Forum Message

Topic: Heterarchy
Posted by: Amilkar
Date/Time: 03/01/2004 21:55:07

I've had some of the same problems trying to figure out Dilt's neurological-hierarchy. I tend to think of these less as 'logical levels' and closer akin to 'logical types'. But since i'm not fully sure that my notion of 'logical types' is identical to JG's, i'll say that my notion of logical types closely aligns with what i think about 'categories'.

Let me analogize this 'heterarchy' idea with a basketball team. Each node/level/player on a basketball team has a specific role in the behavior of the overall team. The point-guard dribbles, the center competes for the tip-off and stays near the basket, some teams have 3-point specialists etc. In the proposed heterarchy of Dilt's levels, all factors (identity, environment, etc) do play a role in the game, but at different times and for different reasons. In the metaphor of the game, a person's role is dictated by their role, the plans of the coach, time on the clock, the play of the other team and other factors. In the overall behavior of a person, each level/node/category takes precedence and operates according to the context.

For example, if in the middle of a sinking boat a person cries out "but i'm georgeous, i don't want to die" (identity) most people would probably think that was situationally inappropriate. However, if the person looks for the presence and location of life-saving devices such as rafts, flares, radios and rations then we'd think that was situationally appropriate. Within this context (environment of a sinking ship) the next lower level in the hierarchy dictated by relevance may be the person's ability to secure (flares, rations, radio), unharness(life raft and/or boat) and use various items. In this context we could say that 'spirituality' or 'identity' would be situationally irrelevant and 'environment' and 'ability' would be situationally relevant.

In contrast, a person recieving recognition for years of hard work (a pulitzer for example) would probably have thoughts revolving around all of these levels to some degree. 'Identity' may be relevant in terms of the right person receiving the award ("show your I.D. to the judges please" and/or avoiding plaigurism (sp?)). Ability would be relevant in terms of the criteria of judging a person's work but that ability wouldn't be tested on the spot ("please write an on-the-spot 300-word article to secure your pulitzer" -contrary to the story in Finding Forrester). Environment, another 'multi-ordinal' word (word with multiple meanings/associations) would take into account the manners appropriate for a black-tie affair and prior to that the research on the situation that informs the content of the article that won the Pulitzer.

Returning to the basketball metaphor, depending on the situation in the game, the skills and specialties of each role will be called upon a different times.  . .everyone doens't need to be in the fastbreak, etc.

The formation of the players we could deem analogous to the 'levels' of Dilt's hierarchy; the possesser/controller of the ball could be talked of as the highest level of the sitationally-dictated hierarchy where each corresponding lower level would present the players closest to the ball etc.

I'm not suggesting that we go play basketball instead of doing therapy. Rather i'm suggesting that basketball can be one example/metaphor that helps us understand the situationally-relevant and situationally-defining shifting hierarchies present within a heterarchy (if i understand heterarchy correctly, or i'll have to come up with another name, perhaps Bob or Jerry or something:).

As for the 'levels' themselves, i said that i think of them as categories. When is a table not a table? When you sit on it (then it's a chair). Though the players on a basketball team are all human (excepting air bud and the super-human MJ) they operate differently in the game, i.e. their behavior is dictated by a confluence of their size, speed, shooting ability and position/role/category. These positions/roles/categories (center, shooting guard, etc) are used to define what behaviors and actions a player focuses on and specializes in during the course of the game (shooting, dribbling, sets, picks, etc.). In many instances a person in any position may perform any of these actions outside of the scope/sphere of their role. In these cases we'd say that there is a flexibility in behavior from each role/position/category as there are no specific rules against any player performing such actions.

Mapping over to the 'logical types'/'categories' of Dilt's 'levels', we could say that these different 'levels' behave more like categories. Each category can be defined as a cluster of thoughts that can be rated as relevant/under the scope of each category (ex: identity, ability, etc.) with any kind of thought or action able to reside non-exclusively in multiple categories.

