Value Circle #2: Engaging with Lui’s Theoretical Sociology

A Supportive Collaboration between two knowledge centers

On May 15, 2023, I finished a “Creative Life Curation” project which is about my journey of engaging with Ping-keung Lui’s theoretical sociology from April 2022 to April 2023.

The outcome of the “Creative Life Curation” project is a 65-page thesis with several case studies about adopting ideas from Lui’s theoretical sociology and using them to develop the Creative Life Theory and other frameworks.

Lui is the founder of the Trojan Society for Theoretical Sociology and I am the founder of Curativity Center. The journey can be seen as a Supportive Collaboration between two knowledge centers.

This article will use this journey as an example for the Value Circle project.

Ping-keung Lui and The Trojan Society for Theoretical Sociology

Ping-keung Lui is a theoretical sociological theorist. He was the Principal Lecturer (retired) at the Department of Applied Social Science at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

Lui aims to build a brand new theoretical sociology as a candidate for the paradigm of sociology. In 2007, Lui published a Chinese book titled Gaze, Action, and the Social World in which he presented his account of theoretical sociology.

He continuously developed his account of theoretical sociology with various activities such as writing books and papers, teaching courses, and curating academic discussions.

In 2009, he published in Chinese Cogito, fidimus et mysterium societatis, which is the first one in the other book project Essays in Social Phenomenology.

In the Fall of 2009, he taught a course titled The Philosopher and Sociology for MA students at Department of Philosophy, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. The following year, he continued the series of lectures and taught a course titled The Philosophers, the Sociologists, and the Scientific Project of Sociology.

In 2016, Lui registered the Trojan Society for Theoretical Sociology (TSTS) in Hong Kong. According to the profile of the society on Academia, it is “a voluntary, informal, non-partisan, non-affiliated and non-profit-making society of sociologists and anthropologists, most of who are currently working or studying in universities and research institutes in Hong Kong and mainland China. Its aim is to promote the study and research in theoretical sociology.”

The Trojan Society for Theoretical Sociology

From 2012 to 2016, Lui and several members hosted online discussions about theoretical sociology and related theoretical themes via email conversations and WeChat groups. The discussions have been edited and published in several volumes.

From 2007 to 2022, it is a 15-year journey of developing a theoretical approach in the field of sociology.

Lui’s Theoretical Sociology

As a theoretical sociological theorist, Lui aims to build a brand new theoretical sociology as a candidate for the paradigm of sociology. According to Lui, “There are three kinds of theories in sociology, namely, social theory, sociological theory, and theoretical sociology. ”

• Social theories are speculations about the social world. They constitute the speculative project of sociology.
• Some social theories are amenable to positivistic investigation under certain specific conditions. I call them sociological theories.
• Also, some other social theories, being very ambitious, attempt to recruit as many as they can sociological theories supporting themselves. I call them theoretical sociologies. They compete against each other. The winner becomes the paradigm of sociology, and its supporting sociological theories become exemplars of the paradigm. In this way, theoretical sociologies and sociological theories constitute the scientific project of sociology.

In fact, the term “Social theories” refer to all “Social Thoughts”, “Logs”, and “Ideology”, etc. For example, a political party’s ideology and a professional community’s knowledge framework are “Social theories” too. However, Lui only considers Sociological Theories and Theoretical Sociologies as scientific projects.

The fundamental starting point of his approach is an Ontology of action, which was inspired by Saint Augustine (354–430), Martin Heidegger (1889–1976), and Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908–1961). See the statement below:

The body is in action, action is in the fleeting moment, the fleeting moment is in the body.

According to Lui, “This moment is Augustinian, it comprises at the same time the Present of the Past, the Present of the Present, and the Present of the Future. The actor Remembers in the present of the past, Pays Attention in the present of the present, Expects in the present of the future.” (p.235–236, 2010, The Scientific Project of Sociology)

The structure of Lui’s theoretical sociology is a nested structure. See the diagram below. According to Lui, “The realism comprises a subjectivist structuralism and an objectivist stock of knowledge, while the hermeneutics is an interpretation and an analysis. Second, I shall present an ontology that nests the realism within its boundaries.” (p.250, 2016, Aspects of Sociological Explanation)

Source: Aspects of Sociological Explanation (Ping-keung Lui 2016, p.251)

We should see this grand theory as a dialogue between philosophy and sociology because “Ontology” and “hermeneutics” are respectable terms in philosophy, but “realism” — sandwiched between them — is not. Lui emphasizes that Realism is the sociological matter proper (p.251, 2016, Aspects of Sociological Explanation).

