Essay 5: Method and Example

Essay 5:

Method and Example

In this essay we will review and apply what we’ve been entertaining, in a casual way. Others have studied these ideas and parameters to arrive at probabilities, but my aim here is only to present the profiles of groups which our immediate study generates. This exercise provides a unified table for comparison along the listed relationships, plus parameters of these represented within two channels: An external objective channel of sense info, and an internal reflective channel of belief, opinion, perception, (knowledge.)

We therefore erect a method to consider each goal or quality within the profile envelope of each group to discover, in simple English, the cited dynamics of collective.  Examples will begin with simple common interest group, expanding to more complex later in essay series. We’ll look at each item in order for groups.

A. Five Prime Relationships

Bag-Receptacle, Host/Guest, Empedoclean Cycle, Appearance, Effigy/Chimera

(Note here the use of bag, suggesting a simple physical structure of containment. For more erudite concept of bag, refer to ‘receptacle’ ὑποδόχη or ‘space for being’ χώρα in the Timaeus Dlg, Plato. This element is third in kind after principle and cause. It is described as ‘unlike aught’: unlike anything and everything.)

B. Six Operational Parameters

Three objective goals of collective: Energy, Utility, Redistribution.

Energy is that surfeit gained in the coalescence of the group, tangible and intangible. Utility is the cost-benefit group formation. The wide assumption is that there will be greatest benefit for least cost. Redistribution characterizes the benefit which the group realizes that is distributed to the group and edifies its members.

Three Qualities that invigorate the group: Belief intensity, Consequential behavior, perceived Access.

Belief intensity is the emotional load of the group within the member. Consequential behavior is that behavior which the member feels is appropriate to the group function. Access, or perceived access characterizes the level of success of the member within the group. This can mean access to the promised distributions from the group or access to host and shepherding members.

Two Other Issues

There are two other issues that are baked in with group coalescence, but the effects may not be salient or important until later.

C. Perceptual Integrity v Truth Relativity.

This scales the transparency of the group by polling. Perceptions of collective truth, where there is limited knowledge, produce shifting truth values over time due to observational aspect or perception. This violates the supremacy of a simple inference for just one observer, which is not the case in a collective. Contradictions become more numerous as groups become more complex. This secondary effect is generally deleterious to messaging and is always to be accounted for in any campaign calendar.

We can demonstrate how this happens as well as apparent precognition. Reluctantly I reuse the symbol of a river as a dynamic element in time, but not Time itself as with Heraclitus. Instead, I’ll show how the members of a bird-watching group report differing facts due to aspect and geology, while one member predicts the future from present circumstances:

Three are in the party and have separated. One is downstream from their camp along the river; another, quite a way upstream, is also along the river. The third has climbed a tree upon a hill, following a rare species. He can observe the entire river and the another member who is downstream from camp; he cannot see his associate far upstream.

… Wouldn’t you know that very day and moment, a dam gave way which retained a lake, out of sight, upstream. Our fellow in the tree saw a great surge of white water at the visible head of the river. He fumbled to retrieve his 2-way and screamed, “You will be flooded out. Are you seeing a flood?” The woman downstream received the prediction but didn’t see the flood--yet. The other man, upstream, did not respond.

Thus, for members of the group, gathered in a contiguous locale, we see that one had no perception of flooding, response false. She regarded the message as a prediction that is unlikely. However, for the reporting tree-climber the response is true, nor is the report real precognition.  So, the truth of a statement, within a given group of some complexity, will vary along with the seeming occurrence of predictive skill. The fellow, upstream, died in the cataclysm and couldn’t respond. The elevations, rock and greenery within the landscape insert more complexity affecting the group.

D. Solidity of Being.

Another similar issue is the perception of being for some members of a group. For some members, the subjects and objects of art, speech or text is given the default status truth, of reality, rather than that of imagination, hypothesis or symbol. There are commonly referred to as ‘literalists’. Often, such people have no time for supposition, hypothesis or symbol because their obvious interest is in the obvious facts of life, and how these might come to benefit. This leaves the arts in general either destitute as meaningless or else encumbered with crude interpretations of story, essentially hiding the actual meaning along with the origin and life of the author. So, not having guessed at the skills of representation, the artist’s observations to the world are taken as fact. For some groups this mix of astral and factual components of messaging is purposely confused, and automatically becomes self-referential.

