If you can help with WILLINGNESS, you will simultaneously help me in my struggle to grasp CHANGE. Both are intrinsic to pursuing our endeavours.
I explained in my last blog how I try to get things progressively clearer.
A crucial feature is ensuring the pattern is right: which means that other elements in the system work well. I call this structural corroboration.
So right now, I want help for something in Personal Endeavour that may be so approximate that it is wrong and misleading. Understanding Endeavour depends on properly appreciating the seven Root Levels that constitute it and define it fully. Of these, CHANGE has proved to be the toughest nut to crack. I'm depending on work in other areas to provide more clues before I launch an assault on its bastions.
Another area that I have only considered to a limited degree is WILLINGNESS, which is Level-7 in Endeavour. The issue that I want your advice on just happens to throw light on the same issue for CHANGE. Any solution for one, will generate insight for the other. So let's not focus on mysterious CHANGE, but on the slightly less mysterious WILLINGNESS.
An Internal Duality is a context-content relationship. It provides deeper understanding and helpful validation for Tree frameworks. In the Tree of Pursuing Endeavours, the context (L7-L5) is Transcendence—what doesn't exist but should, and the content (L4-L1) is Actualization—the process of bringing it into existence. (Visit Actualization of Potential to see the diagram that complements this text.)
There is always a correspondence between the Levels in the two poles of the duality. Let's spell this correspondence out and think it through together now, step by step:
Action-L1 sustains Actualization,
and
Communication-L5 sustains Transcendence.
How's that? Quite good, I think.
Next:
Inquiry-L2 guides Actualization,
while
Purpose-L6 guides Transcendence.
Also rather obvious and easy to agree with. Do you?
But then comes the one that is niggling me:
Change-L3 generates actualization,
and
Willingness-L7 generates Transcendence.
Change sort of works.
Or does it? Generate?
I wonder if my bias to changing things and getting good results in any endeavour hasn't led me astray here. I think I tend to mix up Change-L3 and Action-L1 (which includes achievement in THEE). Change-L3 is definitely not Action-L1. So what is it? Good question! I now think it is more about an identity shift. A move from one state of stable existence to a new state of stable existence. I say this because recent evidence and reflections suggest that the heart of the CHANGE-PH3 framework is 'not changing' i.e. stabilization-L4. Could we say that "stabilization generates actualization"? Just possibly … if we stretch it. But putting my hand on my heart, I don't think so.
However, the problem did not come from Change, but from Willingness. I became bothered by suggesting that Willingness generates Transcendence. I think that this process is more like "invites" or "permits".
If that is correct, then we have to say Change-L3 invites or permits actualization. How does that sound? Mmmm … that could work. It means: the notion that my endeavour will shift reality from one state to another is inherently inviting, or that change permits actualization. To get to the proposed heart of change, I think you could say that stabilization invites/permits actualization. It is chaos and disruption that inhibit endeavors and the changes they produce.
But invite and permit are not exactly synonyms. If one is right, the other would certainly be wrong.
And what about "encourages"? "Nurtures" seems a bit too intense and personal.
I am definitely now feeling unhappy and uncomfortable with "generates". It seems to be a relic of sloppy ignorant thinking that happened to be the best I could do at the time: or perhaps I was just tired.
You can see that I am going around in circles.
Can you help out here? What do you think the process should be?
WK
About
Warren Kinston