Psychosocial Pressures

Single or Dual

In the investigation of Q expansions, we discovered that two psychosocial pressures were in play.

The primary pressure related to the identity (or structure) of the Q-arena. and a secondary pressure related to the operation of the Q-arena.

It has been proposed and tentatively accepted that for both Primary Structural Hierarchies and Spiral Structural Hierarchies each grouping has a characteristic psychosocial pressure as shown at right i.e. this pattern is based on structure.

A similar pattern (provisionally) appears to apply in relation to at least two Q-Structural Hierarchies:

■ components of informed pragmatism PH'2Q1sH, and
■ components of a functioning school of philosophy PH'5Q5sH

which strongly suggests it is more generally applicable.

It therefore seems likely that this pattern based on structure will apply to the PH'6Q4sH groupings: an investigation to further establish the validity of this pattern is desirable.

But is it possible that a secondary pressure based on operating the groups also applies? This possibility also deserves investigation.

Investigation

G1: Serving Self-Interest

Autonomy is the natural structural pressure given the requirement. Without autonomy, it is hard to know how self-affirmation could operate effectively.

However, in terms of operating the component groups, autonomous choices of benefit appear to be driven by a striving for well-being.

Other possibilities:Closed It is too reflex to be understanding, certainty is impractical, acceptability is inappropriate, selflessness would be contradictory; and performance is not being judged.

G2: Organising Risk-taking

Understanding is the natural structural pressure because to take risks without knowing what they are would be self-destructive.

However, in terms of operating the component groups, it seems that effective understanding requires follow through via performance.

Other possibilities:Closed  Autonomy is relevant but it will be relevant everywhere, certainty would prevent risk-taking, acceptability is inappropriate, selflessness would not be helpful; and well-being is not the issue.

G3: Handling Exposure

Performance is the natural structural pressure given the focus is speaking up in a way that seeks to be effective and, inevitably, being judged by others.

However, in terms of operating the component groups, it seems that you can only perform well if you are strongly driven by certainty.

Other possibilities:Closed  Autonomy is relevant but it will be relevant in this way everywhere, understanding is taken for granted, acceptability is opposite of what drives you, selflessness does not fit something so personal; and well-being is not the issue.

G4: Managing Exchanges

Certainty is the natural structural pressure because you need a conviction that any exchange is worthwhile or there will be an inability to proceed.

However, in terms of operating the component groups, it seems that certainty has to be complemented by acceptability for yourself and the other party or there will be no exchange.

Other possibilities:Closed  Autonomy is relevant but it will be relevant everywhere, performance is not the issue, understanding is not crucial, selflessness would not be helpful; and well-being is not the issue.

G5: Seeking Control

Acceptability is the natural structural pressure because you cannot influence anyone about anything if you do not take great care to ensure they will accept you and what you have to say.

However, in terms of operating the component groups, it seems that acceptability requires to be bolstered by selflessness or the other parties will react against your biases, reject your influence and fail to be persuaded.

Other possibilities:Closed  Autonomy is relevant but it will be relevant everywhere, certainty would be counter-productive, performance could apply here but does not seem so crucial, understanding is not the primary issue; and well-being is irrelevant.

G6: Maintaining Affluence

Well-Being is the natural structural pressure because that is wealth is about maintaining your standard of living.

However, in terms of operating the component groups, it seems that well-being depends on the application of autonomy in regard to what level of affluence calls for action. So this pressure also applies to labeling events as misfortune or activating your energies in the search for greater wealth.

Other possibilities:Closed  Performance is not the immediate requirement, certainty is not required, acceptability is inappropriate, selflessness would not be helpful; and understanding is not the issue.

G7: Awakening Ambition

Selflessness is the natural structural pressure because a realistic ambition is not about your egotistic wishes but about capabilities and aspirations that you discover inside yourself, possibly to your surprise.

However, in terms of operating the component group, it seems that being selfless requires understanding the world about you or vigilance is pointless and you will never realize your ambitions.

Other possibilities:Closed  Autonomy is relevant as usual but seems inapplicable as it counters selflessness, certainty is impossible, acceptability is inappropriate, perormance does not fit; and well-being is not the issue.

Comparison

The pattern that has been identified above is shown in this Table:

sH-G 1° Structural
Pressure		 2° Operating Pressure 
G7 Selflessness Understanding
G6 Well-Being Autonomy
G5 Acceptability Selflessness
G4 Certainty Acceptability
G3 Performance Certainty
G2 Understanding Performance
G1 Autonomy Well-Being

We can compare this to the pattern found for Q-arenas, which is shown
below:

Arena 1° Identity
Pressure		 2° Operating Pressure 
Q7 Selflessness Acceptability
Q6 Autonomy Well-Being
Q5 Understanding Selflessness
Q4 Well-Being Autonomy
Q3 Acceptability Certainty
Q2 Certainty Performance
Q1 Performance Understanding

It is evident, but perhaps difficult to see immediately, that the pairings of pressures are identical but reversed i.e. the operating pressure in Q-arenas is the structural (identity) pressure in the Groupings and vice versa.

For easier comparison, this Table reverses the columns:

Arena 2° Operating Pressure 
 1° Identity
Pressure
Q7 Acceptability Selflessness
Q6 Well-Being Autonomy
Q5 Selflessness Understanding
Q4 Autonomy Well-Being
Q3 Certainty Acceptability
Q2 Performance Certainty
Q1 Understanding Performance

The similarity can be made even more visible by altering the ordering of the Q-arenas to conform to the ordering of the Groupings and combining the two Tables into one as below:

sH-G 1° Structural-G
2° Operating-Q 
 2° Operating-G
1° Identity-Q		 Arena
G7 Selflessness Understanding Q5
G6 Well-Being Autonomy Q6
G5 Acceptability Selflessness Q7
G4 Certainty Acceptability Q3
G3 Performance Certainty Q2
G2 Understanding Performance Q1
G1 Autonomy Well-Being Q4

Conclusion

Confirmation of the structural pressures was expected. However, identifying operating pressures is new and the relation to the Q-arena pattern is entirely unexpected.

The exact nature of the discovery is puzzling.

All we can say is that there seem to be a pairing of pressures in two different parts of the Taxonomy. No particular link is known between Q-expansions and structural hierarchies.

The significance of the re-ordering of the pairings as shown in the final table is mysterious.

Also it is not evident immediately why the pairing should be reversed such that what is primary (structural) in one case is secondary (operating) in the other, and vice versa.

Research on these matters will take place in the Architecture Room.

The first research task will be to check other structural hierarchies in THEE for the presence of secondary pressures and, if present, to see if they conform to the same pattern. That may give clues to the other research questions.

Originally posted:  30-Jun-2025.