I also am asserting that no specific 'level'/'category' maintains supremacy in the hierarchy. Rather the situationally-defined hierarchy is constructed according to the relevance each 'level'/'category' has to the situation. Further, this hierarchical ordering need not be defined as influencing the lower levels, but more simply as more relevant to the situation. The hierarchy(ies) can be formed and re-formed according to the development of the same situation or when a new situation arises.

Hopefully these last two paragraphs reads true to my basketball metaphor.

And of course this is only a beginning. I do think i'm starting to scratch where it itches.


Entire Thread

TopicDate PostedPosted By
Neuro-logical levels17/12/2003 12:42:44GSM
     Re:Neuro-logical levels17/12/2003 14:56:30Anthony
     Re:Neuro-logical levels17/12/2003 15:14:03GSM
          Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels17/12/2003 17:58:10John Schertzer
               Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels17/12/2003 18:58:39GSM
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels17/12/2003 19:37:32John Schertzer
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels18/12/2003 16:43:32Stephen Bray
                         Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels18/12/2003 16:49:11GSM
                              Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels18/12/2003 19:51:12Stephen Bray
                                   Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels18/12/2003 21:48:09John Schertzer
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 04:53:33Todd
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 15:12:46John Schertzer
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 09:09:45nj
                                                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 20:34:08John Grinder
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 07:46:40Stephen Bray
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 14:57:22John Schertzer
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 12:28:55GSM
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 14:50:35John Schertzer
                                                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 15:17:25GSM
                                                       Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 15:36:48John Schertzer
                                                            Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 15:47:24GSM
                                                                 Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 16:29:32John Schertzer
                                                                      Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 17:52:16GSM
                                                                           Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 18:58:28John Schertzer
                                                                                Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 21:20:18GSM
                                                  representing rocks03/01/2004 20:40:49Amilcar
                                                       Re:representing rocks04/01/2004 16:48:02John Grinder
                                                       Re:representing rocks05/01/2004 12:04:45GSM
                                   Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels18/12/2003 22:31:47GSM
          Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 12:22:20Pete West
               Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 12:47:04GSM
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 18:24:47John Grinder
                         Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 03:04:27Pete West
                              Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 20:17:46John Grinder
                                   Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 20:47:16GSM
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 21:16:10Kate Sheffers
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 22:22:33John Grinder
                                                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 13:20:16Kate
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 21:48:12John Grinder
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 10:22:47GSM
                                                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 10:36:40nj
                                                       Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 10:46:56GSM
                                                            Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 20:06:07nj
                                                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 13:30:09Kate
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 13:26:21Kate
                                                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 13:49:44GSM
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 22:11:34nj
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 22:11:34nj
                                   Heterarchy03/01/2004 21:55:07Amilkar
                                        Re:Heterarchy05/01/2004 03:09:59nj
                                             Re:Re:Heterarchy06/01/2004 00:00:01Amilcar
                                                  Re:Re:Re:Heterarchy07/01/2004 18:00:55nj
                                             Re:Re:Heterarchy26/07/2004 05:58:59nj
                                        Re:Heterarchy05/01/2004 16:42:44John Grinder
                                             Re:Re:Heterarchy - now categories05/01/2004 23:22:48Amilcar
                         Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels20/12/2003 03:43:51nj
                              Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 13:39:06kate
                                   Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 14:03:45Susan Landon
                                   Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 17:52:01spike
                                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels21/12/2003 21:35:23Lewis Walker
                                             Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels22/12/2003 03:34:10Spike
                                                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels22/12/2003 12:55:24Lewis Walker
                                                       Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels22/12/2003 17:07:49Spike
                                                            Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels22/12/2003 17:57:43Lewis Walker
                                                                 Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels22/12/2003 18:51:59John Grinder
                                                                      Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels22/12/2003 20:21:26Lewis Walker
                                                                           Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels24/12/2003 19:07:14John Grinder
                                                                                Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels24/12/2003 21:38:43Lewis Walker
     Re:Neuro-logical levels19/12/2003 01:26:45nj
     Re:Neuro-logical levels26/07/2004 11:14:21John Grinder
          Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels27/07/2004 09:33:31GSM
               Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels27/07/2004 22:47:41John Grinder
                    Re:Re:Re:Re:Neuro-logical levels07/08/2004 20:28:49nj

Forum Home