Ray Bradley and Karl Pribram have been refining some work done by Bradley in the area of collectives - in particular the collective's makup. From this work they have derived the distinctions of flux and control where these distinctions identify the fundamental differences in collectives.
(Bradley, R.T. (1987) "Charisma and Social Structure : A Study of Love and Power, Wholeness and
Transformation" New York : Paragon House
Bradley, R.T., & Pribram, K.(1998) "Communication and Stability in Social Collectives" IN
Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems 21(1):29-81)
I here take the flux/control dichotomy and apply it to yin/yang and BBBB/MBTI® patterns
identified in IC+.
The flux emphasis is a field emphasis with a bias to linkage BETWEEN all members of the collective and as such
a collective rich in potentials where the generally equal connections give us a 'boiling' sea of relationship potentials.
The control emphasis is more hierarchic, more 'dot' biased due to the emphasis on one's position in the hierarchy.
This favours a focusing of linkage WITHIN as an actual rather than potential.
With these basic associations we can immediatly map the flux/control dichotomy to IC+ without more details since
the general distinctions cause the unfolding of patterns inherent in the method of categorisation of 'field' vs
'dot'. (that emerge 'naturally' from the use of self-referencing when making the categories due to the 1:many nature
of the brain/mind)
In mapping the control/flux dichotomy to the binary form of the I Ching, and so to bring out the structural biases
in each group, we 'cut' the 64 hexagram sequence into two threads, one reflecting flux (yin based sequence of hexagrams)
and one reflecting control (yang based sequence of hexagrams).
Due to the nature of the I Ching, where the whole is embedded in all parts since the sequences are derived by self-reference,
so within each sequence are elements of the other. Thus the thread of flux emphasises a range of states dealing
with trust in OTHERS, from total trust in others (hexagram 02) to total distrust in others (hexagram 44). Those
hexagrams reflecting total distrust in others show an increase in trust in self such that control concepts
emerging within the flux realm reflect security seeking taking over from identity seeking (where the latter reflects
the disciples perspective of total trust in others).
The control thread emphasises a range of states dealing with trust in SELF, from a total trust in self (hex 01)
to a total distrust in self (hex 24) where the latter indicates an increase in trust in others but within the context
of control (hex 24 deals with the need to be brought back to the 'true' path - one gets distracted easily).
From a neurocognitive perspective the realm of flux reflects a more dialectical perspective when compared to the
realm of control that reflects a more analytical perspective (and so a more fundamentalist, archetypal emphasis
- clear identifications with an emphasis on purity).
These distinctions identify the realm of flux as more attuned to begin-end notions of time and so a sensitivity
to theromodynamics when compared to the realm of control with time being considered more as a sense of the eternal
and so a mechanistic perspective.
Recognising the mechanistic/thermodynamic expressions so we can identify energy biases where the mechanistic, being
so strongly into 'dot' precision, is high on energy usage and this is reflected in the charasmatic leaders found
in control collectives.
On the otherhand, the more thermodynamic biased collective, the flux, aims to conserve energy through awareness
of context as a 'pusher' of change; rather than favouring transcendence, as the control group does, the emphasis
is on transformation where core self remains 'as is' but facades change due to context changing. As such the flux
intergrates well with external context compared to the control that attempts to assert its own context.
Given these general distinctions we can extend them further when we recognise that the development path of a control
collective seems to stem from a flux collective where encapsulation of 'something' forms a tight group that takes-on
a more 'them' vs 'us' perspective and the explicit energy put into that forces a 'control' bias.
