Psychological Panarchy

Perplexed by the inadequacy of visualising trichotomy dynamics in two dimensional graphs, I have begun modeling some of the adaptive cycles for psychosystems as 3D models. Yes, warning science content and nerd alert, ... yet in essence this seeing in many ways affects us all.

In examining the feeling of vertigo from following the contours of the spatial dynamics of the phases of conservation, release, reorganisation and exploitation in the adaptive cycle, I had a deep feeling of deja vu. Where had I seen the 3D adaptive cycle previously?

Then it occurred to me. In the writings of psychologist Clare Graves he describes the four phase cycle of psychological development, not of individuals, but of populations when looked at through a system ecologists eyes. Speaking in 1977 he describes the adaptive cycle of psychological growth in human society as follows:

"Overall, psychological development can be seen as a complex wave like phenomenon. But development does not occur in the smooth flowing manner suggested by Exhibit VIII. It is more a spurt-like, plateau-like, more a progressive, steady state, regressive movement in which certain demarcation points can be identified in the flowing process. As systems of personality and culture come and go with changes in psychological time and alterations in psychological space, four demarcation points can easily be distinguished. This progressive, steady state, regressive development and the four demarcation points are shown in Exhibit IX." (Graves, C. 2005, p. 178)

He goes on to describe how 'anxiety and rigid functioning' accompany the crisis that occurs following a period of adequate coping with the problems of existence [conservation], with regression in using older ways for newer problems then leading to 'fixation and pathology' [release], creating dissonance and new insights which have to overcome existing conditions in the existential space [reorganization], before the removal of those barriers leads to rapid movement and a quantum leap to the next steady state [exploitation].

Here is psychological panarchy described thirty years prior to its naming. To see a description of psychological multi-state resilience, in a systemic population model, in four phases, as a hierarchical open system of complexity, preceding the publication of Buzz Holling's pioneering work in ecological systems by some years, affirms the significance of this early and innovative research work.

Who would think that this understanding might have been lost to us, or that were it not for the 35 years of ongoing inspirational research work by the resilience theorists, we might not have even understood its profound significance for our own emergence.

All we can do at this point is marvel at what they together saw and continue to ask, now that the cyclical nature of natural systems (including human thought) are disclosed, what is it we must do ...?

From Cradle to Graves: The genesis of health and psychopathology

For about a decade now I have been studying various nuances in the work of psychologist, Clare W. Graves and have recently been reading his original PhD thesis (1945). All of the positive qualities of intrigue and obstinacy in this brilliant mind are evident in this original source work.

Titled "A study of the genesis and dynamics of psychopathic personality as revealed by combining clinical case history and experimental approaches" he re-introduces the concept of "Anspruchsniveau" (aspiration level) while looking at why the different theories of therapy in sociology, psychology and physiology only have partial histories of success in very similar cases.

When you consider that Engel's essay on a biopsychosocial theory of medicine was not written until 1977 and the approach of triangulation in research methodology is still not often used, here we have a unique mind forming a creative methodology to an undefined problem of great importance.

In his doctorate Graves reviewed 1048 titles of theory, conducted five experiments with 94 subjects in four groupings, and reviewed seven case studies so as to highlight the difference and similarity in thirteen theoretical traits of the psychopathic personality.

His conclusion on the preceding 136 years of confusion in the field of psychology is significant. His thesis was that: "although these individuals may have many traits in common, one cannot understand the meaning of the traits until the dynamics of their organization within the individual are known." (p. 108). His conclusion on the thesis was that: "... the results of all the previous observations are not necessarily divergent if one orients himself properly. In this investigation a simple proposal was made; namely, that all the points of view are correct for one or another psychopathic personality but not for all of them." (p. 126)

What Graves found was that within the homogeneity of traits was uniqueness. The arguments on the definition of what is a psychopathic personality by its causes of deficiency leads nowhere, but to opposition. His resolution was to see the initial whole and gather greater definition of the parts. He concludes:

"Let us classify first by the broadest common trait, then as experiment shows differences exclude, so that we finally arrive at a point where we understand what the person is like in comparison to others and also how his dynamic organization differs from others." (p. 135)

This quest for the broadest common traits led to another 30 years of research and the generation of the emergent cyclical levels of existence theory. From this we are able to create, with some small measure of informed understanding, the broad classifications that lead to the definition of individual dynamics. This algorithm of uniqueness is where human nature might be disclosed for all the forms in which it is made manifest.

The only question I have is why we still prefer a simplistic answer to a complex problem rather than simple answers within a clear solution. Graves' work was apparently inspired by the confusion he saw in what must be a solvable problem in his field. In his approach he embraced, rather than narrowed, the confusion. This tendency towards the simplistic is I suspect, our ultimate human failing and one that can be easily met with acknowledgment and self-acceptance of this fact, if only for its attempted mitigation within ourselves.