top of page
DowntownDenverWMountains.JPG

Empowerment Fundamentals

Interaction

Interaction is simply the interdependent actions of objects on each other. The way an object acts on its environment depends on the way the environment acts on the object, which depends on the way the object acts on the environment, ad infinitum. We can illustrate this relationship using the following type of diagram, which we'll refer to as an interaction diagram.

The environment consists of other objects. Objects themselves consist of several components. The words we use to identify these components will be used more broadly than usual, as follows.

​

  1. A body - the physical part of any object, not just living things. For many objects from rocks to plants this is the only component of the object.

  2. A mind - the intellectual part of an object. Computers, many animals, and people all have minds. They are all capable of processing signals and the data they contain.

  3. Emotions - the motivational part of those objects that are sentient. This includes many animals and people, but not computers or robots.

 

From the perspective of interaction, the bodies of those objects that have a mind or emotions must, in turn, have three components.

 

  1. An abstraction interface that converts environmental events into internal signals. The senses of animals comprise their abstraction interface.

  2. A processor that transforms signals representing environmental events into signals representing actions of the object on its environment. The microchips in a computer and the brains of animals are examples of processors.

  3. An actualization interface that converts internal signals into actions on the environment. The muscles of animals are the primary part of their actualization interface.

 

There are a number of ways in which an object can interact with its environment. We'll refer to these ways as levels since the functionality of each builds upon its predecessors. The empowered interact at the highest level that is appropriate to the situation. Some situations call for fast action whereas others call for careful planning. Some situations require flexibility and others require predictable behavior. The lower levels of interaction tend to yield fast, predictable behavior while the higher levels provide for more flexible behavior.

​

The mind and emotions reside within your brain - your processor. They are responsible for your ability to interact at the higher levels of interaction.

 

The basis for all interaction is Effect, but since an action's effect alone is not truly interaction, we will designate it as level 0. The subsequent, true levels of interaction are:

​

  1. Mechanism - a reaction by an object to an environmental effect. This reaction is generated purely by physical means.

  2. Reflex - an otherwise mechanistic reaction that is generated via the transformation of signals rather than by purely physical means. Reflex requires a mind, but not emotions.

  3. Response - a reaction generated by choice, which requires emotions and a self. The self is an internal mental model of the object itself.

  4. Initiative - action designed to affect the events of the future rather than react to events of the past.

  5. Dispassion - action based on selfless consideration of what is best for all involved. It requires objectively balancing the mental and emotional processing subsystems.

 

The behavior of both people and organizations is governed primarily by their minds and emotions; their intellect and motivation. Before discussing these, however, we need to understand a bit about systems.

Systems

​A system is a group of interacting objects. We call a group whose components don't interact at all a collection. The members of a collection may affect each other, but the actions of one member are not related to the actions of another. As we add objects to the collection the number of possible actions of the collection expands linearly. That is, adding an object to the collection simply adds its possible actions to the collection, as shown in the following illustration.

SystemDiagramCollections.JPG

Note that any object in a collection can take no action at all. In the preceding diagram the "a" actions could represent no action while the "b" and "c" actions represent actual actions. Including the "no action" action allows us to consider combinations of actions in which some of the objects act but others don't. While this usually isn't a major factor in understanding the way collections act, without it our understanding isn't really complete. However, there is another type of group where including the "no action" action has a profound effect on the group's actions: systems.

​

The difference between a collection and a system lies solely in the interaction of their members. The members of collections don't interact, so the collection is defined by its members. The members of systems must interact because it is their interactions that define the system, not just the members themselves.

 

Interaction makes the behavior of even a simple system more complex than that of even the largest and most varied collections. Since each object's actions are dependent on the other objects' actions, adding an object to the system expands the number of possible actions of the system exponentially. That is, adding an object to the system multiplies the system's possible actions by the number of actions the object can take, as shown in the following diagram.

The preceding two illustrations show only two objects with three actions each, so the difference doesn't seem all that great. However, consider 8 objects with 10 actions each. In a collection they produce 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 = 10 x 8 = 80 potential actions. As a system they produce 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 = 10 to the 8th power = 100,000,000 potential interactions. This is why including the “no action” action has a greater impact on systems than on collections. 10 x 8 becomes 11 x 8 for a collection, increasing its possible actions from 80 to 88. However, for a system 10 to the eighth power becomes 11 to the eighth power. We jump from a hundred million to over two hundred million possible interactions.