It can perhaps be said to be the apple in the scientist’s eye,138 though the term “realism” may sound naïve to the phenomenological ear. It is much closer to “what is” than “what is the meaning of”.

In a certain sense, science is always naïve though not simple. With the freedom of imagination being exercised by the scientist to its fullest, it presupposes in the first instance that there is really a reality out there, at least in the Schutzian sense, that is, the reality is often “taken- for-granted”, “questionable but unquestioned.” The presupposition may be naïve, but its buttresses are not. The sociologist — who should be a scientist more than a philosopher — relies on empirical (or positivistic) investigations to buttress his discipline.

Lui considers the following four realities for the grand theory:

• the Weberian course of action
• the Giddensian course of action
• Social Territory
• Symbolic Universe

The Realism is determined by the Ontology. According to Lui, “I made a distinction between action and its course; that is, action is not a reality but its course is. My justification is based on a fundamental ontology.” (p.251, 2016)

The Realism leads to the Hermeneutics which considers two parts: the actors’ interpretation and the researcher’s analysis.

The whole structure of the grand theory is represented by the following semiotic system.

Source: Aspects of Sociological Explanation (Ping-keung Lui 2016, p.258)

Lui defines the concept of Subjectivity as three basic human capacities of the actor: Memory, Attention, and Expectation. We should notice that this definition echoes his fundamental ontology:

This moment is Augustinian, it comprises at the same time the Present of the Past, the Present of the Present, and the Present of the Future. The actor Remembers in the present of the past, Pays Attention in the present of the present, Expects in the present of the future.” (p.235–236, 2010, The Scientific Project of Sociology)

The concept of Agency is defined as all human capacities of the actor other than the basic three, namely, “Memory”, “Attention” and “Expectation”.

The concept of Otherness is defined as the impersonal other. For example, Death. According to Lui, “Otherness as the impersonal other is not a variety of subjectivity. Nor is it a variety of intersubjectivity which by itself is in fact the social process according to George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) in Mind, Self, and Society. Otherness is an impersonal intruder into the social process, most of the time it is called in by some actor, but it belongs to nobody in the social process. This actor exercises his autonomy; he is now more than a simple actor, he is an autonomous actor, an agent. But the otherness he calls in still needs to evade his attention.” (p.242, 2010, The Scientific Project of Sociology)

Moreover, Lui’s approach also emphasizes Stoic causality. According to Lui, “…the Stoic conception that the course of action lives in the depth of the world (the ancient Stoics conceived the world as an ocean) while the corresponding sequence of events (its traces) inheres on the surface. The actor does not bother with the sequence of events, that is, it is out of his memory, attention and expectation, it is ‘dead’, it is therefore an objective reality outside his subjective experience.” (p.247, 2010, The Scientific Project of Sociology)

Lui’s grand theory doesn’t use “Activity” as a theoretical concept. The basic unit of his approach is “the Course of Action”. According to Lui, there are two types of Courses of Action:

• The Weberian course of action: In actual intervention, the actor does not necessarily remember (in the present of the past) nor expect (the present of the future), but he must pay attention (in the present of the present).
• The Giddensian course of action: In contemplation of intervention, however, he does not need to pay attention, though he must remember and/or expect.

These two types of Courses of Action are located at the part of Realism in Lui’s approach.

The above diagram is the semiotic system of the hermeneutics of Lui’s approach. This part is quite complex because it aims to deal with issues of social theoretical research.

How to read this semiotic system? Let’s follow Lui’s introduction:

I begin with the actor’s situation, which is the focus of his memory, attention and expectation on the Weberian course of action in which he is participating. It is also the sphere of relevance to him. He sees the situation (in diachrony), and he also speaks about it (in synchrony). The speech he makes is his definition of the situation.

