Checks for Hierarchy
Levels not Types
The elemental forms of willingness are offered not as "types of willingness" (as some might say), but rather levels as shown at right.
Whereas types in a typology can be presented in any order that is convenient for a particular purpose, hierarchies resist such handling. At least in THEE, there is far too much meaning tied up in the hierarchical ordering.
During formulation of the elements from L1 to L7 it was easy to imagine a natural linkage and upward flow.
Example
A person to be part of an enterprise. During vetting and on joining the question of emerges, perhaps about how things should be done or where the enterprise should go.
Disputes amongst of believers are common. is a unifier that pulls people out of their silos and integrates them in a wider group for . Strength progressively develops within the enterprise at .
to the group framework encourages members to take as a way to progress, while being reassured the group can absorb failure.
By acknowledging was due to a lack of skill, a person can engage in and commence remedying weaknesses. In choosing how to learn, a person must the methods and the teachers. On returning to the fray, in what has been learned can be activated for a new .
Below are some more formal reasons for believing in hierarchy, and the oscillation discussed in the next topic is highly persuasive. In sections to come, if additional frameworks can be developed on the assumption that the hierarchy is appropriate, that will provide further validation.
Stratification
The study of forms of willingness, developed here and elaborated here, commenced from an assumption of hierarchy: the levels of will (root hierarchy) and its psychosocial pressures. So the layout would be expected to be hierarchical.
However, any postulate that the result is a hierarchy needs to be backed up by examining what was developed and whether the properties of the elements identified to fit what might be expected in THEE.
An initial inspection of properties laid out in 7 levels reveals three strata:
Click to see a Table of Properties
-
In THEE, these levels commonly form a detailed foundation.• are all matters for the self to handle.
• Fears are about the ego's internal state and potential exposure: failure, categorization, helplessness.
• Intervention to assist is about providing information. -
In THEE, these levels typically offer a more general perspective.• involve the social milieu.
• Fears are relational and focused externally on demands or harm.
• Intervention to assist is social and strategic. -
In THEE, these levels typically set the context or enable transcendence.• provide for open-ended potentials.
• Fears are about loss or change of self, even disaster for the self.
• Intervention to assist is transformative and self-referential.
Cumulative Development
A cumulative approach is a classic signature of THEE hierarchies—each level may be self-sufficient, but it does not just replace the one below. It assumes, encompasses and transcends it by including lower level qualities while adding a distinctive new quality.
This was initially noted in levels of work (a Q-hierarchy) and subsequently used to discover primary hierarchies like this one (cf. inquiry; communication).
Based on the investigation so far, it appears that:
calls for initiating some action, and all the higher forms also require some sort of action to occur as part of their process.
calls for insisting on a particular belief and following through by initiating actions in some fashion, otherwise the belief would be irrelevant.
calls for giving attention to certain facts that are important, then insisting on the details of that reality and continuing by initiating appropriate action.
calls for submitting to the group and that requires attention to group needs, insistence on group values, and initiating action.
calls for daring to enter upon an undertaking, which involves submitting to its requirements, attending to its details, insisting on the likelihood of gain, and initiating a commitment.
calls for changing your capabilities by daring to be vulnerable, submitting to the development process, attending to what the methods offer, insisting on the value of what is learnt and initiating actions based on that.
calls for hoping that your openness and positivity will bring out the best in a new situation. This goes along with changing to accommodate the new, daring to expect benefits safely, submitting to the evolution of the situation, attending carefully to what is revealed, insisting on what is possible and initiating action as appropriate.
This schema tabulates this cumulating pattern for the :
| L1 | Trying | calls for | Initiating | |
| L2 | Believing | calls for | Insisting | + initiating |
| L3 | Facing | calls for | Attending | + insisting + initiating |
| L4 | Participating | calls for | Submitting | + attending + insisting + initiating |
| L5 | Risking | calls for | Daring | + submitting + attending + insisting + initiating |
| L6 | Learning | calls for | Changing | + daring + submitting + attending + insisting + initiating |
| L7 | Trusting | calls for | Hoping | + changing + daring + submitting + attending + insisting + initiating |
Transitions Up & Down
THEE hierarchies have levels that can be seen to emerge from lower or higher levels to meet some functional requirement.
Example: The Levels of Purpose hierarchy emerges from the lowest level () by asking why? again and again until the highest level () is reached and the question loses meaning. At the same time, the hierarchy can be developed by starting at L7 and continually asking how? until the lowest level is reached and the question again loses meaning. See the full layout here.
The psychosocial challenge in appears to be summoning the inner energy to engage so as to ultimately benefit.
The proposal for understanding the hierarchy is that:
transitions upward answer the question: how to be energized?
and
transitions downward answer the question: how to engage ?
Starting from below:
is the foundation of because the readiness to initiate action re-occurs at every higher level (as just explained).
Q: How can trying be energized?.
A: By adopting relevant ideas that are emotionally charged
i.e. move up to .
Q: How can believing be energized?.
A: By directly connecting beliefs to the reality relevant to your needs
i.e. move up to .
Q: How can facing be energized?.
A: By getting well-deserved social support
i.e. move up to .
Q: How can participating be energized?.
A: By increasing the excitement of likely gain
i.e. move up to .
Q: How can risking be energized?.
A: By addressing weaknesses in your abilities.
i.e. move up to .
Q: How can learning be energized?.
A: By overcoming fear, uncertainty and doubt about the unknown.
i.e. move up to .
is the pinnacle for energy.
There is nothing more: you just have to trust!
Starting from above:
is the pinnacle of because it reflects a readiness to enter the unknown for benefits, despite likely dangers and failure.
Q: How can trusting engage realistically?.
A: By obtaining useful knowledge and skills.
i.e. move down to .
Q: How can learning engage realistically?.
A: By finding relevant situations where there can be gains.
i.e. move down to .
Q: How can risking engage realistically?.
A: By being part of groups where you get support.
i.e. move down to .
Q: How can participating engage realistically?
A: By recognizing how and where contributions can be made.
i.e. move down to .
Q: How can facing engage realistically?
A: By using values and assumptions to direct efforts.
i.e. move down to .
Q: How can believing engage realistically?
A: By attempting to generate relevant results.
i.e. move down to .
is the foundation for engagement with reality.
There is nothing more: you just have to try!
The evidence is now strong that a typical THEE hierarchy has been identified. However, a striking characteristic of THEE hierarchies is their oscillating duality. So:
- Search for dualities that oscillate.
Originally posted: 20-Feb-2026.
