Interacting-for-Benefit > Generating Benefit > Analysing Resonance

Analysing Resonance

Of interest to THEE-dedicated investigators and developers only.

Understanding Resonance

Resonance is the phenomenon whereby psychosocial entities with similarities in their THEE-formulae show similarities in their psychosocial properties. These similarities may be substantial enough that careful discrimination is required to avoid confusing the entities. See examples.

Independently, certain features of experience and identity states were linked to the Interacting-for-Benefit Approaches/Mentalities. The figure from that webpage is shown.

Here is the Framework of Experience, showing the Primary Hierarchy and the Typology (nested within L6) whose Levels formally draw on Primary Hierarchy Levels.

The self-boundary properties shown belong to the Typology, which exists to create a self that we can call our own. The Primary Hierarchy contains the various elements of experience that are used to construct the self-identity.

We have already specified the THEE hierarchical ordering of the Approaches to Interacting for Benefit via the THEE-Process and the ordering page.

Looking for Resonance

We can now investigate resonance by positioning our Subsidiary Typology [PH'6-QHt4] dealing with interaction for benefit alongside the Framework of Experience [PH4: PH’4]: as shown at right.

It seems that resonance only occurs at L6 and L7. L6 and L7 often exhibit resonance across Frameworks; and this may be just another example. If so, it proves little.

A comparison can be made between the spiral-derived hierarchy resulting from transforming the Principal Typology. However, this does not show even one correspondence to PH’6-QHt4.

It is noted that the L4-Individual Being values in the Spiral correspond to the re-ordering of the Identity Typology forced by the Interacting for Benefit Hierarchy; the significance of this is not immediately apparent. It may be chance, or some feature of THEE that is as-yet undetermined.

Let’s Consider the Empirical Possibility

Beck & Cowan specified what looks like an «exemplification» of this THEE Framework. It is related to the evolution of self-awareness and behavioural systems. This also corresponded to the conjectured order of exposure.

So the same comparison as above has been performed. The THEE-Level numbers have remained attached to the Names (because they are part of the Names) and the new Beck & Cowan hypothesized levels are listed in purple.

The former L6 and L7 correspondence remains but, in addition, there is a correspondence at the new L5. There is also an additional correspondence with the spiral transform (L3/L’3). It is difficult to know what to make of this.

In the Final Analysis

We must now check how the description of self-boundaries aligns.

In the left column of the last table, the two diagonals have been separately listed in ascending order: Well-being from lower-left to upper-right; and Productivity from lower-right to upper-left.

The conjectured associated identity approach is placed in correspondence and then the nature of self-boundaries, defined by that PH’4 system, is specified.

We see here that the clustering is 100% precise. That suggests to me that this is the phenomenon driving the relationship. It is overpowering the resonance, which given its weakness (cf. the formulae) is unsurprising, because the locations of the two Frameworks within THEE are far apart.

Originally posted: July 2009




All posted material is part of a scientific project and should be regarded as provisional. Visitors are encouraged to think through the topics and propositions for themselves. Copyright © Warren Kinston 2009-2016.
All Rights Reserved.



comments powered by Disqus