The situation is however not proprietory to him, it is shared by other related actors, although what each sees in not exactly the same. To be exact, we should perhaps take the situation to be the overlaping totality of all the “situations” in the eyes of actors involved. These other actors also speak in the Giddensian course of course about the “situation” they see in the Weberian course of action.

There are more than one definition, namely, the actor’s and the other related actors’. Those definitions are taken from the S-B network (the stock of knowledge, the “library”) by the actors, when they give up their alertness (attention, the present of the present). Equivalently, they are taken from their respective symbolic universes. Again, to be exact, we should perhaps take the symbolic universe to be the overlapping totality of all the “symbolic universes” on the tongues of actors involved. Obviously this overlapping totality is accommodated by the S-B network.

We have seen that “situation” (that is, sight) and “definitions” (sound) in interpretation are suspended respectively by “social territory” and “symbolic universe” from the realism. Next, the actor must deal with his and others’ definitions of the situation, and does it differently in the two courses of action. That is, he is making a narrative in the Weberian course of action, and a strategy in its Giddensian counterpart.

His narrative is, expectedly, suspended by the Weberian course of action (sight) and social territory (sound), that is, he is in dialectical oscillations. Besides being reflexive (he remembers and expects), he is alert (he pays attention). He is overwhelmed by his alertness, he cannot “stop and think”.

If, however, he does stop and think, he will no longer be alert, he shuttles himself from dialectical oscillations to logical oscillations. He in dialectical oscillations is in fact not reflexive (in the literal sense of the word) because his memory and/or expectation do not help him to stop and think, but are simply assisting his attention to respond quickly to others’ definitions. In other words, his definition (narrative) is a quick response to others’. That is why social territory is said to be the S-B network in tension.

His strategy is suspended by the Giddensian course of action and symbolic universe, that is, he is in logical oscillations. The actor is no longer alert, but is reflexive. Without the alertness, he can stop and think. He is in fact asking himself repeatedly this question: “If I define the situation as such, how will the others define it in response?” He is seeking for himself a definition (strategy) in response to which others will define the situation in a way favourable to him. This seeking is an iterative process.

How are narrative and strategy related to each other? They are complementary representations under the aegis of the famous Bayes’s Theorem. In this sense, the collective of Bayesian representations is a method of formal analysis. It is used by the actor implicitly, and can be used by the sociologist explicitly. The implicit use by the former suggests that it is part and partial of the hermeneutics. The explicit use by the latter, on the other hand, enables a distinction of causalities, including the parametric and the Stoic. I shall discuss these two causalities in due course.

Furthermore, like social territory and symbolic universe, narrative and strategy of an agency alternates. But there is a difference: While the former pair alternate as tension-relaxation reversals, the latter pair alternate with a delay effect in the definitions concerned. The situation is like this: when the agency shuttles from strategy to narrative, he carries the definitions made or recognized in strategy into narrative. In fact, the agency makes or recognizes no definitions in narrative, and if he wants to make or recognize definitions, he must return to strategy to do so. On the other hand, since the definitions made or recognized in strategy are carried into narrative, they are subject to dialectical oscillations instead of logical ones.

- Source: Aspects of Sociological Explanation (Ping-keung Lui 2016, pp.255–257)

Lui also develops a Bayesian-based method to explain the complexity of narrative and strategy.

Lui’s approach also offers a brand-new tool called “Semiotic System Diagram” which is a set of concepts that are connected together. He used the same method of mapping the semiotic system of theoretical sociology to map other sociological theories. By comparing different semiotic system diagrams with the semiotic system diagram of theoretical sociology, he can use his theoretical sociology to support and contain many empirical sociological theories.

What’s the value of such a complicated grand theory?

As a grand theory, Lui’s theoretical sociology can be used as a frame to curate theoretical approaches. We can also adopt some knowledge elements from the approach to inspire our own creative projects.

Lui’s Semiotic System Diagram and the related method are pretty useful for knowledge creators who are making various kinds of logos as social theories.

Meet with Lui

I read Lui’s papers and articles online many years ago. I also discussed his Ontology of action with a friend in 2018.

Lui’s Ontology of action was inspired by Saint Augustine (354–430), Martin Heidegger (1889–1976), and Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908–1961). See the statement below:

The body is in action, action is in the fleeting moment, the fleeting moment is in the body.

