1
From: "Human Potential & Development."
Split Justification: Development fundamentally involves both our inner landscape (**Internal World**) and our interaction with everything outside us (**External World**). (Ref: Subject-Object Distinction)..
2
From: "External World (Interaction)"
Split Justification: All external interactions fundamentally involve either other human beings (social, cultural, relational, political) or the non-human aspects of existence (physical environment, objects, technology, natural world). This dichotomy is mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive.
3
From: "Interaction with the Non-Human World"
Split Justification: All human interaction with the non-human world fundamentally involves either the cognitive process of seeking knowledge, meaning, or appreciation from it (e.g., science, observation, art), or the active, practical process of physically altering, shaping, or making use of it for various purposes (e.g., technology, engineering, resource management). These two modes represent distinct primary intentions and outcomes, yet together comprehensively cover the full scope of how humans engage with the non-human realm.
4
From: "Understanding and Interpreting the Non-Human World"
Split Justification: Humans understand and interpret the non-human world either by objectively observing and analyzing its inherent structures, laws, and phenomena to gain factual knowledge, or by subjectively engaging with it to derive aesthetic value, emotional resonance, or existential meaning. These two modes represent distinct intentions and methodologies, yet together comprehensively cover all ways of understanding and interpreting the non-human world.
5
From: "Interpreting Subjective Significance"
Split Justification: Humans interpret subjective significance from the non-human world in two fundamentally distinct ways: either through direct, immediate sensory and emotional engagement (e.g., experiencing beauty, awe, or comfort from nature or art), or through a more reflective, cognitive process of attributing abstract conceptual meaning, often through symbols, narratives, or existential contemplation (e.g., a landscape symbolizing freedom, an artifact representing heritage, the night sky evoking questions of purpose). These two modes are mutually exclusive in their primary focus (immediate reception versus reflective attribution) and comprehensively exhaustive, covering the full spectrum of subjective engagement.
6
From: "Conceptual and Symbolic Meaning Attribution"
Split Justification: Humans attribute abstract conceptual and symbolic meaning to the non-human world through two fundamentally distinct avenues: either by drawing upon established collective human constructs, narratives, traditions, and historical contexts (sociocultural and historical frameworks), or by engaging in deeper, reflective inquiry into universal aspects of existence, purpose, and the human condition that transcend specific cultural bounds (existential and universal contemplation). These two modes are mutually exclusive, as the primary source and nature of the attributed meaning differ (contingent human constructs vs. transcendent philosophical inquiry), and together they comprehensively cover the full scope of how humans assign abstract conceptual and symbolic significance to the non-human world.
7
From: "Meaning from Sociocultural & Historical Frameworks"
Split Justification: Humans attribute meaning to the non-human world through sociocultural and historical frameworks in two fundamentally distinct ways: either primarily from the actively evolving, present-day shared understandings, values, and narratives within a specific society or culture, or predominantly from the accumulated weight of past events, collective memory, and inherited traditions that shape our understanding of heritage. These two modes represent distinct temporal and generative dimensions of collective meaning-making, yet together they comprehensively cover the full scope of how humans derive meaning from established sociocultural and historical frameworks.
8
From: "Meaning from Historical Legacy & Collective Memory"
Split Justification: Humans attribute meaning to the non-human world through historical legacy and collective memory in two fundamentally distinct ways: either primarily from verifiable, documented historical facts, specific past events, and archaeological evidence that directly relate to the non-human entity (e.g., its creation, a major event that occurred there), or predominantly from the intergenerational transmission of non-factual or evolving cultural stories, myths, symbolic practices, and traditional uses that imbue the non-human world with significance. These two modes represent distinct sources and natures of meaning attribution (evidence-based vs. tradition/narrative-based), yet together comprehensively cover the full scope of how the past influences the subjective interpretation of the non-human world.
9
From: "Meaning from Established Historical Records and Events"
Split Justification: Humans derive meaning from established historical records and events relating to the non-human world in two fundamentally distinct ways: either through the interpretation of direct physical remnants, structures, and artifacts discovered and analyzed (e.g., archaeological sites, ancient ruins, historical objects), or through the study and interpretation of textual, visual, or audio records that document past events, facts, and descriptions. These two categories represent distinct primary forms of historical evidence (tangible vs. symbolic/narrative) that are mutually exclusive yet comprehensively cover how verifiable history informs our subjective understanding of the non-human realm.
10
From: "Meaning from Written and Recorded Historical Accounts"
Split Justification: ** Humans derive meaning from written and recorded historical accounts in two fundamentally distinct ways: either by extracting objective (or purportedly objective) factual information, quantifiable data, or direct descriptions of past events, entities, and conditions, or by interpreting the subjective perspectives, analytical frameworks, emotional responses, or broader narratives and conceptual understandings conveyed within these accounts. These two modes represent distinct types of information and understanding sought (what happened/was vs. how it was perceived/explained) that are mutually exclusive yet comprehensively cover the full spectrum of meaning derived from written and recorded historical sources.
11
From: "Meaning from Documented Facts and Descriptive Data"
Split Justification: All documented facts and descriptive data derived from historical accounts can be fundamentally categorized as either numerical, measurable, or otherwise quantifiable information, or as descriptive, non-numerical observations, characteristics, and states. These two forms of data are mutually exclusive in their nature (numerical vs. descriptive) and together comprehensively cover the full scope of objective factual and descriptive information that can be extracted from historical records.
12
From: "Meaning from Quantitative Historical Data"
Split Justification: Humans derive meaning from quantitative historical data in two fundamentally distinct ways: either by interpreting the inherent magnitude or specific value of individual data points and measurements (e.g., the exact population size, the total production volume), or by analyzing the relationships between data points, focusing on comparisons, ratios, and how quantities change or evolve over time. These two modes represent distinct types of information and understanding sought (static value vs. dynamic relationship) that are mutually exclusive yet comprehensively cover the full spectrum of meaning derived from quantitative historical data.
✓
Topic: "Meaning from Comparative Analysis and Temporal Trends" (W6490)