Ld of thought products and art functions (Popper, 1972). The basic concept is the fact that the structural perspective is neither a first- nor third-person point of view. Nonetheless, experiential or objective information may perhaps serve because the components of structural models. In other words, structural models suspend the categorical difference of first- and third-person descriptions. An encompassing structural framework is for example offered by dynamical systems theory (DST, e.g., Guckenheimer and Holmes, 2002) and self-organization theory (synergetics: Haken, 2000). DST is aimed at the deterministic modeling of modify and stability of a technique, whereas synergetics especially models pattern formation and phase transitions, in which deterministic and stochastic processes are combined. Both structural disciplines are according to a formal mathematical terminology. Proponents of self-organization theory have presented different approaches to model the emergence of novel properties arising from decrease levels of a hierarchy. Such “contextual emergence” (Atmanspacher and beim Graben, 2009) assumes a structural relation among different levels of description. As an example, the PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21383217 mind might be viewed within the context of neuronal dynamics (Haken and Tschacher, 2010). A current reconstruction of intentionality, the defining home of first-person experience, in terms of synergetics and contextual emergence was presented by beim Graben (2014). He used a dissipative non-equilibrium system (so-called magnetic surface swimmers) to show that self-assembling patterns with intentional behavior can be determined by, but not lowered to, order NAMI-A uncomplicated physical and electromagnetic laws. In this vein, Kyselo and Tschacher (2014) have previously elaborated the concept that the psychological self–and social relationships amongst selves–may be analyzed applying structural concepts joining enactive embodied theorizing with DST. As mentioned, the person self is hypothesized, in enactivist terms, to exhibit two independent strivings, distinction and participation. Kyselo and Tschacher (2014) proposed a model making use of a geometrical phase space that may be spanned by distinction and participation as two diverse dimensions; they are seen because the coordinate axes of phase space. The stability of all distinctionparticipation states were symbolized by basins and hills in the “landscape” of such a phase space. The elevation of a state in phase space, its third dimension, reflects an “energetic” worth (the potential V) of that state. As method states x tend to relax toward states of decrease power, the momentary state of a system follows trajectories (like a ball that would roll downhill). In DST, a possible minimum (basin) is definitely an attractor of the phase spaceApril 2015 Volume six ArticleTschacher et al.Alliance: a common factorof a technique, denoting states with decrease possible and thus higher probability; analogously, a hill denotes a repellor. One particular might say that the behavior in x follows a probability distribution p, where p(x) is negatively associated with V(x). Here, we continue the project of describing interaction dynamics in structural terms. We assume that distinction and participation are two poles of a single dimension x, akin to Horowitz’ communion axis on the circumplex (cf. Figure 1). In comparison with Kyselo and Tschacher (2014), who permitted orthogonal (uncorrelated) distinction and participation dimensions, this suggests a simplified initial step of modeling. As a result we premise here that distinction and participation are mutually ex.
