Fluidity of Experience

Function of Experience

Endeavours (RH), simple and complex, are the evolutionary achievement of humankind. Each person plays their part in their own way as best they can given their circumstances. In creating and pursuing endeavours, we use our minds consciously and unconsciously.

The use of the mind entails implicit use (or misuse) of the Taxonomy as discovered and investigated on this website. Any part of the Taxonomy has to come into conscious awareness if it is to be used explicitly. For example, a purpose-RL6 may emerge as an intuition or idea, which are forms or elements of experience-PH4/RL4.

Cf. Kahneman's Systems

The mind can and does operate the taxonomy unconsciously. This is intuitive thinking: relevant to System-1 identified by Daniel Kahneman. But maximum effectiveness and complicated situations commonly require us to reflect on our thoughts. We must be conscious of mental phenomena to correct errors due to illusions, biases, simple forgetting, and a host of other sources. This is Kahneman's System-2.

However, experience-RL4 itself is a vital mental tool in its own right. As developed during investigation of Endeavour-R, the function of experience-RL4 is to serve as a personal reference gauge in creating and pursuing endeavours.

This function is essential in every sort of endeavour, that is to say anything and everything we each attempt. Inner experiences like emotions, thoughts and intuitions provide signals, impetus and guidance so we can determine that the unfolding events are what we need, want and can accept.

Perhaps not surprisingly, experience-RL4 is found at the heart of the Tree framework for endeavour-RH. As revealed in the partial image from this Tree shown at right, my experiences-RL4 are connected to every endeavour Centre but one.

All aspects of endeavour can be tricky, but experience-RL4 seems to pose particularly intractable problems due to its fluidity.

Endless Flux

We suffer from an endless flow of experiences of all sorts. This is surely partly due to the numerous endeavours, large and small, that we simultaneous juggle, some of which unavoidably interact or conflict.

However, the experiential flux also seems caused by instabilities of our nervous system. Irrelevant stimuli provoke associations and memories and these reverberate. Ideally following a distraction, we reassert mental control and re-focus attention on the task at hand.
More ►

Although changing or staying on course is essential for endeavours, neither course is necessarily easy. We tend to get over-enthusiastic or excessively disappointed as events unfold. We get frustrated and irritable, often over minor matters or when tired. Extraneous events or opportunities disturb our concentration. We find ourselves subject to diverse life stresses that provoke ruminations. Irrelevant emotions like anger, envy and entitlement often intrude and threaten to distort our thinking. Biases welcome and unwelcome, press forward for consideration.

It seems that our experiential reference gauge is in danger of dysfunction through its intrinsic instability.

For an experiential gyroscope to guide effectively, it absolutely needs a degree of mental stability. It should therefore be no surprise that experiential methods have evolved to help us master the turbulence of our experiential flow.

Optimal Use of Experience

In other Primary Hierarchies within the Taxonomy, a set of 7 systems have been found within Level-6 that guide the use of elements of that Hierarchy for optimal effect e.g. within Action-PH1, there are Decision Systems; within Purpose-PH6, Ethical Choice Approaches. This set is referred to as a Principal Typology.

It is therefore proposed that within Experience-PH4, there is a Typology of Methods for Mental Stabilization. Because we think of the mind and self as synonyms, i.e. we identify with our experiential flow, the name might have been «Self Stabilization».

The Type in any Typology is primarily a methodical system. Here it provides a way to feel comfortably stable and able to «exist» naturally. The various methods may be referred to more abstractly as «approaches» or more personally as a «mentalities».

The deeper features of Principal Typologies are currently under investigation in the Architecture Room. In what follows, those principles will be applied.
Reminder of Principles

1. There is a core idea that anchors the Typology function. The function here is mental stabilization, which therefore has a core stabilizer.
2. Each approach or method (for mental stabilization in the present case) derives its logic from assigning primacy to one of the levels of the Primary Hierarchy (PH4-experience here). So there are 7 approaches-methods to be investigated.
3. Amongst those individuals, referred to as practitioners, for whom mental stability is important, some are reflective.
4. Reflective practitioners articulate a coherent and consistent system for their own use. They also develop it to educate others as to the best and proper way to understand phenomena and intervene.
5. The devised system/method/approach/mentality/Type is therefore a value system (PH6-L6). As a result, it provides for an experience of personal identity.
6. In any Typology, people usually select (or find themselves gravitating towards) one approach as primary, and also a secondary complementary approach.
7. Reasons for the choice are not currently understood, but may be genetic as well as environmental. Once the selections are made, there is a strong identification with them. That solidifies a personal identity.

---

• Clarify distinctions between mind, self, identity and more.
• Review the elements of experience.
• See the taxonomic path from Will-R to the Principal Typology-PH'4.

Originally posted: 24-Sep-2014. Last updated 10-Dec-2014.