Re-enter Mode-1: Sufficient Explanation

ClosedReminder of the clarification process so far:

The Watershed

Having reached the Dynamic mode-μ4, the situation and its progression have been substantially clarified.

Mode-1 again to get a sense of closure with a sufficient explanation.

Because of the values and principles that have cumulated and been applied to this point, the quality of the causal explanation now shifts. It is no longer superficial but rather complicated. So the spiral trajectory spontaneously re-enters the causal node-μ1 further down the ellipse at a new position which may be characterized as sufficient.

A sufficient explanation is one in which the nature of the situation can be explained, at least in principle and in a way that is credible.

Crude efforts to control explanation lessens because of the dynamic modelling and appreciation of polarization effects. At the same time, the cumulation of awarenesses from the structural, dualistic and dynamic modes makes it easier to address complexity.

The initial values of the causal mode-μ1 are significantly adjusted due to inputs from modes μ2, μ3 & μ4.

  • What was merely plausiblenow seems reasonable and likely.
  • Confusion has largely receded.
  • Salience can be put into perspective.
  • Beliefs will be selected based on relevance.
  • The obvious gives way to the important.
  • Expertness strengthens and may lead to group leadership.

Having provided a sufficient and satisfying grasp of the situation and its progression, the completion of Cycle-1 is an attractive settling point.

Recap of Cycle 1

The function of Cycle-1 is to give a full answer to the question of "what is going on". Understanding of a situation undergoing sustained progression (PsH3K) has been progressively clarified.

ClosedReminder of this clarification and the oscillation of modes:

■ Causal mode-1 entails the use of immediately available evidence and salient features to provide an explanation that is satisfying.

The rapid adoption of such an explanation is highly subjective and evidence for it is inevitably very limited.

■ Structural mode-2 develops a holistic model of the situation by abstracting the essential categories.

The construction of the model aspires to be objective and coverage strives to be comprehensive.

■ Dualistic mode-3 identifies unavoidable polarization within the situation which exposes disputes and fixed perspectives.

The recognition of tensions is subjective and the identification of the underlying opposing forces is limited.

■ Dynamic mode-4 enables a persuasively realistic narrative of the evolution of the situation based on interactions of components.

The factors and forces in the situation are objectively determined and the narrative needs to be comprehensive.

At each of the initial 4 Stages, clarificationmay be deemed to be satisfactory. If so, there is no call for further penetration. Such a choice will depend on situational factors, as well as the interests and aspirations of those involved.

However, if we look at truly complex situations like financial markets, state of the climate, quality of government and development of social justice, it is evident that more is required to appreciate a situation.

Significant social situations whose evolution needs to shaped typically call for individuals and groups to take action independently within their own spheres of autonomy and responsibility.

While the clarity reached at the end of Cycle-1 can be useful, if people in general do not accept it, then even a sufficient explanation will be ineffective in practice.

Personal Acceptance in Cycle-2

Cycle-1 is socially supported. But if an explanation of a situation is to have any impact, then it needs to be personally supported. Developing personal acceptance is a multi-stage process delivered by Cycle-2 and based on explicit respect: for the person, for minimum standards, for contextual pressures—which can be provided in three successive Stages:

■ Stage-5 involves moving back along the X-axis to the Atomistic Mode to allow the explanation to be personally owned.

■Stage-6 requires moving up the Y-axis towards maximum control via values of the Unitary Mode. This is where group ownership becomes possible and people accept explanations because they conform to relevant socio-cultural standards.

■Stage-7 requires moving across to the Unified Mode in which the explanation needs to be adjusted, without abandoning any earlier principles, to fit the psychosocial context within which it is being used.

■ With this final acceptance, a second spontaneous return to the causal-μ1 occurs, but now to the lower right end of the ellipse. Here, the explanation is not just plausibleand sufficient, but robustbased on meeting personal, social and practical criteria of acceptance.

Originally posted: 30-Oct-2024. Last amended: 30-Apr-2025.