​

The previous examples used objects that all had the same number of potential actions to clearly illustrate the linear vs. exponential relationship of collections vs. systems. However, most systems are comprised of different objects, so not all objects are capable of the same number of actions. For example we may have a collection of 3 objects that are capable of 5, 4, and 7 actions respectively for a total of 5 + 4 + 7 = 16 possible actions. If the objects interact as a system so that their actions depend on each other this becomes 5 x 4 x 7 = 140 possible interactions.

​

Numbers of combinations of actions seem very abstract, so let's consider a practical example of the difference between a collection and a system. Consider a hermit who has separated himself from society and lives off the land. He may be affected by society and society may affect him since each will use environmental resources, making those resources unavailable to the other. However, the way society affects him does not depend on the way he affects society and vice versa. Although they are members of the same collection – the group of people that live in the area – the hermit is not a member of the social system comprised of the society's members. The hermit and the society may affect each other but they don't interact.

​

The rest of the people in the group, however, are part of the social system. They interact with each other. In fact, their interactions define the system. The ways in which they interact are countless. Therefore the number of different actions they can collectively take on their environment is countless. If they were all simply non-interacting members of a collection the number of actions they might take on the environment would still be large, but not countless. A collection of non-interacting hermits behaves in a much simpler manner than the same people interacting together to form a society.

​

Since collections are defined simply by their members whereas systems are defined by the interactions of their members, systems have several traits that collections don't.

​

  1. A system has defining properties that none of its parts or subsystems have individually.
    The way the members of a system interact determines how the system as a whole will interact with its environment and its members. In fact the easiest way to define a system is by identifying the properties that it has, but that none of its parts or subsystems individually have. These are the defining properties of the system. If the defining properties of a system change then the system itself changes. In other words, the behavior of a system is not just the sum of the behaviors of its parts. The defining properties of the system manifest only when its parts interact. They disappear if the parts don't interact, and the system becomes a mere collection.
     

    For example, consider the brain. No one brain cell is capable of thought. Only when the cells interact together can the brain think. In fact, the brain alone can't really think. It will quickly die if separated from the rest of the body. Only when the brain is integrated with the rest of the body can it think. The brain is therefore a subsystem of the body and can't carry out one of its primary functions when separated from the body. This leads us to the next characteristic of systems.
     

  2. The parts of a system behave differently in the context of the system than they do apart from it.
    In other words, every part of a system has one or more defining actions, or roles, with regard to the system. These are represented by actions a, b, and c of the objects in the preceding diagram.

    This means that the actions of any part of a system can affect the behavior of the entire system. Further, at least some actions of each system component must impact the system, although every action of a component need not have a material effect on the system. Therefore removing a part from a system changes the behavior of the system. In fact some parts are so tightly coupled with their parent system that removing them from that system renders them, and possibly the system itself useless. If you remove your brain from your body it can no longer think or perform any of its other vital functions and the entire body will die.
     

    However, while a part can sometimes be rendered dysfunctional by separating it from its parent system, in other cases it simply loses the properties that make it a part of that system. This can in turn alter its behavior with respect to other systems to which it may belong. This is not surprising when we consider the nature of interaction. Recall that interaction means that the way an object acts on its environment depends on the way the environment acts on the object. If we remove an object from a system we are changing its environment. Since the new environment will behave differently than the old one the object will interact with it differently.
     

    Consider the case of marriage. Two people who are married form a system called a family. They behave differently toward each other and toward others than the same two people if they are not married. Society and those in it also treat them differently, for example with regard to taxation, property (in community property states), and various social engagements. If the wife and husband in a family with children divorce then the family system is changed drastically. If there are no children it is dissolved entirely. From these two defining traits of systems we can deduce the following, third trait.
     

  3. Systems operate most efficiently by optimizing the interactions between their parts, not by optimizing the parts themselves.
    A very important corollary of this trait is that if all parts of a system operate at maximum efficiency we can be sure that the system itself is not operating as efficiently as it could. If we take the wings from the most maneuverable type of plane, the engine from the fastest, and the fuselage from the most comfortable we won't get the best possible plane. In fact, we won't even get a plane that flies.

