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 Humans"
Split Justification: All human interaction can be fundamentally categorized by its primary focus: either on the direct connection and relationship between specific individuals (from intimate bonds to fleeting encounters), or on the individual's engagement within and navigation of larger organized human collectives, their rules, roles, and systems. This dichotomy provides a comprehensive and distinct division between person-to-person dynamics and person-to-society dynamics.
4
From: "Personal Relationships"
Split Justification: Personal relationships can be fundamentally divided based on whether their primary origin is an unchosen, inherent bond (such as family or blood ties) or a volitional, chosen connection based on mutual interests, affection, or shared values. This dichotomy accounts for all personal bonds.
5
From: "Chosen and Affinitive Relationships"
Split Justification: All chosen and affinitive relationships can be fundamentally categorized by the presence or absence of a romantic and/or sexual dimension. This dichotomy is mutually exclusive, as a relationship either encompasses these elements or it does not, and it is comprehensively exhaustive, covering all forms of chosen bonds from intimate romantic partnerships to platonic friendships, mentorships, and other volitional connections based on shared interests or values.
6
From: "Romantic and Sexual Relationships"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally distinguishes between relationships characterized by a significant, often explicitly agreed-upon, investment in a shared future, emotional depth, and defined partnership (e.g., marriage, long-term cohabitation) versus those relationships that are primarily focused on present enjoyment, exploration, or short-term connection without a mutual commitment to a long-term future or defined partnership. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division, accounting for the full spectrum of romantic and sexual bonds from one-time encounters to lifelong unions.
7
From: "Committed Romantic and Sexual Relationships"
Split Justification: ** This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes committed romantic and sexual relationships based on whether the primary commitment to emotional, romantic, and/or sexual exclusivity is solely between two individuals, or whether it encompasses or allows for multiple, equally valid romantic and/or sexual partners within the scope of the committed relationship. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division of all committed romantic and sexual relationships based on their intrinsic relational structure regarding exclusivity and the number of primary participants.
8
From: "Non-Monogamous Committed Romantic and Sexual Relationships"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes committed non-monogamous relationships based on whether they establish an explicit or implicit ranking among partners or relationships (e.g., primary/secondary partnerships), or if they aim for an egalitarian structure where all committed relationships are considered equally valid and central without inherent prioritization. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division of all committed non-monogamous relationships based on their intrinsic organizational principle regarding the distribution of emotional investment, resources, and decision-making power among multiple partners.
9
From: "Hierarchical Non-Monogamous Relationships"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes hierarchical non-monogamous relationships based on whether the primary ranking and prioritization are established by an overarching, foundational relationship unit (e.g., a primary couple, a marriage, or a core polycule) to which other relationships are secondary, or if the hierarchy is primarily defined by an individual's personal prioritization of their own partners, designating one or more as primary based on their commitment and investment, independent of an overarching core relationship unit.
10
From: "Relationship Unit-Centric Hierarchies"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes Relationship Unit-Centric Hierarchies based on whether the primary relationship unit expands its non-monogamous engagement by forming collective partnerships where additional individuals are integrated into the unit's shared structure (e.g., forming a triad or quad together with the unit at its core), or by permitting its individual members to form separate partnerships while maintaining the primary unit's foundational status and defined hierarchy. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division of how a foundational relationship unit structures its hierarchical non-monogamous interactions.
11
From: "Unit-Permitting Individual Partnerships"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes Unit-Permitting Individual Partnerships based on whether the permitted individual partnerships are intentionally maintained as separate and distinct relationships, with minimal or no direct interaction or social integration between the primary partner and the secondary partner (metamour), or if there is an expectation or allowance for the metamours to interact, acknowledge each other, and potentially integrate into a shared social sphere. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division of how individual partnerships are managed within the context of a primary relationship unit.
12
From: "Parallel Permitted Partnerships"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes parallel permitted partnerships based on the agreed-upon level of information sharing and discussion about the individual partnerships *within the primary relationship unit*. "Discreet Parallel Partnerships" are characterized by an implicit or explicit agreement to limit the discussion and detail shared with the primary partner about the permitted individual relationships, often to maintain a sense of separation or avoid potential discomfort. In contrast, "Transparent Parallel Partnerships," while still maintaining the physical and social separation between metamours, involve an open approach where primary partners share significant details, emotions, and experiences regarding their individual relationships. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division, covering the full spectrum of information management within the primary unit regarding its parallel permitted partnerships.
✓
Topic: "Transparent Parallel Partnerships" (W6728)