provide everything required to operate within a particular . However, having available all the possible forms (levels) gives no indication as to how these should be used in practice.
People have naturally wondered about the what is «the best way» to handle:
As a phrase, «the best way» refers to endeavours in general, not any particular endeavour or situation. So it can only be meaningful in terms of the function of a particular : i.e. in the same endeavour, «the best way» to handle, say, will not be the best way to handle, say, . It is apparent that the focus and requirements of each are utterly different.
A function is referred to as a Primal Need, a universal and fundamental context of all human endeavours. Primal Needs are everyday currency and not strange, mysterious or unexpected. However they were only systematically identified, checked, listed and compared during the present investigation of Root Projections.
have a 1:1 correspondence with that they emanate. In addition, all have a 1:1 correspondence with within each . As a result, it gets to look rather complicated. In a similar way, there is a 1:1 arrangement between and Primal Needs; and yet all do make a contribution to every Primal Need, because they are all involved (implicitly or explicitly) in any endeavour.
With this caveat, it is possible to tabulate current findings and conjectures. Although still provisional, none of Primal Needs here (or their replacement) should be particular surprising:
Put another way: the are not only the means for , they are also the means for addressing 7 contextual features of any endeavour: i.e. the Primal Needs.
To do your best by using «the best way» to realize a Primal Need, it is necessary to possess and experience autonomy.
in each is developed and used under a psychosocial pressure of autonomy. So it is alone that enables an individual to freely pursue the Primal Need as well as they can for themselves and in their own terms. The is relatively free from the distracting pressures of performance, certainty, acceptability, well-being, understanding, and selflessness—which dominate other .
However, possession of autonomy does not necessarily mean that you will do your best. Autonomy, as a psychosocial condition, also allows you to be negligent, to make a mess, to produce chaos and believe nonsense. Under the primary influence of autonomy, you may do anything at all as long as it is feasible:
However, it is readily observable that we often (but not always) experience an internal-psychological or an external-social pressure to consider quality and make a good choice (or even the best choice), a good judgement (or even the best judgement), a good representation (or even the best representation), etc.
This is not a moral demand (i.e. an example of the goodness instinct). So it is necessary to be more precise about what «good» or «best» means in practice. Here is a proposal:
: «Good» provide performance when .
: «Good» provide certainty when .
: «Good» provide acceptability when .
: «Good» provide well-being when .
: «Good» provide understanding when .
: «Good» provide autonomy when .
: «Good» provides selflessness when .
It is immediately evident that the items in bold are psychosocial pressures. Once again, they have unexpectedly come into play. This coincidence was not pre-planned or fixed in advance. seems slightly different in that it engages the Primal Nexus.
The relationship is possibly clearer when viewed as the context:
As explained in the state of knowledge review, the search for "the best way" led to discovery of the .
Initially posted: 30-Nov-2013. Last amended 2-Jan-2015.