I told my friend that this statement is similar to my idea of the Ecological Practice approach. See the diagram below. I send the following statement to my friend in an email conversation:

The World is Container while the Person is Containee. The Person is Container too.

In April 2022, I received an email that recommended Lui’s paper from Academia. I found The Trojan Society for Theoretical Sociology’s profile on Academia and downloaded some papers.

After noticing Lui’s email address on a paper, I wrote a thank-you letter to him. This email kickstarted a one-year journey of appropriating Lui’s theoretical sociology.

From April 2022 to April 2023, I read Lui’s papers and books. We had email conversations and Wechat discussions. While learning ideas about sociological theories from Lui’s approach, I also considered his 15-year journey of developing a brand-new theoretical sociology as a case for the Slow Cognition project.

For example, I used the Thematic Landscape Map to visualize the landscape of Lui’s knowledge enterprise.

In Dec 2022, I received a package that contains a hard copy of Lui’s 2007 book Gaze, Actions, and the Social World. Since the book is out of print, Lui mailed a copy to me for my study.

Gaze, Actions, and the Social World

From Jan 2023 to April 2023, I read Gaze, Actions, and the Social World at various places. I brought it to libraries, a tennis court, and parks.

I also wrote 15 notes which total 228 pages.

In the beginning, I just wrote short notes. After sending about three notes to Lui, I realized that I can run a passion project with the theme “Re-Engagement”.

The idea of Re-Engagement is not new. We all have experiences of remembering someone, someday, someplace. On March 1, 2017, my son wore mismatched socks in order to celebrate Dr. Seuss’ birthday. However, I want to use the concept of Re-Engagement to highlight the creative potential between personal memory such as my son’s birthday, and collective memory such as Dr. Seuss’ birthday.

Once upon a great experience. No matter how big or small the experience is, we could re-engage with it.

We can also find the theme of Re-Engagement from knowledge activities. For example, see the picture below.

The 2019 book Perception as Information Detection: Reflections on Gibson’s Ecological Approach to Visual Perception is the outcome of a “Re-Engagement” project.

Ecological psychologist James J. Gibson published his landmark volume The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception in 1979. The 2019 book is authored by 16 ecological psychologists with a special form that provides a chapter-by-chapter update to and reflection on the 16 chapters in Gibson’s original volume.

Gaze, Actions and the Social World was published in 2007. I wrote notes chapter by chapter. This idea turned my normal notes into a passion project.

The outcome is amazing! I reflected on the following three projects while I was replaying Lui’s journey of developing his theory.

• The Knowledge Engagement Project
• The Creative Life Framework
• The Theme of “Value Circle”

I also developed several new frameworks which form the Creative Life Theory (v2.0).

You can find more details in A New Possible Book: Knowledge Engagement.

Appropriating Lui’s Theoretical Sociology

In May 2023, I reflected on my journey of engaging with Lui’s Theoretical Sociology. In fact, it was a 3-week “Creative Life Curation” project.

• April 25 to May 12: Collected email conversations and wrote summaries
• May 12 to May 15: Designed diagrams to map the conversations and wrote the final report

I found 35 email conversations in my Gmail account from 2019 to Jan 2, 2023, and sorted them into the following three categories:

• Social: it refers to interpersonal connections. It was divided into four sub-categories.
• Communication: it refers to normal online discussions and thematic conversations. It was divided into eight sub-categories.
• Work: it refers to emails about my creative projects that were inspired by Lui’s theoretical sociology. It was divided into five sub-categories.

The final report was divided into three parts. Part One is the summary of 35 email conversations. Part Two is about W4 (How did I adopt knowledge elements from Lui’s theoretical sociology to inspire my creative projects?). Part Three picked two events from W4 for deep discussions.

Let’s have a look at the Table of Contents of Part Two:

• 2.1 What are Knowledge Elements?
• 2.2 Mental Moves
• 2.3 Moving Knowledge Elements between Knowledge Centers
• 2.4 A Model of Mental Moves
• 2.5 Appropriating Lui’s Theoretical Sociology
• 2.6 The Development of the Knowledge Engagement Project
• 2.7 Reframe Knowlege Engagement
• 2.7.1 Foundational Ontology
• 2.7.2 Ontology
• 2.7.3 Realism
• 2.7.4 Hermeneutics

On May 15, 2023, I finished the “Creative Life Curation” project with a 65-page thesis.

