that.

Trusting-L7 calls for hoping openness and positivity will bring out the best in a new situation. This goes along with changing to accommodate the new, daring to expect benefits safely, submitting to the evolution of the situation, attending carefully to what is revealed, insisting on what is possible and initiating action as appropriate.

This schema tabulates this cumulating pattern for the Primary Hierarchy of Willingness:

L1 Trying calls for Initiating  
L2 Believing calls for Insisting + initiating
L3 Facing calls for Attending + insisting + initiating
L4 Participating calls for Submitting + attending + insisting + initiating
L5 Risking calls for Daring + submitting + attending + insisting + initiating
L6 Learning calls for Changing + daring + submitting + attending + insisting + initiating
L7 Trusting calls for Hoping + changing + daring + submitting + attending + insisting + initiating

Transitions Up & Down

THEE hierarchies have levels that can be seen to emerge from lower or higher levels to meet some functional requirement.

Example: The Levels of Purpose hierarchy emerges from the lowest level (L1-Tactical Objectives) by asking why? again and again until the highest level (L7-Ultimate Values) is reached and the question loses meaning. At the same time, the hierarchy can be developed by starting at L7 and continually asking how? until the lowest level is reached and the question again loses meaning. See the full layout here.

The psychosocial challenge in willingness appears to be summoning the inner energy to engage so as to ultimately benefit.

The proposal for understanding the hierarchy is that:

transitions upward answer the question: how to be energized?
and
transitions downward answer the question: how to engage sensibly?

Starting from below:

L1-Trying is the foundation of Willingness because the readiness to initiate action re-occurs at every higher level (as just explained).

Q: How can trying be energized?.
A: By adopting relevant ideas that are emotionally charged
i.e. move up to L2-Believing.

Q: How can believing be energized?.
A: By directly connecting beliefs to the reality relevant to your needs
i.e. move up to L3-Facing.

Q: How can facing be energized?.
A: By getting well-deserved social support
i.e. move up to L4-Participating.

Q: How can participating be energized?.
A: By increasing the possibility of gain
i.e. move up to L5-Risking.

Q: How can risking be energized?.
A: By addressing weaknesses in relevant abilities.
i.e. move up to L6-Learning.

Q: How can learning be energized?.
A: By overcoming fear, uncertainty and doubt about the unknown.
i.e. move up to L7-Trusting.

L7-Trusting is the pinnacle for energy.
There is nothing more: you just have to trust!
But if you want to energize it, then L1-Try something.

Starting from above:

L7-Trusting is the pinnacle of Willingness because it reflects a readiness to enter the unknown for benefits, despite likely dangers and failure.

Q: How can trusting engage sensibly?.
A: By obtaining knowledge and skills relevant to the situation.
i.e. move down to L6-Learning.

Q: How can learning engage sensibly?.
A: By finding situations where the knowledge can lead to gains.
i.e. move down to L5-Risking.

Q: How can risking engage sensibly?.
A: By being part of groups where you get support.
i.e. move down to L4-Participating.

Q: How can participating engage sensibly?
A: By recognizing how and where contributions can be made.
i.e. move down to L3-Facing.

Q: How can facing engage sensibly?
A: By using values and assumptions to direct efforts.
i.e. move down to L2-Believing.

Q: How can believing engage sensibly?
A: By applying them so as to generate beneficial results.
i.e. move down to L1-Trying.

L1-Trying is the foundation for engagement.
There is nothing more: you just have to try!
If you still want deeper engagement, then L7-Trust .

The evidence is now strong that a typical THEE hierarchy has been identified. However, a striking characteristic of THEE hierarchies is the difference between odd-and even-numbered levels.

Originally posted: 20-May-2026.