These last two issues, limited perception and limited imagination, take up within the greater matter of message structures and their design. Their corrosive effect on messaging has its root in the individual member, not the whole per se. I conceive of these effects as interference due to 1) the complexity of a group (cause); the other, due to individual difference or preference (principle). Each of these issues is therefore distinct from the illusory quality of messages when looking the entire campaign, with designed response structure, as preconceived and implemented.

So, as I proceed now with our first example of collective dynamics we will refer to these registers, A, B, C, D … to gather facility in thinking about collective awareness.

Hobby

The first type of group will be a simple one for starters. Hobby group will take up our fist category. This innocuous word is flexible enough for our purposes. Common Interest Group is another broad name for same, but ‘common interest’ impinges on the entire concept of a group that is expressed in the invariant message.

Continuing with our Bird Watchers’ Group, we register 5 Prime Relationships: Bag-Receptacle, Host/Guest, Empedoclean Cycle, Appearance, Effigy/Chimera

The Bag of the group, echoing 1960s jargon, being the containment or center of gravity for the group, is simply ‘birds’ or ‘the bird’. This may be formulated in a motto that is amenable to current advertising memes. Usually this means that you as a member will learn about and find the bird in the field, ‘if you join us’.

Due to the strength of the invariant of the group, little is required for messaging other than initial notice or ad which comprises the acquisition phase of grouping. Retentive messaging broadcasts ordinary schedule, coming special events, due collections.

Host/Guest relates the general membership with the founder or leader. In this instance, common interest keeps this relationship at a minimum. Here, the Host designs seminars, outings, collects dues, but does not impose much more regulation on the members.

Empedoclean Cycle within a hobby primarily has to do with varying popularity of group over time from internal functional matters or changing external ones. The most obvious cycle for hobbies is the burn-out cycle that measures how long a certain hobby maintains interest in the membership. For our birdwatchers, interest is easily maintained if there are plentiful animals and species. Engendering anticipation within the group by scheduling future field trips or glam symposia in beautiful landscapes strengthens the center of gravity.

Appearance for a group of birdwatchers is what it is, unless some kind of uniform is required to enable identification within the group. We can think of this relationship as fading to casual, unremarkable clothing.

Effigy/Chimera. Effigy will come in if camouflage clothing is worn to enable stealth in the field. Secondary to this, would be any emblem visible to others worn upon or inserted in the body.

Chimera is the internalized world of bird watching within the members awareness; it is composed of memories of the woods, leaves, trees, birds, comrades, equipment, charge cards, motor vehicles along with the visceral surges of excitement that draw the membership onward.

These are the five prime relationships. Now let’s look at six operational parameters that measure the cohesion of the group.

Energy, Utility, Redistribution. Energy is the force and leverage of collective used to further same. For our hobby, the energy surfeit is realized by excitement of membership and received dues.

Utility for our birdwatchers is optimal since cost-benefit shows direct relationship between dues and service.

Redistribution is also optimal since there is no divergence in spending. Everything is spent on materials and services that directly aid the members.

Belief intensity, Consequential behavior, perceived Access. Belief in the group relating to the invariance, is high since the experience offered is relatively easy to obtain either in meetings or outings.

Consequential behavior considers what each member thinks is appropriate behavior for the group. Everyone knows what is expected for bird watching: Stealth, silence, appreciation for other animals and people. Should a member not adhere to these bases, then the goal of the group will be lost.

Access of individual members to services and materials are equalized throughout so this parameter is nominal. There is no obvious advantage to stratifying access; no divergence, no secrecy. In our further investigation this parameter will not so clean.

Perceptual integrity. I refer you to the above instance at the river. By large, the complexity of our small group of hobbyists does not allow but the minimum of discrepancy in truth, beyond the usual from information lag or some innocent baffle obstructing it.

Solidity of Being is not an issue with our birdwatchers since, well, a bird is a bird is a bird. There is no message or body of information that stringently recalls hypotheticals or symbols. Bird watching is essentially a scientific endeavor that filters out the complexity and ambiguity of artistic representations.

So much for our introductory method and look at a simple group with its dynamics of collective awareness.

Next time, we’ll consider another kind of group… Media markets and Viewers.

Thos. Reedy ©2025