Picking up sticks: when axes matter ii

This past week at WCCS26, I've put Hodges' model itself on the work-, or more properly the inspection bench. Now, referring back to the - 'Our broken sticks' c/o Roger Lewin "Complexity: life at the edge of chaos" post, perhaps a theatre table is required. That is, as I try to examine the model, take it apart, have a look at the bits - as far as they are. And, what about the question posed in the above post?

'If we take the axes of Hodges' model, and break them at twenty-five points, I wonder what we end-up (or start) with?'

If there are twenty-six sticks, well, amongst other things - we've made quite a mess. But, there's more going on.

There may be some kind of idealised symmetry, or is it equality between the necessary, or projected length of the I-G axis. That is, as it extends for the INTERPERSONAL and SOCIOLOGICAL domains. But is there equivalence, in a default sense, for the SCIENCE and POLITICAL domains? Or am I (once again) overthinking? If medicine, health and by implication social care are bio-psycho-social, then surely we have a structural problem? Not only that, but we see a boundary, partition ... axis - in action. In Hodges' model the axes have two parts, two sides, so they are in effect composite. If the bio-psycho-social model is true, in whatever senses we wish to declare, derive or pursue in research (the literature, logic, practice, political expediency, or realism ...), then the group axis is incomplete. 

Hodges' model: Structure and Content - Axes and Domains

Is this literally why health care systems are so difficult to design, develop, establish and sustain? Think about that too, please. Is this why we as individuals rely on a functioning (caring) society and political systems? Is this why health care systems can suddenly be faced with collapse, as geopolitics has revealed. Vulnerability, becomes more than an individual characteristic and experience; when nations are dependent upon others for their funding, organisation, logistics, personnel, continuity and more. As a result, many understandably want to break with this socio-political and coloanial legacy.

Is there something in the sentence above in italics, that we can actually utilise to help define the foundation of Hodges' model? Again, not wanting to sound grandiose, but is there an axiom hidden in there? Even as 'health' is the inevitable election issue. The irony of this! Even if the politics of health and health in politics is not so much hidden as often denied. History reveals the influence of triage on the battlefield on the emergence of medicine and surgery. The future is here now. There is a political fight to follow for health in all its manifest forms. So here is another post to return to.

Hodges' model: An algebra for care - seeking axioms?

Although Oliver had been brought up by philosophers, he was not theoretically acquainted with the beautiful axiom that self-preservation is the first law of nature.
                                                                                    
- Charles Dickens, Oliver Twist

Coady, C. A. J. (1990). Hobbes and “The Beautiful Axiom.” Philosophy, 65(251), 5–17. 
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3751240

"It is an axiom in therapeutics that the more remedies there are proposed for a disease the less likely is any of them to be effective."

[- William Osler]

Mountin, J. W. (1943). Nursing: A Critical Analysis. The American Journal of Nursing, 43(1), 29–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/3416264

Individual

|

     INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES               

HUMANISTIC  --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC      

 SOCIOLOGY  :    POLITICAL 

|

Group

'One of the core tenets of pragmatism, despite its various formulations by William James, Jane Addams, John Dewey, and neo-pragmatists like Rorty, Habermas, and Putnam, is an epistemological axiom first formulated in 1868 by Charles Sanders Peirce. This maxim, often dubbed the pragmatic maxim, states that the meaning of our ideas is best expounded when we can spell out the implications or the effects of these ideas in real-world experience and practice (Peirce 1878).' pp.105-106. (Racine, 2024).

physical - SELF - My body[?]

'The lack of consideration of downside risks applies to all COVID-19 countermeasures, including mass-masking (e.g. the social and psychological consequences of mask-wearing for all kinds of social interaction, most notably in educational and childcare settings) and to the accelerated approval of vaccines. The latter is particularly noteworthy because the need for rigorous testing of new medications to guard against the risk of side effects is a standard axiom of contemporary ethical medical practice. Given that the vaccines in question employed novel mechanisms, not testing them sufficiently to assure their longer term safety was stratospherically risky: it meant that the possibility that this vaccination programme would do more harm than good could not be excluded. Yet, the medical establishment stood foursquare behind it, insisting on the safety and efficacy of the vaccines and pillorying any, including those within it, who demurred.' p.55. (Kelly, 2023).

