Q3: Social Proposal(III)

The Story so Far

The Q3 Arena, based on applying causal and dualistic paradigms, deals with fitting in to social proposals as explained in the introduction. The 7 different ways in which it is possible to support a proposal in order to fit in were then developed here, and plotted on a Typology Essentials Table (TET). A spiral dealing with strengthening promotion of a proposal could then be developed here.

Determinants of Orienting to a Social Proposal (Q3CHK)

The Tree framework for orientation indicates the near-simultaneous use of all the factors examined in the TET and Spiral. It is likely the way most people will think of fitting in. In bringing the various Centres to life, a person needs to be imbued with a political spirit. That means things like being sensitive to opinions, interests and attitudes of others, expecting some controversy, showing a readiness to explain, listen and compromise.

A Tree framework can be created from the Q-Spiral by focusing on the essence of each of the 7 modes as they might emerge in actual situations. This reveals a dynamic duality as well as influences between the determinants.

ClosedApplication of the Dynamic Duality

Trees are about actual activity in a social milieu. As a result modes/levels are converted to Centres by application of the dynamic duality, which is personal v social i.e. whether your functioning is essentially determined or controlled by:

  • the person with their interests and preferences: given subscript P

    or
  • the socio-physical milieu with its factors and requirements: given subscript S

    or
  • an indivisible combination of these: given subscript B for balanced.

In the case of bipolar levels, the dominant Centre is placed on the right.

Generating Social Momentum: L1-L4

The lower pole of the internal duality appears to be "generating social momentum". It corresponds to the inner circle of the TET ("direct expedient ways") and Cycle-1 of the Spiral ("developing group interest").

Level 1: You are in control when developing and presenting the rationale for your proposal. However, you have no control over the needs and social milieu that forces you to generate the proposal. These two perspectives cannot be disentangled.

So the Centre is balanced and named:  L1B-Present the Rationale.

Level 2: Your selection and engagement of individuals prepared to actively support your proposal is under your control. But this depends on who is available and their influence, which is given by the milieu. The two factors cannot be addressed separately.

So the Centre is balanced and named:  L2B-Find Active Supporters.

Level 3: In checking popularity, there is first of all the actual level of popularity over which you have no control but which you must handle. Then there is your assessment of the popular appeal of the proposal which is under your control. The two are distinct and independent of each other.

So there are two Centres here named:

L3P-Assess the Popular Appeal

&

L3S-Work with the Level of Popularity

The two poles naturally influence each other with your assessment appearing to be dominant given this what you can be most sure about.

Level 4: In highlighting the benefits of the proposal, you are in control of the analysis and the promotion, but the benefits themselves emerge from a milieu which you do not control. These factors cannot be disentangled or divided.

So the Centre is balanced and named:  L4B-Highlight Benefits.

Embedding an Obligation: L5-L7

The upper pole of the internal duality appears to be "embedding an obligation". It corresponds to the outer circle of the TET ("contextual and controversial") and Cycle-2 of the Spiral ("forging a group consensus").

Level 5: Change is controversial and you cannot control the emergence of opposition. Opponents may even coalesce to form a factions in response to your proposal. However, you can take the concerns of opponents seriously and deal with them constructively.

So there are two Centres here named:

L5P-Handle Concerns of Opponents

&

L5S-Engage Emerging Factions

The two poles naturally influence each other with engaging factions appearing to be dominant because that is most achievable.

Level 6: You have control over your defense of your proposal in any debate, and you should strongly support a debate. However, you do not control the potential alternatives on offer, nor the arguments against your proposal, even if these deserve your consideration.

So there are two Centres here named:

L6P-Facilitate Public Debate

&

L6S-Consider Potential Alternatives

The two poles naturally influence each other with considering potential alternatives appearing to be dominant because that will determine your handling.

Level 7: Invoking imperatives is something under your control, but it only works if others share those imperatives and that is outside your control. You will only choose imperatives that are shared so there can be no disentanglement.

So the Centre is balanced and named:  L7B-Invoke Shared Imperatives.

Psychosocial Pressures

All psychosocial pressures are underpinned by acceptability as the driving force intrinsic to the Change-RL3 domain. This is not shown in the diagrams below.

First there is acceptability (1°) based on the Q3 position.

(Selflessness, 2° in the Q3 position, is not shown in the diagrams below.)

Then, as listed here, performance (1° from Causal paradigm-PH'3L3) in the lower half, and understanding (1° from Dualistic paradigm-PH'3L4) in the upper half.

The duplication of acceptability is noteworthy.

The requisite and self-interested Trees (below) show level by level pressures based on the Spiral pattern (see left Tree) and Tree structure i.e. Root Hierarchy (see right Tree).

Better viewing: Widen browser window and use browser zoom if needed.

Determinants of sociability: Tree pattern Q1 Self-centred handling of dterminants of sociability: Tree pattern Q5

Originally posted: 26-Jan-2026.