On May 15, 2023, I sent the thesis to Lui and closed the project. To be honest, I didn’t design the above cover image for the thesis. It was designed for this article!

Appropriating Lui’s Theoretical Sociology

I introduced a model for Mental Moves case studies in the W4–2.4 section. The model uses Container [Configuration (Mental Elements)] as the basic structure. See the diagram below.

You can find more case studies in Creative Action: The Attachance of Moving Mental Elements and Mental Moves #1: The Transformation of Mental Elements.

Theoretically, I could use the model to conduct case studies about engaging with Lui’s theoretical sociology one by one. However, I thought that it could be too cumbersome for the project.

I went to the W4–2.5 section Appropriating Lui’s Theoretical Sociology with a new solution. See the following Thematic Network Diagram.

The above diagram summarizes the major mental moves between Lui’s knowledge center and my knowledge projects.

The left column lists 7 knowledge elements of Lui’s theoretical sociology while the right column lists ideas under my four knowledge projects.

The middle column uses a few words as clues of connections between the left column and the right column.

It represents the landscape of moving knowledge elements between two knowledge centers.

July 2022 — Project Engagement (v2.1)

On July 20, 2022, I started writing an introduction to the Project Engagement approach (v2.0) in Chinese. The thesis was finished on July 30, 2022.

It’s a 116-page file with the following three keywords: Significance, Complexity, and Genidentity.

The thesis was organized into the following five parts:

• Part 1: Project, Projecting, and Activity
• Part 2: Significance
• Part 3: Complexity
• Part 4: Genidentity
• Part 5: Rethinking Activity Theory

Part 4 (Genidentity) is not part of my original plan. It was born from the journey of writing the thesis. The term “Genidentity” refers to the transformation from a theme to a project, then a platform. How does a project keep its uniqueness?

This idea is a Significant Insight because I realized that I can detach the Platform Genidentity framework from the Platform Ecology project, and attach it to the Project Engagement approach.

Why did I make this decision? How did I discover this Attachance (the value and meaning of Attaching acts and Detaching acts)?

First, I asked myself the following question:

Now, I have v1.0 and v2.0. What about v3.0?

Second, I used a new idea I learned from Lui’s theoretical sociology to frame this question for my answer.

Lui’s theoretical sociology offered me a meta-theoretical framework for reflecting on the development of the Project Engagement approach.

There are three focuses in his account: subjectivity, intersubjectivity, and otherness. I used these three focuses to frame my question.

• V1: the “Person — Project” relationship is about Subjectivity.
• V2: the “Project Network” complexity is about Intersubjectivity.
• V3: the “X” … should be about Otherness.

Lui uses the term Otherness to refer to “non-human others” such as Society, Death, etc. For the Project Engagement approach, It seems the notion of “Genidentity/From Project to Platform” echoes the focus of Otherness.

In this way, I imagined the v3 and found a solution, and used the solution to expand the v2. Now I have v2.1 and the approach has multiple levels.

Lui’s theoretical sociology also inspired me to rethink Activity Theory. Part 5 of the thesis is the outcome o the project of rethinking Activity Theory. I discovered the following pairs of keywords for discussions:

• Concepts and Themes
• Project and Platform
• Culture and History
• Context and Settings

Finally, I made a “meta-framework” for the Project Engagement approach (v2.0). See the picture below.

The meta-framework is formed with two sets of keywords:

• Activity, Concept, Culture: this set of keywords is discovered from Andy Blunden’s approach.
• Actor, Settings, Society: this set of keywords is discovered from the Project Engagement approach.

I also highlight nine theoretical concepts of the Project Engagement approach (v2.0).

You can find more details in Project Engagement (v2.1) as an Innovation Approach.

Oct 2022: Creative Life Curation (Book)

On Oct 18, 2022, I closed the Knowledge Curation project (phase 1, 2020–2022) and started the Creative Life Curation project.

From July 2022 to Oct 2022, I developed several frameworks for creative life development from different theoretical perspectives. This led to a challenge:

How to curate these perspectives together for the Life Strategy project?

