Motivation

Chapter 5. Motivation

Motivation as distance · Three levels of MTV · The compilation chain · Collective mismatch · The recursive regime · Typology

5. 1. Motivation as a metric distance

Motivation in the theory of Gativus is not a single psychological phenomenon and not a «force» pushing the organism to action. Motivation is a metric distance in the corresponding vector space, and in the architecture a separate device answers to it — MTV, one per transformation. At each level motivation is defined identically: it is a nonzero connective vector requiring nullification. While the vector is nonzero — the system moves; when it is nullified — movement ceases.

The principle is one for all three levels, but the content of the distance is fundamentally different:

1. •

   GTR1, MTV1 — metric distance. The b-vector is centimeters and meters in physical space. A cat sees a mouse — the b-vector is nonzero — the cat moves; caught it — the b-vector is nullified — movement has ceased.

2. •

   GTR2, MTV2 — semantic distance. The k-vector is the distance between narrative states in MP23. A student does not know the answer — the k-vector is nonzero — the student thinks; solved it — the k-vector is nullified — thinking on the problem ceases.

3. •

   GTR3, MTV3 — conceptual distance. The w-vector is the contradiction between two concepts on the field MP31. A person experiences injustice — the w-vector is nonzero — the person acts; the contradiction is sublated — the w-vector is nullified — peace.

The higher level of motivation sets the meaning and direction of the lower ones. The w-vector is compiled into the k-vector, the k-vector into the b-vector: will generates a plan, the plan generates an action. Motivation is not a «desire», but a distance. No distance — no movement; there is a distance — movement is inevitable. The only question is which level sets the direction.

It is important from the outset to separate the roles of the devices. MTV sets the vector distance itself — what requires nullification. The semantic predictor PRD computes the variants of the path that nullify this vector (route, narrative plan, path of sublation), while the syntactic predictor SPL closes each separate unit. The operational network OP executes the chosen variant. The trajectory log TRL stores the states and the marked experience (Chapter 4). Motivation is a vector, not a computation and not an execution; the conflation of these roles is a frequent source of confusion.

5. 2. Three levels of individual motivation

Full individual motivation contains exactly three levels — one MTV device per transformation. No fourth, «collective» MTV device exists: collective motivation, as shown below, is a derived quantity on the concordance of many individual vectors, not a separate device.

Table 5.1. The three levels of motivation-distance.

a) Physical motivation (MTV1, b-vector)

The distance from the current state to the goal configuration in physical space. The content is a biologically determined drive: hunger is the distance to food, fear is the distance from a threat (a b-vector of the reverse direction), sexual drive is the distance to a partner.

Example. A wolf pursues a deer. The b-vector is the distance wolf→deer; it is set by MTV1. The semantic predictor PRD1 builds BLOM — variants of the pursuit route; TRL1 contains precedents of past hunts with markers; taking the markers into account, a strategy is chosen, the operational network OP13 executes it. Motivation ceases when the b-vector is nullified (the deer is caught or lost). GTR1 is present in all animals with a spatial map — it is the most ancient level of motivation.

b) Symbolic motivation (MTV2, k-vector)

The distance is semantic — between narrative states. The content is a need for symbolic completeness: an unsolved problem is a k-vector between the condition and the answer; an unfinished book is a k-vector between what is read and the finale; the search for the right word is a k-vector between the meaning and its symbolic expression.

Example. A scientist proves a theorem. The k-vector is the distance from the axioms to the proposition (MTV2). PRD2 builds KLOM — variants of chains of logical steps; TRL2 stores precedents: some methods led to success, others to a dead end; the method is chosen taking the markers into account. Motivation ceases when the k-vector is nullified (the theorem is proved). GTR2 is specifically human. A scientist solving a problem for the sake of the problem itself is a pure example of GTR2: he is not hungry (MTV1 does not dominate) and does not experience a conceptual crisis (MTV3 is inactive), but cannot stop, because the k-vector is nonzero.

c) Conceptual motivation (MTV3, w-vector)

The distance is conceptual — the contradiction between two concepts. The content is the necessity of sublating the contradiction between the is and the ought. This is will — not in the sense of a «volitional effort», but in the sense of a driving force that cannot be ignored when the w-vector exceeds a threshold. Important: the concept of the ought is largely formed by the shared concepts of culture (Chapter 8), so the source of the polarization «is/ought» is partly social — the w-vector as such is a contradiction of two concepts, not a difference of projections of one.

Example. A doctor works in a system that compels refusing patients without insurance. There is a contradiction between the concept of the actual practice and the concept of medical duty (the latter largely set by the shared concepts of medical ethics). The w-vector is nonzero (MTV3). A downward compilation begins: the w-vector is deconvolved into a narrative MP23 («what can I do?»), the narrative into symbolic steps, the steps into physical actions. The doctor writes to the administration, turns to the press, changes jobs. Each action is a BLOM compiled from a KLOM compiled from a WLOM. Motivation ceases when the w-vector is nullified — a deep peace. MTV3 is the highest individual motivation: it is able to block GTR1 (the doctor risks income) and to subordinate GTR2 (symbolic thinking becomes an instrument of will, not an end in itself).