When we line-up the two threads of binary-ordered hexagrams focusing on total trust in X to total distrust in X
so we pair-off hexagrams into their opposites/complements thus:
02,23,08,20,16,35,45,12 (first octet of total trust in others sequence)
01,43,14,34,09,05,26,11 (first octet of total trust in self sequence)
These are structural opposites (yin in one is reflected as yang in the other) however the neurocognitive data identifies
the emergence of the precision of self from the approximations of others and so complements emerge such that we
have:
02 -> 01 outof dualmindedness (devotion) comes singlemindedness (total trust in X [others->self])
23 -> 43 outof pruning comes seeding (transplant, cuttings, spread the word etc)
08 -> 14 outof unity comes success
20 -> 34 outof admiration comes motivation
16 -> 09 outof planning comes making small gains
35 -> 05 outof progress comes serving ones dues
45 -> 26 outof congregating comes holding firm to beliefs
12 -> 11 outof neutralising comes harmonising/balancing
15 -> 10 outof levelling (modesty) comes conduct (tread a path)
52 -> 58 outof restraint/discernment comes reflection/intensity
39 -> 38 outof bypassing obstructions comes bypassing oppositions (mirroring)
53 -> 54 outof gradual development, maturing, comes immediate development, immaturing
62 -> 61 outof exagerating traditions comes sympathy (humanity, yielding)
56 -> 60 outof loyalty comes standardisations
31 -> 41 outof intense stimulation (wooing) comes concentration, distill
33 -> 19 outof trickary, false retreats comes advances (approach the high fearlessly)
07 -> 13 outof uniformity comes likemindedness (loose associations with others)
04 -> 49 outof socialisation (teaching, masking) comes revelation (revolt, unmask)
29 -> 30 outof containment/control comes guidance/direction (an ideology)
59 -> 55 outof dispelling illusions comes diversity
40 -> 37 outof relaxed structuring comes rigid structuring [coin : tension release]
64 -> 63 outof remaining open comes the need for closure [coin : gratification]
47 -> 22 outof being fenced-in comes facading ('beautify')
06 -> 36 outof compromising comes uncompromising
46 -> 25 outof getting entangled comes disentanglement (stand up to say you piece regardless of consequence)
18 -> 17 outof correcting corruption comes belief/following
48 -> 21 outof foundation setting comes problem solving
57 -> 51 outof cultivation/influence comes enlightenment/awareness
32 -> 42 outof commitment comes augmentation
50 -> 03 outof transformation comes new beginnings (sprout)
28 -> 27 outof going beyond what is required (Excess) comes hungering
44 -> 24 outof seduction/persuation comes return, being drawn-back (total distrust in X [others->self])
The interpretation mode is such that left column is dialectical, conserve energy through habit formations etc and
so 'transform', whereas right column is analytical, expend energy through intense expression and so 'transcend'.
From a precision perspective the left column is more into 'pattern matching', field precision, passive when
compared to the right column that reflects a more 'dot' precise perspective, active, with a high energy &
purity emphasis.
The self-reference bias means that within the flux column (left) will emerge elements that reflect strong influences
of control from hexagram 07 down to hexagram 44. This is complemented by within the control column (right) an emerging
flux bias developing from hexagram 13 down to hexagram 24.
Overall we can identify the set of 'flux' collectives together with the most likely 'control' collective to appear
out of the flux. I stress 'most likely' in that we are talking generalities here such that each hexagram has 64
'shades' where one shade of a particular flux collective will favour development into a 'different' shade of the
particular control collective. This is expressed in the form of changing lines etc within a hexagram.
Note also that in these pairs, due to their structural nature (opposites) so we can also reflect on the 'name of
the coin' - e.g. in the 40-37 pairing the coin is named 'tension release' where 40 expresses it as a sudden, explicit,
release due to relaxation and 37 expressed it as a gentle, implicit release due to rigidity (family hierarchy).
Another example is 63-64 where the coin reflects gratification, instant (63) or delayed (64).
We can also apply the traditional sequence to bring-out the more sociological, relational biases - e.g.
64 -> 01 (out of delayed gratification comes singlemindedness)
63 -> 02 (out of completion comes devotion)
62 -> 03 (out of exagerating traditions comes sprouting, new but difficult beginnings)
61 -> 04 (out of sympathy/yielding comes socialisation/masking)
60 -> 05 (out of standardisations comes serving, waiting)
59 -> 06 (out of making things clear comes compromise)
58 -> 07 (out of reflection (others see themselves in you) comes uniformity)
57 -> 08 (out of cultivation/influence comes unification)
etc
etc
The interpretations emphasis is on the nature of the octets - personal purity (right column) vs social purity (left
column)...