The answer is Ping-keung Lui’s theoretical sociology. I used it as a reference frame to curate three paths and four frameworks together.

The structure of Lui’s theoretical sociology is a nested structure. See the diagram below. According to Lui, “The realism comprises a subjectivist structuralism and an objectivist stock of knowledge, while the hermeneutics is an interpretation and an analysis. Second, I shall present an ontology that nests the realism within its boundaries.” (p.250, 2016, Aspects of Sociological Explanation)

I used Lui’s nested structure to connect my four frameworks:

• The Anticipatory Activity System (AAS) framework
• The Life—History Complex
• The Creative Life Curation framework
• The Path of Creative Life

See the diagram below:

It’s clear that these frameworks are located at different layers.

• Ontology: The Path of Creative Life and The Life — History Complex
• Realism: The Anticipatory Activity System (AAS) Framework
• Hermeneutics: The Creative Life Curation Framework

Lui’s approach also offers a brand-new tool called “Semiotic System Diagram” which is a set of concepts that are connected together. He used the same method of mapping the semiotic system of theoretical sociology to map other sociological theories. By comparing different semiotic system diagrams with the semiotic system diagram of theoretical sociology, he can use his theoretical sociology to support and contain many empirical sociological theories.

I also made two semiotic systems diagrams for the new theoretical framework. The first one offers a global view. You can find more details in Three Paths of Creative Life and A Semiotic System.

The second one expands the third part which offers details of the Creative Life Curation framework. See the diagram below. You can find a large-size picture in A Semiotic System Diagram for Creative Life Curation.

This is an amazing theoretical knowledge curation project!

While the primary theme is claimed, the concrete solution is not clear. The primary theme is the transformation between individual actions and collective culture.

From three different theoretical approaches, I developed three paths for understanding the primary theme. How can I curate these paths into a meaningful whole?

I need a new knowledge container to contain these three pieces.

The solution is clear. I can use a meta-theory as the container. Lui’s theoretical sociology is a such meta-theory.

Finally, I edited a book (draft) titled Creative Life Curation: Turning Experiences into Meaningful Achievements.

Dec 2022: Advanced Life Strategy (Book)

In Dec 2022, I worked on the Advanced Life Strategy Project. I used the “ontology — realism — hermeneutics” schema as a reference frame to curate four frameworks.

The notion of “the World of Activity” is inspired by Alfred Schutz’s concept of “the World of Working”. The World of Working is one sub-world of the World of Daily Life or the Life-world. There are other sub-worlds in the Life-world. For example, the worlds of fantasy and dream.

The difference between “the World of Activity” and “the World of Working” is the former doesn’t require the distinction between the worlds of fantasy and dream and the world of working.

In order to research creative life, I think it is important to consider the worlds of fantasy and dreams since they are significant sources of creative inspiration. Since Schutz is a social scientist, the quasi-We relation of the dream is empty and ghostly, so the world of dreams is not useful for studying the We relation. However, the world of dreams is important to creative cognition which is related to creative work study.

The above diagram highlights four keywords: Birth, Death, Heaven, and Earth.

The Horizontal group refers to the “Activity” of Life while The Vertical group refers to the “Theory” of Life.

• The “Activity” of Life = the Situations of Activity of “Engagement”
• The “Theory” of Life = the Degrees of Abstraction of “Knowledge”

If we put them together, we get the following formula.

The World of Activity = The “Activity” of Life + The “Theory” of Life

You can find more details in Lifescope: The World of Activity for Creative Life Curation.

The World of Activity defines the life scope of a creative person’s life. It also defines the context of Advanced Life Strategy. Especially, Life Achievement.

The World of Activity Diagram was inspired by the idea of “Heaven, Earth, Birth, Death” which is inspired by the “Diagramming Reference Frame” diagram.

In 2021, I worked on the D as Diagramming project which produced two books (drafts) and a set of tools for studying knowledge diagrams.

The diagram below is called the Means—End Spectrum which was introduced on Nov 29, 2021.

On Oct 27, 2022, I modified the above diagram and made a new version. Now it has a new name: the Diagramming Reference Frame. See the above diagram.

The major change was adding two types of diagrams:

• Semiotic System Diagrams
• Meta-diagrams

I really liked Lui’s Semiotic System Diagrams and the related method using Semiotic System Diagrams to curate sociological theories.

