Mobilize Views: CG1

The Foundation is You

As explained in the orientation, apart from pursuit of specific purposes, there is a concern to enter selected relationships to experience togetherness and to benefit from genuine compatibility. This is partly to mitigate the unavoidable necessity to fit in to a society and its culture, like it or not.

It follows that determination of compatibility must be your responsibility. So clarifying compatibility needs to start from your experience and your interests.

It is up to you to become as clear as possible in your own mind about how your interests fit with another because without common interests there is no point to compatibility. With that base, you must become clear about the nature of the person, persons or social body, the wider context, the evolving situation and other issues—any of which may be relevant to whether or not there is likely to be compatibility.

The requisite psychosocial process in the CG1-monads is to mobilize views. This is the only way to answer: "where do I stand" in relation to any particular person, group or social body.

Monad Function: To access and establish a personal stance for social encounters.

The relevant views will be shaped by your personal experiences, past and current, as much as or sometimes more than the reality you are facing. However, those views have to be yours—there is no right view unless you hold it.

Remember: Only you can determine whether or not another person or group suits you—no-one else; and that determination rests on the views that you hold and develop through experience.

Preliminary studies in the Experience Domain suggest that the primary hierarchy tree (PH4K) provides an integrated structure dedicated to an authentic perspective—which is synonymous with a personal view. Click thumbnail to view this instrument: you can see that ideas-L4 are the centre-piece for any view, but other centres play a part as well, although not all need be activated.

The only requirement in this monadic grouping is to mobilize views: there is no requirement to express those views. The issue in regard to views and all later groupings is acceptability, not correctness.

Remember: This framework is not about seeking acceptance and approval from certain others but rather to discover whether or not you, with all your quirks and faults, are compatible with them and they, with all their quirks and faults, are compatible with you.

Mechanism: Views are mobilized through reflection on previous experiences and relationships, and on intuitions generated by the emerging potential relation.

Personal Strength: Reflection and intuition call for self-knowledge. You must know what you actually and honestly want, need, believe in and can handle in practice, otherwise your interests will be unreal and unrealisable.

Qualifier

Given "mobilizing authentic personal views" as the natural grounding for clarifying compatibility, it is necessary to determine a qualifier for these CG1-views: see an explanation here. This g1-qualifier is a vital validity check because it needs to characterise the lowest level of every group in subsequent groupings.

Qualifiers get their character from the correspondingly numbered monad, which for g1 is CG11 explanation-based. It is provisionally proposed as «plausible». Anything plausible is suggested as reasonable, possible and acceptable for consideration without necessarily being true.

Psychosocial Pressures

The expected 1° pressure is autonomy. This fits here given the emphasis above that your views and the judgement of compatibility are ultimately matters for you and you alone. While social fitness in terms of society and culture is not optional, choosing social relations within that environment is an exercise in freedom.

The expected 2° pressure is understanding. This also fits because specific views defined by the monadic groups cannot be strongly held without grasping their meaning and implications. You must also understand yourself and your situation to mobilize and develop views that are genuine and relevant to the encounter.

How It Goes Wrong

Everyone forms views. But that does not mean they will always help you determine compatibility. Reflection and intuition can go wrong in many ways:

If you do not know yourself, because:

  • your head is full of the current fashions and fads of how to be;
  • you habitually dissociate and disconnect from your experiences;
  • you use a protective cocoon (false self) to interact with others;
  • you have a paranoid or schizoid tendency.

If you do not believe in yourself, because

  • you seek approval;
  • you fear rejection;
  • you doubt or distrust yourself;
  • you do not respect yourself.

If you regard authenticity as a matter of ethics, so that:

  • you habitually suppress your own autonomy in favour of others;
  • you equate a wrong view with failing or being a bad person;
  • you seek others to be a mirror of yourself to remove pain and conflict.

In all these cases, authenticity is lost and any fitting in subverts compatibility concerns. The door is then wide open to either isolation and alienation or a pseudo-compatibility leading to future dissatisfaction, unhappiness and relationship breakdown.

Re Inquiry:   If you are obsessed with being correct even in private, then you may put extra effort into inquiry before developing a view. There is no harm as long as this does not mean avoiding having views where they are required. All results of inquiry must be fed into experiences that you can call your own, and you need to recognize that the potential for being wrong remains.

Clarifiers of Interest

In order to clarify the interest that invites a social relationship, a person must be able to form views in all ways possible. These possible ways have been identified by the essences of clarification (PH'3C), which emerged from the depiction paradigms (PH'3) and then became levels in the social fitness framework (PH'3CHK).

In accord with those studies, the ways to clarify interest are named as follows:

CG11: Explanation-based Views

CG12: Framework-based Views

CG13: Interpretation-based Views

CG14: Narrative-based Views

CG15: Responsibility-based Views

CG16: Authority-based Views

CG17: Context-based Views

Levels in THEE hierarchies often cumulate properties or functions and this phenomenon is evident here. While each of the 7 views are distinct, a cumulation is evident when ascending the monads.

So:

The CG11-explanation stands alone.

The CG12-framework may provide an explanation, but an explanation does not provide a framework.

The CG13-interpretation may work as a framework or provide an explanation—but the reverse does not apply.

The CG14-narrative may provide an interpretation, work as a framework or provide an explanation—but the reverse does not apply.

The CG15-responsibility may form the narrative, offer an interpretation, serve as a framework, or provide an explanation—but the reverse does not apply.

The CG16-authority may generate responsibility, specify a narrative, offer an interpretation, serve as a framework, or provide an explanation—but the reverse does not apply.

The CG17-context may serve as an authority, indicate responsibility, determine the narrative, provide an interpretation, work as a framework or offer an explanation—but the reverse does not apply.

Originally posted: 6-Oct-2026.