5. 3. The compilation chain

The full embodiment of a conceptual experience — from concept to physical action — is a downward compilation through all the levels downward.

MP33 → MP23 (will into narrative). PRD3 builds WLOM; each WILL is deconvolved into a narrative plan — a KLOM on MP23. The moment when «I know that I must» becomes «here is what I will do». Inner speech turns on, the person formulates a plan for himself.

MP23 → MP13 (narrative into behavior). The narrative sets symbolic goals; each utterance is deconvolved downward through the reverse deconvolution of symbols (MP21 → MP11), generating imagined objects and a movement plan on MP13 with the status «planned». B-vectors appear — a scenario of movement. The experience acquires a bodily dimension.

MP13 → motor activity. The b-vectors are deconvolved into motor commands through the sensory-reflexive subsystem. The person acts: walks, speaks, writes.

This chain explains the phenomenon of embodiment: a concept, initially devoid of spatial properties, through several steps of compilation acquires a bodily dimension. Shame (a w-vector) → obsessive thoughts (KLOM) → a «lump in the throat» (a b-vector without a motor output) → the flushing of the face (deconvolution into the GTR0 subsystem). The whole chain from concept to physiology passes through the steps of compilation.

Compilation can be interrupted at any step. If the narrative plan is not deconvolved into behavior (there is no physical possibility of realizing it) — the semantic predictor PRD returns to the level MP23 and builds an alternative plan. If no plan is deconvolved — the w-vector remains unsublated, generating background activity at the conceptual level (an existential impasse; cf. the unclosed WILL in Chapter 4).

5. 4. Collective mismatch

Up to now the discussion has been of motivation within one organism. But individuals act side by side, and their connective vectors enter into relation with one another. Here it is necessary to fix at once the architectural status of collective motivation, so as not to fall into the error of the first edition.

The emergent level has no MTV device of its own. There is no «collective motivator» with a carrier of its own — all the information remains physically in the individual maps. Collective motivation is a derived quantity: the mismatch of the individual vectors of the members of a group. Let us denote it by delta: Δb, Δk, Δw — the distance not between a state and a goal within one subject, but between the vectors of different subjects. These are not the fourth, fifth, and sixth levels of MTV, but a relation on the three already existing.

Δb — physical mismatch. The distance between what an individual does and what the joint action requires. A pack of wolves surrounds a deer: each has its own b-vector to the prey, but the concordance of positions (who on the left, who on the right) goes through the observation of the behavior of neighbors. Δb is the divergence between the individual position and the position the shared behavior requires. No language is needed: coordination goes at the level of observed behavior.

Δk — symbolic mismatch. The distance between an individual narrative and the generally accepted one. A scientist publishes a result diverging from the consensus — a Δk arises between his narratives and the shared narratives of the community. The community evaluates: convincing arguments shift the shared narratives (a scientific revolution changes the narratives of many), unconvincing ones compel the author to revise his own (a retraction). Each publication is an attempt to nullify Δk.

Δw — conceptual mismatch. The distance between the differently directed w-vectors of the members of a society. Part of society considers some practice just, part does not; their concepts of the ought diverge. Δw is nonzero and is not sublated within one individual. Institutions (law, courts, debates) try to sublate it by codification — the fixing of the resolution at the level of shared narratives. But the sublation of one Δw changes the shared concepts and thereby generates new mismatches in the following generations.

These processes are real, but do not form a separate story of the architecture with devices of their own. Law, morality, ethics are «reified» sublations of the Δw of previous generations; their physical manifestation each time arises at the individual conceptual level (MTV3) and from there is compiled downward by the resources of individual organisms. Collective mismatch sets what the individual vectors gravitate toward, but always moves through individuals — it has no other carrier.

5. 5. The hierarchy of motivation

The three levels are not equivalent. The conceptual (MTV3) is the highest: it sets the direction of the symbolic (MTV2), which sets the direction of the physical (MTV1). This does not mean that MTV3 always wins. Dominance in a concrete individual depends on the development of GTR3 and the richness of the field of concepts MP31; on the richness of TRL3 (whether there is experience of successfully sublating w-vectors); on the modulus of the w-vector (whether it exceeds the threshold); on the competition with the sensory-reflexive subsystem (the modulus of the physical drive may turn out to be higher).

Typical conflicts. GTR1 against GTR3: a hungry person steals bread — the b-vector defeats the w-vector (the concept of honesty); with a developed field of concepts and a rich TRL3 the w-vector may win — the person endures hunger for the sake of a principle. GTR2 against GTR3: a scientist discovers that his result supports an immoral application — the k-vector (an unfinished narrative, curiosity) conflicts with the w-vector (the concept of responsibility); the outcome depends on the moduli. A collective conflict: a society develops a technology generating new conceptual contradictions (Δw): atomic energy, genetic engineering, artificial intelligence are examples of this kind.