Lui’s Semiotic System Diagrams are quite unique because remove the spatial structure from normal diagrams and only keep concepts.

This is a counterexample of the Means—End Spectrum. Originally, I can place it on the Means—End Spectrum. Later, I realized that I can expand the spectrum into a matrix.

One important notion I learned from Lui’s theoretical sociology is from Ferdinand de Saussure’s structural linguistics.

Langue and parole is a theoretical linguistic dichotomy distinguished by Ferdinand de Saussure in his Course in General Linguistics. Langue refers to the abstract system of language while parole means concrete speech.

Lui’s theoretical sociology and Semiotic System Diagrams are inspired by Saussure’s structural linguistics.

The theoretical sociology I have conceived is an example: It has an ontology, a realism and an hermeneutics, each of which is by itself a cluster of interconnected keywords; and then there are some more interconnections between some members of any two clusters. Thus, a network of all keywords of a theoretical sociology is formed, and together with annotations of every keyword and every interconnection between keywords, the theoretical sociology is specified. Clearly, annotations are meant to guide us to read and understand the network of keywords. In fact, this network is the famous semiotic system in Saussure’s structural linguistics. As I have said early, he calls it language because innumerably many speeches can be made within its four corners.

Source: Ingold’s Idea of Making — A View from Theoretical Sociology (Ping-keung Lui 2020, p.21)

Lui used “Langue (Language)” to refer to his theoretical sociology while “Parole (Speech)” refers to all empirical sociologies.

I notice that all theoretical sociologies I happen to come across in the literature are each a speech, and usually a long one. But, in contrast, I conceive my own as a language, that is, a semiotic system in which innumerable number of speeches can be made within its four corners. Figuratively speaking, a semiotic system can be likened to a wetland in which innumerable speeches live and breed like birds. On the other hand, all empirical sociologies are in the first place each a speech, and if they can be made within the four corners of a certain semiotic system then they can be said to be supported and contained by the theoretical sociology that is represented by its semiotic system. Empirical sociologies are birds in that semiotic system as a wetland.

Source: Ingold’s Idea of Making — A View from Theoretical Sociology (Ping-keung Lui 2020, p.23)

Lui’s Semiotic System Diagrams inspired me to reflect on the Means-End Spectrum.

The notion of “meta-diagram” considers a special type of diagram as an independent thing that doesn’t have to be a representation of an existing theory or model. For example, the 2x2 matrix diagram is a meta-diagram that doesn’t refer to any concrete theory or model such as BCG’s Growth-share matrix.

In the past several years, I designed a series of meta-diagrams. See the picture below.

If we put Lui’s Semiotic System Diagrams and my meta-diagrams together, we can find two extreme examples of diagrams.

• Semiotic System Diagrams: remove the spatial structure from normal diagrams.
• Meta-diagrams: remove all texts from normal diagrams.

This is a significant insight!

I realized that there is a new dimension for thinking about diagrams and diagramming: the Langue—Space dimension.

The Diagramming Reference Frame was made on Oct 27, 2022. Later, I reflected on the matrix. I realized that it can be used for discussing other things.

The matrix defines a Reference Space in which we can place diagrams, concepts, models, and other knowledge-related entities.

It is a universal tool of thought!

On Nov 11, 2022, I made a new diagram called “Universal Reference”.

The above canvas uses a new approach to name dimensions. I use multiple words to name one dimension.

The Vertical group refers to the Degrees of Abstraction of “Knowledge”.

The “Theory — Practice” dimension is shared with the following pairs of concepts:

• The “Heaven—Earth” dimension
• The “Langue — Space” dimension
• The “Episteme — Empeiria” dimension

The Horizontal group refers to the Situations of Activity of “Engagement”.

The “Means-End” dimension is shared with the following pairs of concepts:

• The “Birth — Death” dimension
• The “Attach — Detach” dimension
• The “Self — Other” dimension

Later, the “Universal Reference” diagram led to two things: 1) The World of Activity, and 2) The Knowledge Engagement Framework.

April 2023: Knowledge Engagement

As mentioned above, I finished a Chinese book (draft) titled Knowledge Engagement: Knowledge Center and Creative Life Theory in April 2023.