'“Never have we been so free. Never have we felt so powerless”: this, according to Bauman, is the paradox of our time. Verhaeghe writes with a variant: “Never before have we in the West had it so good, and never have we felt so bad.”33 Because neoliberal axioms determine the standards of what is healthy and normal, society sees those who do not want to participate as sick or abnormal.' pp.97-98. (Vanheste, 2023).

My emphasis

Racine, E. (2024). What Participatory Research and Methods Bring To Ethics: Insights From Pragmatism, Social Science, and Psychology. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 34(1), 99-134. 
 https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/ken.2024.a943431.

Kelly, M.G.E. (2023). Securing the Pandemic: Biopolitics, Capital, and COVID-19. Foucault Studies 35, 46-69. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/940834.

Vanheste, J. (2023). Half a Century of Exhaustion and Madness: The Fiftieth Anniversary of Pink Floyd's The Dark Side of the Moon. Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal 106(1), 87-109. 
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/950363.

See also: 'axiom' : 'algebra' : 'pragmatism'

Person-centred care = care axiomatics at a collective and individual level?

The first rule (axiom?) of first aid is...?

Biology, axioms, teleology and knowledge c/o Cox & Forshaw (2012)

'Teleological ideas generally have a rather bad reputation in science, and it's easy to see why. In biology, a teleological explanation for the emergence of complex creatures would be tantamount to an argument for the existence of a designer, whereas Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection provides a simpler explanation that fits the available data beautifully. There is no teleological component to Darwin's theory - random mutations produce variations in organisms, and external pressures from the environment and other living thing determine which of these variations are passed on to the next generation. This process alone can account for the complexity we see in life on Earth today. In other words, there is no need for a grand plan and no gradual ascent of life towards some sort of perfection. Instead, the evolution of life is a random walk, generated by the imperfect copying of genes in a constantly shifting external environment. The Nobel-Prize-winning French biologist Jacques Monod went so far as to define a cornerstone of modern biology as "the systematic or axiomatic denial that scientific knowledge can be obtained on the basis of theories that involve, explicitly or not, a teleological principle".

As far as physics is concerned, there is no debate as to whether or not the least action principle actually works, for it allows calculations to be performed that correctly describe Nature and it is a cornerstone of physics. It can be argued that the least action principle is not teleological at all, but the debate is in any case neutralized once we have a grasp of Feynman's approach to quantum mechanics. The ball flying through the air 'knows' which path to choose because it actually, secretly, explores every possible path.' pp.52-53.

Cox, Brian, and Jeff Forshaw. (2012) Quantum Universe, the: Everything That Can Happen Does Happen. London: Penguin Books Ltd.

See also: 

Jacques Monod - https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/monod/

Harrison, Peter. 2022. 'The History of Science and Theology', St Andrews Encyclopaedia of Theology. Edited by Brendan N. Wolfe et al. https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/TheHistoryofScienceandTheology

Greslehner GP. "Molecular Biology"- Pleonasm or Denotation for a Discipline of Its Own? Reflections on the Origins of Molecular Biology and Its Situation Today. Biomolecules. 2023 Oct 12;13(10):1511. doi: 10.3390/biom13101511. PMID: 37892193; PMCID: PMC10605324.

Previously: 'axiom' : 'biology' : 'corner'

"Global Mechanism - Your analysis and ideas?" c/o COMMINIT.com

I have posted some items c/o The Communication Initiative Network previously, but that was quite a while ago. Having just contributed to an ongoing discussion I thought it might help me and readers new to COMMINIT to post some background and add to my comment over coming weeks. The topic begins on COMMINIT:

UNICEF, with Rafael Obregon (Chief, Communication for Development, UNICEF New York) leading and The Communication Initiative, through Warren Feek (Executive Director) are holding a series of consultations, to gather views, opinions and ideas on what kind of global mechanism could be helpful for supporting advancements in the scale, sustainability, relevance and influence of programmes, strategies and organisations that develop and implement initiatives rooted in communication and media development, social and behaviour change. 