    Similarly, if a wife and husband spend all of their time improving themselves and no time on their relationship, the marriage will not succeed. This is true even if their motives for self improvement are altruistic, such as trying to make themselves more attractive to their spouse. However, if they spend all of their time improving their relationship and no time on self improvement then the marriage will almost certainly succeed, although the husband and wife as individuals may not be as well developed as they could be.
     

    Therefore we can't empower society just by empowering ourselves. We must also manage the interactions between ourselves and the other members of society in an empowered way to develop the best possible society. This is why the empowered must be willing to make personal sacrifices to help empower others and society as a whole. If we put all of our resources into optimizing a system's parts, including ourselves, then there will be no resources left to optimize interactions. On the other hand we must devote some resources to improving the parts of a system or the interactions will not be as effective as possible. There is a balance in allocation of resources between improving the parts of the system and improving their interactions. This balance point is different for each system and finding it is a critical task for whoever manages the system. In most cases, however, we'll need to put the majority of the resources into improving interactions rather than parts since the interactions of the parts define the system.

Intellection

Intellection is the ability to systematically manipulate data and the other concepts that are based on data. While we usually think of concepts as reasonably complex structures, for our purposes we'll also include the simpler structures like data.

​

The intellect manipulates concepts via processing mechanisms that give rise to the intellectual functions. These functions are combined into logical constructs called programs that are capable of transforming data and other concepts in very complex ways. Intellectual programs contain the logic that allows a processor to carry out its parent object's functions. Computer programs, meetings within organizations, and thought are all examples of intellection.

​

The intellect is indispensable to the processor. Motivation is only required by the processors of entities - objects that can choose - but without intellection there is no processing at all. Intellect is the source of computation, calculation, analysis, synthesis, evaluation, thought, and similar activities involving the manipulation of concepts. In general the intellect is responsible for:

​

  1. Accepting input data from the environment, usually via an abstraction interface.

  2. Retrieving relevant data and other concepts from memory.

  3. Transforming data and other concepts by routing them to the relevant programs and executing those programs.

  4. Synchronizing output from multiple programs.

  5. Storing both input concepts and output (transformed) concepts in memory.

  6. Using output data to act on the environment, usually via an actualization interface.

​

Not all processors perform all of these activities. For instance some processors such as those of early electronic calculators have no memory in which to store data. They simply accept input and transform it to output. However, when any of the preceding six functions are performed, they are part of the intellectual process.

​

While all of these functions can be complex, all but two of them are reasonably easy to understand in principle. However, the transformation of data and synchronization of the results are another story. Understanding in detail how even a relatively simple computer chip works usually requires a degree in computer science or electrical engineering. The inner workings of the brain's intellect are currently beyond our comprehension, although we have begun to scratch the surface with modern neuroscience.

Like interaction, intellection can be represented in levels.

​

  1. Data - the basis for all other intellection.

  2. Information - data placed into context.

  3. Knowledge - organized information.

  4. Understanding - knowledge of relationships.

  5. Wisdom - understanding applied without bias.

​

Wisdom reveals the implicit and often inaccurate or invalid assumptions on which our paradigms - our ways of perceiving the world - are based. It will allow us to construct an objective, systemic paradigm - empowerment - that will greatly improve the effectiveness of our interactions and therefore our competence and happiness. Building the empowerment paradigm, however, is only half the battle. Adopting it will require a substantial, prolonged effort. It will require motivation.

Motivation

Motivation is simply the means of prioritizing and selecting which programs will be run and which outputs will be actualized. While intellection is the only indispensable subsystem of the processor, motivation is required for all save the lowest levels of interaction. Further, it is intimately integrated with all save the lowest levels of intellection. Where intellection transforms data and other concepts, motivation directs the transformation. Motivation is as much of a determining factor in the behavior of animals, people, and organizations as is intellection.

​

As with interaction and intellection, there are levels of motivation. Low levels of interaction and intellection make use only of low levels of motivation. Higher levels of interaction and intellection make use of higher levels of motivation as well as lower levels of motivation. They use the level(s) appropriate to the circumstances.

