Exploring Inesia-Forde's Frameworks' Research Gaps With AI

Description

Series information (English)

Inesia-Forde’s frameworks are dynamic theories of social change, motivation, and power across 
interpersonal (family, friends, romantic partners, acquaintances, community ties, and professional) 
relationships, political, institutional, cultural, and historical contexts. This means the theories transcend the 
macro level (national borders) and can be applied at the global level. The empowerment and 
disempowerment frameworks work in tandem to achieve sustainable social change at the institutional and 
macro levels, while individually they can be applied at lower levels of analysis. The disempowerment 
framework may lead to demoralization, which can lead to depression, anxiety, and other mental and 
physical manifestations. Traditionally, demoralization has been associated with negative effects on those 
demoralized. However, that perspective is challenged by this framework. It is argued that agentic 
individuals are likely to feel empowered or may act boldly in the face of disempowerment (e.g., American 
Founders, civil rights activists, bullied students, intimate partner survivors, and the people of Vietnam, 
South Korea, China, and Russia). The empowerment framework may lead to positive and sustainable social 
change, but the quality of that change depends on the effectiveness of the tactics employed, whether those 
tactics reinforce multiple strategies, and whether the framework is used alone or in conjunction with the 
disempowerment framework. 

The aufheben framework of transformation and entitlement argues that those who use strategies to 
disempower and people or groups who want to be empowered share interests they want the other side to 
reflect: humility, consciousness, oneness, beneficence, prudence, and agency. This is the most basic way to 
explain the Hegelian dialectic method: Compare and contrast the thesis (disempowerment framework) and 
the antithesis (empowerment framework) to find the aufheben, the product of a shared essence that both 
causes and removes tension. Hegel's method only requires the analyst to find the negation, that which 
removes tension between the paired dialectics. However, it is logical to go beyond what removes tension 
to what causes the tension to better understand what the analyst must be watchful for when selecting 
emerging aufhebens. Most people seek mutual recognition and reciprocity for respect for their human 
dignity. This is especially true for people who seek external validation, power, or both.  

Other (English)

Research Fields  
The frameworks are interdisciplinary and, with some reconceptualization (safety as security and food; 
fairness as sharing in the animal kingdom; knowledge as skill and instinct; hope as cognitive calculus; 
human dignity as dignity/pride; unity as pack behavior), transdisciplinary (e.g., primates and birds). They 
can be applied to various fields: Philosophy, Ethics, Theology, Psychology, Social Work, Child Welfare, 
Education, Human Resources, Gender Studies, Public Health, Sociology, Communication, Criminal 
Justice, Public Relations, Political Science, Public Policy, Public Administration, Medicine, Law, Military 
Science, Business, Disability Studies, and others. 

Research Gaps 
The table covers 51 gaps, which can be applied as the complete motivational strategic power framework 
[MSPF] of the disempowerment framework [DF] and empowerment framework [EF], or aufheben 
framework [AF] across micro, meso, and macro levels: 
1. Habermas’ Discourse Ethics  
2. Habermas’ Communicative Action  
3. Integrating Lawrence Solem’s Constitutional Originalism with the Principles Framework 
4. Apply Frameworks to Understand Foucault’s “Power is relational,” and “Power is Everywhere.” 
5. Apply Frameworks to Understand Bourdieu’s Field of Power theory in Interpersonal 
Relationships, Politics, and Institutions.  
6. Integrate the Frameworks of Empowerment and Disempowerment with Bourdieu’s to understand 
the Use of the Strategies by Various Cultures (Social Hierarchies, Professional organizations, 
Politicians, etc.). 
7. Apply the Frameworks to Understand the Strategic and Cognitive Processes of Marx’s 
Revolutionary Social Change. 
8. Apply the Framework to Understand the Dominant Strategic Framework Deployed by America’s 
Political Left and Right.  
9. Propaganda  
10. Aging (Dementia) 
11. Quantitative Methodology to confirm or disconfirm the framework as a motivational theory of 
social change  
12. LGBTQ+ Rights  
13. Chinese Exclusion  
14. Japanese American Internment  
15. The Red Scares  
16. Foster Care and CPS  
17. Juvenile Delinquency  
18. Race Discrimination  
19. Corporations  
20. Serial Killers  
21. Code of Hammurabi 
22. Explain the Frameworks’ use by Major Religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.)  
23. Religious Cults  
24. The Holocaust 
25. War in Gaza / Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 
26. Israel-US War Against Iran 
27. Learning and Physical Disabilities 
28. Supreme Court Decisions 
29. Democratic Policing 
30. Prison Inmates 
31. Prison System 
32. BRICS 
33. Democratic Policing 
34. Military 
35. Former Military Member in Prison  
36. White-Collar Crime 
37. Gender Discrimination 
38. Empowerment of Demoralized Agentic Individuals (Possible Disconfirming Cases)   
39. Demoralized Nations’ Rise to Power (China, Iran, Russia, S. Korea, Vietnam, Japan) 
40. Disconfirming Cases—Empowerment Framework (Loners, Serial Killers, Coma Victims, Cancer 
Patients, and Trauma victims (The last one is an AI example). 
41. Climate Justice and Environmental Policy (Suggested by AI) 
42. Technology and AI Ethics (Suggested by AI) 
43. Public Health and Pandemic Response (Suggested by AI) 
44. Immigration and Border Policy (Suggested by AI) 
45. Criminal Justice Reform Beyond Policing (Suggested by AI) 
46. Elder Care (Suggested by AI) 
47. Bioethics and Genetic Technologies (Suggested by AI) 
48. International Trade and Economic Justice (Suggested by AI) 
49. Heritage, Memory, and Repatriation (Suggested by AI) 
50. Digital Constitutionalism and Platform Justice (Suggested by AI) 
51. Constitutional and Transitional Justice (Suggested by AI)  
52. Mental Health System Transformation (Suggested by AI)