Background
The global development tapestry has seen the growth of a series of such mechanisms seeking to advance particular fields of work. For example, WASH for All; the Global Partnership for Education and, the Global Partnership on Violence Against Children, amongst others.
As we have reviewed these mechanisms it is clear that there are a range of differing goals and roles including:

• Raising technical standards;

• Advocating value and impact;

• Engaging in policy debates and dialogue;

• Coordinating action;

• Accrediting data;

• Expanding funding levels; and,

• Acting as a legitimate global point of contact for policymakers, funders and other major global players in development.

What kind of mechanism - priority, strategy, structure?
The major question for the social and behaviour change, communication and media for development field of work is what kind of mechanism – focus and structure - could help to advance our field of work. Consequently, there will be 3 major themes to the consultation that we will be holding. From your perspective and experience:

1. What priority goals and themes would you propose as the focus of such a possible mechanism?
2. What strategic approach should such a possible mechanism take to work towards those goals?
3. How would you recommend that such a mechanism be structured and organised?

continued... 


There was a meeting last year in London but I could not attend. I was prompted to write following a brief comment by Lorenzo Vargas...

Communication... also as a right (and more in Hodges' model)

I have copied and will further develop my ramblings as follows...

Dear Lorenzo and All,

'Communication' needs to be considered as not just a com-plex concept (process, social, practice, research, purpose, policy, reality...) but a com-pound phenomena too.

I have raised the potential of Hodges' model previously and in your few lines Lorenzo you also highlight how this (open) model might help integrate and provide a generic foundation for the whole health care agenda, locally, globally and glocally - through technology and culture.

First I quite agree to 'communication' being a Right: definitely and even when claims of rights has been described as a 'rights-fest'. In some contexts communication is a privilege, when cultural and historical structures accord a speaker - the 'stage'. Communication as much an innate ability. So the work of Paul Watzlawick needs to taken into account. The primacy of communication is made explicit in the first of Watzlawick's axioms of communication: "One cannot not communicate." Stepping over several axioms, number five brings us to the health context: "Inter-human communication procedures are either symmetric or complementary." This communication dynamic is the pivotal point of entry for communication as a right. The politics of axiom 5 is why we focus so closely on advocacy, engagement, safeguarding, guardianship, best interests, translation services and other measures that might include others acting as a proxy. If these are legal so much the better, if recourse to law if needed is accessible and affordable for example. In health, gender and development contexts a mix (compound) of qualities, characteristics and outcomes must be taken into account:

• being heard (physically, linguistically, politically, educationally - literacy, culturally ...)
• and being able to hear (physically, politically, language, environment, educationally - literacy ...)

We must also include choosing not to communicate (verbally, non-verbally, vote) and such acts ?

I'm sure we can all add our own experiential, personal, and professional emphases on the above.

The link below (should... ) outline Hodges' model - a generic conceptual framework.

Hodges' model - Structure and Care Domains

What is 'spiritual' encompasses the whole model.

As a 'right' like human rights we can place this conceptually in the POLITICAL domain. The scope of 'communication' and its dimensions can then be reflected upon and made more explicit. 

There are a number of 'gifts' in your comment beyond the obvious one in C4D :-)

We are aware of the skills needed in the sciences and many clinical treatments in handling instruments. The history of science is full of them through to the fact of robots deftly and with mm accuracy (and less) assisting in surgery.

For communication to be a right, this should necessitate a series, or at least one 'policy instrument'. 

In Hodges' model the SCIENCES and POLITICAL domains are associated with what is usually considered MECHANISTIC (physical).

This is not merely word association, but a tool that imho can help this and related communities.

With communication as a right, Hodges' model can help stress the need for the many identified and debated literacies to be made a reality. Or if they are not realised, then those who control axiom 5 (and other key factors - social media?) can be held to account?

Just to close I am presenting Hodges' model in London on the 18 May - there is a link on the blog's sidebar.

Thank you for your comment Lorenzo.

I hope this helps your deliberations?

Kind regards,

Peter Jones

Jones, P. (1996). Do we need an overarching theory of health communication? Health Informatics Journal, 2,1,28-34.