2018 September

When in doubt, push the agenda? Or use Value Dynamics

From the Aug 31, 2018, NYTIMES:


“The Daily”: When we almost stopped climate change

The U.S. had an opportunity to solve the environmental crisis in the 1980s. What went wrong?”


This lead follows right after the “global warming caused by man” agenda.

“As the world warms because of human-induced climate change, most of us can expect to see more days when temperatures hit 90 degrees Fahrenheit.”

Now, they switched it to an “environmental crisis” after they state that “When we almost stopped climate change.”

[One needs to note the logical inconsistency in moving from climate change to environment without noting differences and causal factors.]

I want to point out something in this value set (FS-GREEN) as depicted in notation as n=1.

Note that “we” have become the “authority” and are now “responsible.”

In other systems, there is a different “PAAR” (Power, Accountability, Authority and Responsibility).

This seems important to me and has been something I’ve noted (PAAR) about other value sets and their emphasis on one or another of the PAAR (PAAA) components and their corresponding social motives ( ):


CP-RED – Power (Pwr) [I]

DQ-BLUE – Accountability (Avd) [you]

ER-ORANGE – Author-ity (Ach) [they]

FS-GREEN – Responsibility (Aff) [we]

The n=1, and “we” emphasis is very important as it differs from the “I”, “you” and “they” connotations of the subject in the other value sets noted above, and hold responsibility forward as the binding component, rather than the other components of PAAR, noted in other value sets.

When the social motive system is coupled with each value set, affiliation (aff) lines up as the goto system in n=1, much differently that power (pwr) directs the n “of” 1 system you might see in CP-RED, the two being kindred spirits which is why so much violence emerges with FS-GREEN (for other reasons that have been historically been noted).*

I’ve often noted that FS-GREEN responsibility is an “illogical, or logically inconsistent” subjective system UNLIKE its cool (sacrifice of self) subjective but logically-consistent counterpart in DQ-BLUE, unlike its warm (express-self) objective opposites in CP-RED and ER-ORANGE.

The reasoning in FS-GREEN includes illogical feeling and while a “rational” process, confounds logic, which means facts are largely attributed to different sources outside of logic, as is present in purely logically or thinking systems.

[This speaks in large part to the divides currently polarised between “right and left” connotation.]

While there are “logical” reasoners in FS-GREEN, the inclusion of illogical feelers dominates and overrides that component…so much so that illogical processes “seem” to become logical.

When this takes place such as the statement that triggered my response:

“…When we almost stopped climate change”

We move quickly past the point where assumptions remain unquestioned….largely because emotion, or “feeling of what happened” comes before “thinking of what happened in the chain of cognition, according to Damasio.

To move “with” the statement quoted, one must believe “first” that humans have the power to alter climate change and hold “a responsibility” to do so.

Those are two fundamental beliefs—both of which are illogical, yet seen as logical fact by the followers—are critical to moving “forward.”

Clearly, if one believes that humans are not significant enough to alter climate change and thus not be held responsible (different than pollution), because no human has the power of weather, earthquakes, comets, or volcanos—at least not yet, it would be impossible for even the collective efforts of all humans simultaneously to move mountains, ash, rock, water or wind, even cosmic radiation or planet magnetism such as does the forces on climate—humans not being one.

It is this n=1 notion which assumes the responsibility, where in fact, none is warranted (note that pollution and climate change are NOT the save system, although some crossovers exist, and in the primary quote, a reference is made to suggest correlation, thus causation.).

The mere illogical emergence of a contorted fact places us at a disadvantage “in the process” of dealing with changes in climate and wasting resources that could have been used to prepare for dramatic shifts in climate that have been a part of the historical record.

Lest we forget that failures in assumptional analysis are at the root of problems.


Each value set through its motive core offers distinct problems and opportunities and it seems wise to continuously be aware of their emergence, even if it’s through a rear view mirror.


*FS-GREEN because of higher degrees of freedom being is thought to open the cultural fabric to CP-RED opportunism—which does take place—yet more so, relies on n of 1 system for force as driven through the anointment created through “responsibility.” It’s like a big brother responsibility that occurs when the weak are oppressed.