Hierarchy is seductive.
From the earliest days of thought, we have imagined knowledge as a pyramid: observation at the base, law above it, theory above the law, metatheory crowning the structure. Authority accrues with elevation. Distance from the concrete is equated with rigor. Elevation signals ontological privilege.
But if complementarity is structural, not local, hierarchy is an illusion — and its persistence demands explanation.
1. The Persistence of Vertical Metaphor
Vertical metaphors are everywhere:
-
Science speaks of “levels of explanation.”
-
Philosophy speaks of “first principles” and “foundations.”
-
Education speaks of “higher-order thinking” and “advanced reasoning.”
This language is not trivial. It encodes assumptions about directionality and priority:
-
“Higher” = more real.
-
“Lower” = derivative, subordinate, empirical.
Yet, from the perspective of the cline:
-
“Higher” and “lower” are merely relational positions along structured potential.
-
Any position can be read upward or downward.
-
Authority is contingent, not ontological.
The metaphor survives because it is cognitively compelling, socially reinforced, and institutionally convenient.
2. Authority by Directional Reification
Hierarchy persists because construal is stabilised through repetition and institutional practice:
-
A theoretical model is repeatedly treated as “fundamental.”
-
Students are taught to prioritise its lens.
-
Scholarship circulates in ways that reinforce its status.
But this is directional authority, not ontological authority.
The model’s constraints are real, but only from the particular direction of construal that situates it as foundational. Viewed from another angle, it is instance — a pattern among others — susceptible to reinterpretation, extension, or displacement.
Hierarchy is a social artefact of perspective, not a law of being.
3. Cognitive Comfort and the Illusion of Stability
The illusion persists because humans crave certainty:
-
We simplify the cline into discrete tiers.
-
We treat local asymmetries as global truths.
-
We stabilise one position to reduce the anxiety of reversibility.
Yet the cline is continuous, structured, and reversible.
Hierarchical thinking is the mental habit of misreading a local asymmetry as universal fact.
4. The Institutional Sedimentation of Hierarchy
Beyond cognitive comfort, hierarchy persists because it serves institutional purposes:
-
Granting authority to one construal enables coordination of research and pedagogy.
-
Funding, publication, and evaluation operate as if there were a fixed pyramid of knowledge.
-
Norms reinforce the idea that higher levels are inherently more explanatory.
These are real forces, but they operate on top of the structural gradient. They do not change the fact that any level can function as instance relative to a broader potential.
Hierarchy is, therefore, a pragmatic fiction.
5. Reversibility Undermines Ontological Privilege
Complementarity, properly understood, dissolves the illusion of vertical privilege:
-
Laws are instance relative to broader theoretical landscapes.
-
Metalevels are instance relative to even more general relational fields.
-
Data is theory in disguise; theory is instantiated pattern.
No construal can claim ultimate superiority.
Hierarchy remains a heuristic, not a fact.
6. Implications
Recognising the structural illusion of hierarchy:
-
Frees theorists from false elevation.
-
Focuses attention on relational positioning rather than vertical authority.
-
Enables a consistent reading of complementarity across domains.
-
Highlights the contingency of institutionalised “levels” of knowledge.
Hierarchy is real enough socially, but its ontological weight is illusory. Reversibility, directional complementarity, and the structured cline show us why.
In the next post, we turn to Theory as Directional Positioning.
If hierarchy is an illusion, then every act of theorising is not a climb. It is a stance — a deliberate position within the relational gradient of structured potential and actualisation.
From this perspective, authority is not a matter of elevation but of situational leverage.
No comments:
Post a Comment