Each internal level in the 28 Groups of a Structural Hierarchy has the formula g# and appears to have its own distinctive quality. The result is that there are 7 distinct qualities corresponding to g1 to g7. These «g-qualities» need to be determined as part of any inquiry involving this form.
The g-qualities are significant in two ways:
Nothing in a Structural Hierarchy is easy to identify and formulate and this applies to the 7 g-qualities also. In the initial Structural Hierarchies, the Framework was covering areas intensively studied over many years. So, in retrospect, the formulations seemed relatively straightforward—even if they may yet be proved wrong or insufficient.
Over time and following discoveries, two «THEE-inquiry principles» were identified to assist investigation of the g-qualities. Here they are in their order of discovery.
The first discovery, made a long time ago in relation to g-quality was related in some way to the Level in the originating hierarchy and visible in the G1-Monads. This has proved itself as a useful principle., was that the
Of course, this principle is rarely simple to apply. The Monads in most cases, including here, cover a vast area; and knowledge is limited, fragmentary and uncertain. However, the principle can still guide the imagination (which can access otherwise unknown parts of THEE), and this may even feed back to reveal something new.
See this principle applied to by clicking here:
As reported following posting of the , it has become evident that each Grouping in a Structural Hierarchy (or at least those derived from a Spiral) has a particular affinity for a particular Root Level &/or its Primary Hierarchy &/or possibly its Primary Structural Hierarchy.
Additional checks on Frameworks not yet posted seem to confirm this correspondence for all Structural Hierarchies. Furthermore, other inquiries suggest that this correspondence is the underpinning THEE framework for what is currently termed «Appreciative Inquiry». In short, I believe there is something solid in this correspondence: albeit poorly understood.
This ordering is now emerging as an investigative principle during examination and formulation of new Structural Hierarchies. In practice, its main impact appears to be in determining the nature of the Groupings, whose Groups possess g-qualities in accord with their internal Levels. The new Grouping is fundamental for the Framework and distinct from lower Groupings due to the additional internal Level and its g-quality. The Grouping, itself, appears to have the g-quality of the highest internal Level.
See this principle applied to the present Framework by clicking here:
This principle is somewhat easier to apply to g-qualities, so long as its use has not inappropriately distorted identification of the Grouping and its Groups.
Root of THEE. So many possibilities emerged that it dragged out the investigation as first one then another was tested to destruction, often by being applied and leading me up the garden path. In this webpage, each of the qualities selected will be briefly reviewed and the basic thinking indicated with reference to the two THEE-Inquiry Principles above.posed particular issues due to its fundamental nature at the
Suggest further alternatives for any of the levels in thesection.
A suitable Level, , needs to be wholehearted, for .assumes that you give yourself heart and soul to finding a creative resolution. This process produces . So the extra
In this case, both the Grouping Principle and the Monad Principle reveal Level which is .as the key. This then repeats the essence of the extra
However, perhaps other terms might be preferred e.g. authentically to emphasize the inner nature, or unwaveringly to emphasize the continuing nature. In this case, and unlike elsewhere, there is no further internal testing, because Level with this g-quality: see diagram.is the only internal
Having chosen thewholeheartedly, the task of rising to it creatively depends on in it. The has numerous difficult aspects, each of which may require a creative . So one or more must be selected at any time and fully engaged with. can be frightening, and time and energy are the creator's most precious resources, so choices here must be imagined and then a or an must be deliberately identified and attempted.
Using the term deliberately seems to include thegenerated in maintaining .
The deliberate qualifier seems highly congruent with the nature of THEE. In the case of , the highest internal Level is , and this must deliberately control all trials. In the case of , providing willingness deliberately captures your need to focus on things that may feel alien, be disliked, or simply demand effort.in
As well as qualifying the top components of the two Hexads, the qualifier must suit the 6th internal Level of the Heptad ( ).
I wondered about other terms: like calculated and considered, but these seem to draw on Heptad.rather than , and are not purpose-like. Also: imaginatively, but that seemed too heavily weighted to and seems wrong in relation to in the
in the face of blocks, failures, difficulties and set-backs of all sorts must be realistic. Persevering mindlessly is neither wise nor creative. Your require you to look at what is going on, and what is possible for you and relevant to the . Then you must focus energy there. I used adaptively to capture this orientation to effort.