5. 6. The recursive regime

Collective conceptual mismatch in the limit exhausts practical motivation: institutions are optimized, Δw is minimized. Where does the system move further? Further movement turns inward — to the analysis of its own architecture. The w-vector is directed not at the world, but at the very system that generates w-vectors.

This is not a new level of the map and not a new device — it is a change of the direction of the w-vector: from changing the world to cognizing one's own mechanism. The recursive regime is the third step after individual and collective motivation. The individual one nullifies distances within the organism; the collective one, between organisms; the recursive one turns the system upon itself.

Architecturally the recursive regime is the conceptual level building a WLOM whose object of sublation is the very construction of the field of concepts. For this it is necessary that the narrative map MP23 contain narratives about its own architecture (theories of consciousness, philosophical systems — from the shared narratives); that the convolution of GTR3, having taken these narratives as input, form concepts about its own construction; and that a nonzero w-vector arise between how the system is constructed and how it understands itself.

The moment when the system is able to analyze and describe its own transformations — from the cellular GTR0 to the conceptual GTR3 and the collective level above them — is an act of recursive self-cognition. The theory of Gativus is an instance of what it describes: it is a w-vector turned by the system upon its own architecture. The detailed development of this theme — the compact transmissible pole of the information circuit (IDEA) — belongs to the book Metaphysics.

5. 7. A typology of personalities by dominant motivation

The dominant level of motivation determines the type of personality — not as a permanent characteristic, but as the current configuration of the system.

a) Dominance of GTR1 (the physical type)

The symbolic and conceptual levels are undeveloped or inactive. Behavior is determined by the b-vector: an immediate drive — hunger, fear, desire — sets the actions. Symbolic planning is minimal, there is no conceptual conflict. The normal case is an infant, an animal; the pathological — severe developmental disorders, cases of linguistic isolation (Genie, Victor).

b) Dominance of GTR2 (the symbolic type)

The narrative map is developed, the symbolic level is active. Behavior is determined by the k-vector: solving problems motivates by itself — the completeness of a narrative, the elegance of a construction, the closing of TRL2 with a positive marker. A lowered sensitivity to conceptual collisions is possible: a scientist absorbed in a problem does not notice the ethical consequences. Example: a mathematician working on a problem for eighteen hours straight; GTR1 is suppressed (hunger and sleep are ignored), MTV3 is inactive — the pure k-vector is sufficient motivation.

c) Dominance of GTR3 (the conceptual type)

The field of concepts is developed, TRL3 is rich, behavior is determined by the w-vector. Symbolic activity is an instrument, not an end in itself; physical activity is a consequence of compilation, not a source of motivation. Example: a human-rights defender risks freedom for the sake of a principle. GTR1 is suppressed (comfort is sacrificed), GTR2 serves as an instrument, MTV3 dominates: the w-vector exceeds the threshold, and the conceptual level compiles a WLOM into a narrative and further into action.

d) Mixed and deficient types

In most people several levels are active simultaneously, and the conflict between them is a normal state. Pathological are only the extremes: the complete absence of the conceptual level (amorality), the complete suppression of GTR1 for the sake of GTR3 (self-destructive asceticism), an irresolvable conflict of GTR2 and GTR3 (an existential crisis). Separately stands the case when a level does not dominate, but is simply absent: without a developed narrative map a person is incapable of planning further than one step and acts impulsively; without a developed field of concepts a person does not experience conceptual conflicts — not because he is «evil», but because the convolution of GTR3 is not trained, the concepts are primitive, the w-vector is chronically small («a good executor without a position of his own»).

5. 8. Conclusions

1. •

   Motivation is a metric distance in a vector space; the MTV device answers to it, one per transformation. A nonzero vector → movement; nullification → peace. The content differs: metric, semantic, conceptual distance.

2. •

   There are exactly three individual levels: MTV1 (b-vector), MTV2 (k-vector), MTV3 (w-vector). There is no fourth, «collective» MTV device.

3. •

   The roles of the devices are separated: MTV sets the vector, PRD computes the path of nullification (SPL closes each unit), OP executes, TRL stores the experience. Motivation is a vector, not a computation and not an execution.

4. •

   The higher level sets the direction of the lower ones: the w-vector is compiled into the k-vector, the k-vector into the b-vector. Will → plan → action.

5. •

   The compilation chain MP33 → MP23 → MP13 → motor activity realizes embodiment: a concept acquires a bodily dimension through the steps of downward deconvolution.

6. •

   Collective motivation is not a separate story with devices, but a mismatch of individual vectors (Δb, Δk, Δw). The emergent level has no carrier of its own; the mismatch always moves through individuals. Institutions are mechanisms for nullifying Δw, reified in shared narratives.

7. •

   The recursive regime is not a new device, but a change of the direction of the w-vector: the system turns its will upon its own architecture. The theory of Gativus is an instance of what it describes.

8. •

   The type of personality is determined by the dominant level of motivation; the conflict of levels is normal, pathological are only the extremes and the deficits (the underdevelopment of the symbolic or the conceptual level).