Trees

Diagram and Location

The dynamic duality, was initially described generically as M v F, based on the conventional cultural notion of M(ale) being rational/assertive and F(emale) being emotional/supportive.

Subsequently, the dynamism intrinsic to Trees was more effectively described as personal-individual v social-situational (P v S). This tension is activated at the moment any functioning occurs. In practice, it is useful to identify specifically how P and S manifest in each framework; and there are many examples in the Satellites.

No.	Form	Formula
1	Root Hierarchy Tree	RHK
1	Root Structural Hierarchy Tree	RsHK
1	Root Typology Hierarchy Tree	RH'K
1	Root Spiral Hierarchy Tree	RH'CHK
1	Root Spiral Structural Hierarchy Tree	RH'CsHK
1	Root Tertiary Hierarchy Tree	RH"K
7	Primary Hierarchy Trees	PH•K
7	Primary Structural Hierarchy Tree	sPH•K
7	Primary Spiral Trees	PH'•CHK
7	Primary Spiral Structural Hierarchy Trees	PH'•CsHK
1	6th Primary Tertiary Hierarchy Tree	PH"6K
1	6th Primary Tertiary Structural Hierarchy Tree	sPH"6K
49	Primary Q-Expansion Trees	PH'•QH◊K
49	Primary Q-Expansion Structural Hierarchy Trees	PH'•QsH◊K

Formulae

Centres

Centres are dynamic versions of levels. They may therefore be given level-based formulae with the dynamic duality subscript, or their own formulae that indicates their relative position more clearly.

NOTE: ■ = the stem of the formula that always ends in -K, and varies according to the taxonomic location of the particular Tree. See above table.

Level-based Formula	Centre-based Formula
■L7_B	■O1
■L6_S	■O2
■L6_P	■O3
■L5_S	■O4
■L5_P	■O5
■L4_B	■O6
■L3_P	■O7
■L3_S	■O8
■L2_B	■O9
■L1_B	■O10

Channels

NOTE: ■ = the stem of the formula that always ends in -K, and varies according to the taxonomic location of the particular Tree. See above table.

Interaction—Influence			Formula
■L7_B ↔ ■L6_S	=	■O1 ↔ ■O2	■c1
■L7_B ↔ ■L6_P	=	■O1 ↔ ■O3	■c2
■L7_B ↔ ■L4_B	=	■O1 ↔ ■O4	■c3
■L6_S ↔ ■L6_P	=	■O2 ↔ ■O3	■c4
■L6_S ↔ ■L5_S	=	■O2 ↔ ■O4	■c5
■L6_S ↔ ■L4_B	=	■O2 ↔ ■O6	■c6
■L6_P ↔ ■L5_P	=	■O3 ↔ ■O5	■c7
■L6_P ↔ ■L4_B	=	■O3 ↔ ■O6	■c8
■L5_S ↔ ■L5_P	=	■O4 ↔ ■O5	■c9
■L5_S ↔ ■L4_B	=	■O4 ↔ ■O6	■c10
■L5_S ↔ ■L3_P	=	■O4 ↔ ■O7	■c11
■L5_P ↔ ■L4_B	=	■O5 ↔ ■O6	■c12
■L5_P ↔ ■L3_S	=	■O5 ↔ ■O8	■c13
■L4_B ↔ ■L3_F	=	■O6 ↔ ■O7	■c14
■L4_B ↔ ■L3_S	=	■O6 ↔ ■O8	■c15
■L4_B ↔ ■L2_B	=	■O6 ↔ ■O9	■c16
■L3_P ↔ ■L3_S	=	■O7 ↔ ■O8	■c17
■L3_P ↔ ■L2_B	=	■O7 ↔ ■O9	■c18
■L3_P ↔ ■L1_B	=	■O7 ↔ ■O10	■c19
■L3_S ↔ ■L2_B	=	■O8 ↔ ■O9	■c20
■L3_S ↔ ■L1_B	=	■O8 ↔ ■O10	■c21
■L2_B ↔ ■L1_B	=	■O9 ↔ ■O10	■c22

Emergent Trees

Trees have been discovered and developed outside the main taxonomic architecture.

Duality Reversal

In the case of the 7 Trees based on a forced reversal of the oscillating duality, where every Centre is an identical level in the Primary Hierarchies, the dynamic duality appears to have also reversed such that at L5 and L6, the P/F pole is dominant, while at L3, the S/M pole is dominant.

These Trees are dynamic transcendental states generated to affect endeavours. The energy and determination involved in operating these Trees is therefore significantly greater than for taxonomic endeavour-based Trees.

All 7 Trees have identical verbs in the Centres, and identical Channel names.

Subjective Requirements

All THEE frameworks are developed from the Taxonomy in an impersonal impartial way, and Trees, so developed, are said to be objectively requisite.

However, Trees by their nature are used by particular individuals who naturally experience their own requirements in relation to the various Centres.

To facilitate requisite operation of a Tree framework, a standard subjectively required Tree has been identified. It has similarity to the duality reversal Trees in that it uses the same verbs in the Centres and the same Channel names.

However, these Trees are not transcendental states requiring high personal intensity, and so there is no reason to expect any change in dominance of the poles.

Return to the overview.

Originally posted: 17-May-2013. Last amended 2-Feb-2023