The 228-page book collects my 15 reading notes about Gaze, Actions, and the Social World (Ping-keung Lui, 2007). I also reflected on the following three projects while replaying Lui’s theory development journey.

• The Knowledge Engagement Project
• The Creative Life Framework
• The Theme of “Value Circle”

I adopted Lui’s theoretical approach to developing several new frameworks which form the Creative Life Theory (v2.0). One of these frameworks is called the Creative Course Framework. See the diagram below.

The Creative Course Framework was inspired by Lui’s Subjectivist Structuralism which is part of his theoretical sociology.

You can find more details in Knowledge Engagement: The Creative Course Framework.

The above diagram is the basic model of the Creative Course framework which was inspired by Lui’s Subjectivist Structuralism.

According to Lui, “I made a distinction between action and its course; that is, action is not a reality but its course is. My justification is based on a fundamental ontology.” (p.251, 2016)

Lui considers the following four realities for his theoretical sociology:

• the Weberian course of action
• the Giddensian course of action
• Social Territory
• Symbolic Universe

The above diagram only uses “Course of Action”.

I also connected it with Value Circle, Anticipatory Activity System, and other models. The result is an expanded version. See the diagram below.

The above large diagram is the outcome of a Diagram Blending process. You can see five sub-diagrams that represent five frameworks.

• Center: The Creative Course Framework
• Left: The Value Circle Framework
• Right: The Universal Reference Framework
• Up: The Anticipatory Activity System Framework
• Down: The Knowledge Circle Framework

You can find more details in Knowledge Engagement: The Expanded Creative Course Framework.

Supportive Collaboration between Two Knowledge Centers

The Value Circle project aims to explore networked knowledge centers. I have written articles about mental moves between a network of knowledge centers that are found by myself.

If mental elements are moving within one network of a person’s creations, then the moves can be understood as a Self-referential Activity.

However, if mental elements are moving between Self and Others’ knowledge centers, then it should be understood as a Supportive Collaboration.

There are many mental moves that appear in my one-year journey of engaging with Lui’s theoretical sociology. I’d like to claim that this is a Supportive Collaboration.

Moreover, we can use the DEEP framework to understand Supportive Collaboration. See the diagram below.

• Self: Curativity Center (Oliver Ding)
• Social Environment: The Trojan Society for Theoretical Sociology (Ping-keung Lui)

The above diagram is based on the ECHO Way model. The basis of the diagram is using three containers to explore possible connections.

• Container X: Self, a person wants to actualize a Possible Self with a Developmental Project.
• Container Y: Social Environment, a platform that wants to actualize a Possible Practice with projects initiated by its members.

It’s clear that the journey of engaging with Lui’s theoretical sociology is a Developmental Project for me.

For Ping-keung Lui, The Trojan Society for Theoretical Sociology aims to develop a Possible Practice of using a brand new theoretical sociology for research, teaching, and learning.

Moreover, we can consider the Trojan Society for Theoretical Sociology as a Developmental Platform for me and Curativity Center. In this way, an established Knowledge Center can be a Developmental Platform for an emerging Knowledge Center.

Related links

• June 2, 2022 — CALL: The Launch Day of Curativity Center
• Sep 5, 2022 — Slow Cognition: Mapping Thematic Landscape (Curativity, 2019–2022)
• Jan 1, 2023 — TALE: A New Knowledge Center
• Feb 17, 2023 — TALE: The 100-Day Challenge
• March 24, 2023 — TALE: A Possible Theme called “Mental Moves”
• July 18, 2023 — TALE: A Possible Theme called “Value Circle”
• May 6, 2022 — CALL: How to Grow A Knowledge Enterprise
• May 29, 2022 — Platform Genidentity: The Movements of Unfolding Uniqueness
• March 22, 2023 — TALE: A Possible Theme called “Knowledge Center”
• April 19, 2023 — A New Possible Book: Knowledge Engagement
• July 13, 2023 — Mental Moves #8: The Hierarchy of Knowledge Centers
• July 13, 2023 — Mental Moves #9: Mental Moves between Knowledge Centers
• August 7, 2023 — Value Circle #1: From “Mental Moves” to “Value Circle”