​

Motivation integrates with intellection to provide the processing functionality that governs the interactions of everyone. However, while we often equate intellection with thought and motivation with emotion, the distinction between these types of processing functionality is often not very clear cut. Both impact our paradigm but neither affects it in isolation. Similarly, as with interaction and intellection, the distinction between the levels of motivation is usually quite fuzzy. However, defining levels is still quite helpful in understanding motivation as a whole. These levels are:

​

  1. Purpose - being external, purpose itself is not motivation, but it is the basis for the other levels of motivation, which are internal.

  2. Directive - purpose that is actualized as programs that generate rational yet unpredictable output.

  3. Choice - the process of selecting from among conflicting directive outputs by referencing an internal model of the processor's parent object - the self.

  4. Discipline - the ability to choose to make sacrifices in the present to obtain benefits in the future.

  5. Love - the will to create; to objectively and wisely use resources to maximize creation and minimize destruction.

 

There is one aspect of motivation that is not a level. Rather, it is a set of directives that support motivation at all levels. It is not only a source of motivation but a goal of motivation as well. We call it happiness.

​

Happiness means different things to different people. Generally, it is a sense of satisfaction with our current state. It engenders a desire to maintain that state. Its converse – unhappiness – is a sense of dissatisfaction with our current state, which engenders a desire to improve that state.

However, what precisely constitutes satisfaction or dissatisfaction varies widely between individuals. There are several types of satisfaction, of which happiness is only one. While these types can be organized logically into levels based on their intensity and duration, these levels do not correspond to the levels of motivation. In order from most intense and temporary to most diffuse and permanent they are:

​

  1. Pleasure / Pain - Since they are contact stimuli, pleasure and pain are also very temporary. Pleasure only provides satisfaction while the pleasant stimulus is active and pain only provides dissatisfaction while the painful or uncomfortable stimulus is active. While the directive to seek pleasure and avoid pain is always active, the sought or avoided stimuli themselves are temporary.

  2. Amusement / Boredom - The directive to seek amusement – mental stimulation – and avoid boredom is only strong in people, although it may be weakly present in some higher animals. It doesn’t support the directive to survive directly, but indirectly through the directive to learn; to mentally adapt to the environment. Mental stimulation manifests in such behaviors as curiosity, imagining, and the enjoyment of beauty. It does not typically influence short term behavior as much as pleasure and pain because it is less intense than physical stimulation. However, mental stimulation tends to impact longer term behavior more than physical stimulation because amusement and boredom are generally more enduring than pleasure and pain.

  3. Happiness / Unhappiness - Happiness is far less transient, but also less intense than either amusement or pleasure. While pain and boredom can temporarily reduce happiness as pleasure and amusement can temporarily increase it, happiness generally fluctuates less than do these lower level types of satisfaction. It is more influenced by changes in our long term relationships and state than by more transient events. Falling in love, changing jobs or social groups, marriage, divorce, moving to another city, or losing a loved one will all impact our happiness more than winning the lottery or buying a car. The latter group of events only impact the objects in our lives whereas the former group impact our relationships.

  4. Serenity / Despondency - Happiness and unhappiness are long term states that can last a lifetime, but serenity - a sense of fulfillment - is eternal. When we know we are fulfilling our fundamental purpose – our reason for being – we experience a sense of joy and peace that trumps pleasure and pain, amusement and boredom, and even happiness and unhappiness. Fulfillment is the one thing we can take with us when we die. It is therefore worth any sacrifice to achieve. However, far from requiring us to sacrifice happiness, amusement, and pleasure, it only requires us to redirect them. We must source these lower levels of satisfaction from our sense of fulfillment rather than basing them on the objects, events, and relationships around us. Serenity requires detachment and dispassion, but engenders happiness and, to a lesser extent, amusement and pleasure.

Putting it all Together

This has been a whirlwind tour of the concepts that underlie empowerment. We've briefly described interaction and the nature of interacting objects - systems. We have also briefly looked at the way thought and motivation influence our behavior. Most importantly, we have seen in a very general way how the higher levels of interaction, intellection, and motivation can lead us toward higher degrees of competence and happiness, both corporately and individually. While we'll ultimately need to delve into these concepts in more detail, for now they give us the high level tools we need begin exploring empowerment at a high level. If you want to learn the details now, however, you can download free .PDFs of the overview of empowerment, Empowerment Book I: Fundamentals, or our more in depth book, Empowerment Book II: Foundation here. Otherwise, now it's time to take a look at The Empowerment Paradigm.

bottom of page