Motivation requires adapting of your. Justification requires adapting of your . Determination requires adapting your .
Using the term adaptively directly relates tobecause perseverance requires changing your thinking or your focus as the situation evolves so you are still in the game.
The adaptive qualifier also is highly congruent with the nature of THEE.in
As well as qualifying the topmost components of the three Pentads, the qualifier must also suit the 5th internal Level of the Heptad ( ), and of the Hexads ( & ).
However, perhaps others terms might be preferred,
to activate and is not something that is implicit or automatic. You are exposed to risk of course, but that was always the case. So being open, exposed and vulnerable becomes part of the creativity process here. For this to occur safely, there is a requirement that occur reflectively.
Reflection is a form of inquiry that is directed internally.
The reflectively qualifier also relates toin that it is an experience for becoming aware of experiences.
As well as qualifying the topmost components of the four Tetrads, the qualifier must also suit the 4th internal Level of the Heptad ( ), the Hexads ( & ), and the Pentads ( , , and ).
I initially formulated this quality as consciously, which has associations with bothand . But that quality seemed possibly too weak. I then consider terms like overtly or even blatantly or nakedly but these severed the link with inquiry. I then considered self-consciously and that lead to the final choice: reflectively.
must be used to foster progress of the creative resolution, whatever it may be. It can provide a charge that gets you going and from others too. But everyone has their own personality and agenda—even you do. So you have to work on yourself and others in a way that is viable and fits with personal experiences, social situations and ongoing activities. That requires a minimum of penetrating insight and so shrewdly
Using the term shrewdly fits withinsofar as commit and consume resources of all sorts. potentially creates social states that cannot be easily untangled. This must be anticipated, in principle if not in detail, and handled. Shrewdness seems a necessity.
The shrewd qualifier also is highly congruent with Framework provides for a deeper implicit that provides the map that we use as we try to produce .because forces a focus on reality. The
As well as qualifying the topmost components of the four Triads, the qualifier must also suit the 3rd internal Level of the Heptad ( ), the Hexads ( & ), the Pentads ( , , ) and the Tetrads ( ( , , & .
Initially I chose adaptively, but although this related to g5). For a time, I played with realistically, but this was too similar to sensibly-g2. Then I tried prudently which does relate well to and , but felt it lacks the punch required by creativity. So then I tried wisely, but this resonated with a virtue that we know is rather rare. I moved from that notion to shrewdly which should be possible for anyone., I was not comfortable with the link to (cf. adaptive for
in regard to possibilities, however desirable, is hazardous because it so easily leads to and , with all that those states entail in terms of precious time and energy. So you must take into account what is known and recognize unknowns, and you must use sound judgement about how things are, what might work and what is simply not feasible. To develop credibility, you must do all this in a way that is sensible.
Formulating the quality required as sensible relates to how you. So there is a link here to communication: you must talk sense and show good sense as you explore, understand and interact.
The sensible qualifier is congruent with the nature of.
As well as qualifying the topmost components of the five Dyads, the qualifier must also suit the 2nd internal Level of the Heptad ( ), the Hexads ( & ), the Pentads ( , , & ) the Tetrads ( , , , & and the Triads , , , & ).
Other terms considered included realistic, but this seemed too general; and also see g3 alternatives above.
refers to: 28 Groups should be handled meaningfully.. Every should be meaningful, and every one of the
Using the term meaningfully in relation to the 28 Groups in the framework should have a meaningful quality for its g1 base component. That certainly helps make it possible todirectly expresses the sense of intention and agreed purpose. So the term fits well. It also seems highly beneficial for that every one of the
The meaningful qualifier also is highly congruent with the nature of THEE) is distinguished from «behaviour» in being thought about and actively chosen rather than being automatic, reflex, or habitual. For , it is particularly important that mean something.. in
This qualifier must suit the lowest Level of every single component (Group) in the Framework.
I explored some synonyms for naturally, other terms like beneficially or gainfully which would relate to Level with this g-quality.. In this case and unlike elsewhere, there is no further testing, because is the only internal
Originally posted: 17-Feb-2012