Conceptual impressions surrounding this post have yet to be substantiated, corroborated, confirmed or woven into a larger argument, context or network. Objective: To generate symbolic links between scientific discovery, design awareness and consciousness.
A Sequential Methodology for Balancing Change within the DAC Framework
Within the metaphysical orientation of the Design/Awareness/Consciousness (DAC) model, change is not a random disturbance imposed upon a static reality. Rather, change is understood as an orchestrated movement of consciousness through structured fields of meaning, possibility, and form. To apply a balanced methodology of change requires more than simply acting upon the world; it requires the coordinated alignment of several foundational elements: ontology, semiosis, dynamics, temporality, creativity, causality, structure, and epistemology. Each of these elements represents a distinct dimension of the design process, and together they compose the full cycle through which consciousness reorganizes itself and its environment.
A typical or sequential scenario for applying balanced change within DAC begins with ontology ... the grounding recognition of what is assumed to exist. Ontology functions as the initial zero point horizon of design consciousness, defining the field of what is considered real, meaningful, and actionable (Heidegger, 1962). Before any transformation can occur, the designer/observer must first encounter a state of being that calls for reconfiguration. In metaphysical terms, this is the moment when the current “operating system” of reality no longer suffices to accommodate emerging needs and intentions. The ontological layer therefore establishes the raw material upon which change will be enacted: the perceived world, the self, and their relationship.
From ontology emerges semiosis, the process by which experiences are translated into symbols and meanings. Within the DAC model, semiosis is the mechanism through which the designer interprets the ontological field and begins to recognize patterns of significance (Peirce, 1931–1958). No change can be initiated without the capacity to name, frame, and interpret what is occurring. Signs convert undifferentiated experience into communicable structure; they allow the observer to recognize discrepancies between what is and what is desired. In this sense, semiosis serves as the bridge between being and becoming, translating raw existence into actionable information.
Once meaning has been generated, the element of dynamics becomes active. Dynamics refers to the energetic movements and tensions that propel systems toward transformation. Drawing from process philosophy, reality may be understood as a field of continual becoming rather than fixed substance (Whitehead, 1978). Within DAC, dynamics represent the felt pressures of imbalance, aspiration, and intention that demand reorganization. The designer experiences dynamics as motivation, conflict, or creative unrest, signals that the current configuration of elements is insufficient.
Temporality enters next as the contextual field within which change unfolds. All design occurs in time, and time itself is not merely a neutral container but an active dimension shaping possibilities (Bergson, 1911). The DAC methodology recognizes that past experiences, present awareness, and future intentions interact continuously. A balanced approach to change therefore requires temporal sensitivity: understanding when to act, when to wait, and how to sequence interventions so that they align with natural rhythms of development.
Creativity follows as the generative response to dynamic tension within temporal context. Creativity in the DAC model is not simply artistic novelty but the capacity of consciousness to reconfigure existing elements into new forms (Bohm, 1998). At this stage the designer imagines alternative structures, solutions, and pathways. Creativity provides the visionary blueprint that allows new possibilities to enter the field of experience. Without this imaginative leap, change would remain purely reactive rather than genuinely transformative.
Causality then organizes creative insight into coherent chains of influence. Within a metaphysical design framework, causality is not strictly linear but participatory and multi-directional; intentions, perceptions, and structures mutually affect one another (Bohm, 1980). The DAC practitioner must therefore consider how proposed actions will reverberate across multiple levels of the system. Balanced change requires causal awareness: an understanding of how small adjustments in one domain can produce large effects in another.
Structure emerges as the crystallization of causal intention into stable form. Every act of change ultimately seeks embodiment—new habits, systems, artifacts, or conceptual frameworks (Simon, 1969). Structure provides continuity and coherence, allowing creative ideas to take root in durable configurations. In DAC terms, structure is the moment when potential becomes actualized design.
Finally, epistemology completes the cycle by reflecting upon what has been learned through the process. Epistemology concerns how knowledge is generated, validated, and integrated (Polanyi, 1966). After structural changes are implemented, the designer reassesses their assumptions, interpretations, and outcomes. This reflective stage updates the original ontology, thereby initiating a new round of semiosis and transformation. Balanced change is therefore not a single event but a recursive spiral of learning and redesign.
When these eight elements are approached sequentially and holistically, the DAC model offers a comprehensive methodology for harmonizing the forces of transformation. Ontology provides the field, semiosis the language, dynamics the motive power, temporality the rhythm, creativity the vision, causality the logic, structure the embodiment, and epistemology the wisdom. Imbalance occurs whenever one element dominates at the expense of the others for example, when creativity runs unchecked by structure, or when rigid ontology resists necessary dynamics. The art of metaphysical design lies in maintaining equilibrium among all dimensions so that change unfolds as an integrated expression of conscious intention.
Thus, the balanced application of energy across these elements constitutes a practical path for intentional evolution. Change within DAC is not merely something that happens to consciousness; it is something consciousness learns to design.
References (APA)
- Bergson, H. (1911). Creative evolution. Henry Holt.
- Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the implicate order. Routledge.
- Bohm, D. (1998). On creativity. Routledge.
- Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Harper & Row. (Original work published 1927)
- Peirce, C. S. (1931–1958). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vols. 1–8). Harvard University Press.
- Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. University of Chicago Press.
- Simon, H. A. (1969). The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press.
- Whitehead, A. N. (1978). Process and reality (Corrected ed.). Free Press.
The author generated some of this text in part with ChatGPT 5.2 OpenAI’s large-scale language-generation model. Upon generating draft language, the author reviewed, edited, and revised the language to their own liking and takes ultimate responsibility for the content of this publication.
* * *
What is design?
What isn't?
Edited:
Find your truth. Know your mind. Follow your heart. Love eternal will not be denied. Discernment is an integral part of self-mastery. You may share this post on a non-commercial basis, the author and URL to be included. Please note … posts are continually being edited. All rights reserved. Copyright © 2026 C.G. Garant.
No comments:
Post a Comment