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: "Social Systems and Structures"
Split Justification: All social systems and structures can be fundamentally categorized by whether their rules, roles, and organization are explicitly codified, institutionalized, and formally enforced (formal systems), or are unwritten, emergent, culturally embedded, and maintained through custom, tradition, and implicit social pressure (informal systems). This dichotomy is mutually exclusive, as a system's primary mode of operation is either formal or informal, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all aspects of collective human organization.
5
From: "Informal Social Systems"
Split Justification: All informal social systems can be fundamentally divided into two mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive categories: those focused on the collective, unwritten understandings, values, beliefs, traditions, and customs that guide behavior (Shared Meaning and Norms), and those focused on the spontaneous, interactional processes and structures of influence, status, reputation, and cohesion that arise within groups (Emergent Social Dynamics). One describes the content and collective interpretation of the informal system, while the other describes the interactive mechanisms and relational outcomes.
6
From: "Emergent Social Dynamics"
Split Justification: ** All emergent social dynamics can be fundamentally divided into the active, ongoing processes of interaction that generate them (such as influence attempts, social signaling, and reciprocal exchanges) and the more stable, patterned configurations that arise as a result of these interactions (such as informal hierarchies, established reputations, and levels of group cohesion). This dichotomy separates the real-time unfolding mechanisms of social activity from the patterned outcomes that define informal social organization, ensuring mutual exclusivity and comprehensive exhaustion.
7
From: "Emergent Social Configurations"
Split Justification: All emergent social configurations can be fundamentally divided into those patterned outcomes that define the distribution of informal power, prestige, and perceived importance among individuals (e.g., informal hierarchies, individual reputations), and those patterned outcomes that define the distribution of emotional bonds, affinities, and sense of integration or estrangement within the collective (e.g., group cohesion, emergent cliques). This dichotomy separates the organizational patterns of social sway and respect from the relational patterns of emotional ties and belonging, ensuring mutual exclusivity as these are distinct dimensions of informal social patterning, and comprehensive exhaustion by covering the primary forms of stable emergent social organization.
8
From: "Configurations of Social Connection and Belonging"
Split Justification: All emergent social configurations related to connection and belonging can be fundamentally divided into those that describe the patterned state of an individual's inclusion within or exclusion from the overall collective, impacting the group's unity (e.g., group cohesion, social integration), and those that describe the patterned relationships and affinities between specific individuals or smaller clusters within the collective, forming distinct social ties or subgroups (e.g., emergent cliques, friendship networks). This dichotomy separates patterns of holistic group belonging from patterns of specific inter-individual relations, ensuring mutual exclusivity and comprehensive exhaustion.
9
From: "Configurations of Collective Integration"
Split Justification: All configurations of collective integration can be fundamentally divided into those that describe the patterned state of individuals' emotional and cognitive identification with the collective, fostering a sense of shared identity and unity (Affective-Cognitive Belonging), and those that describe the patterned state of individuals' active roles, contributions, and functional interdependence within the collective, enabling coordinated action and collective purpose (Instrumental-Behavioral Participation). This dichotomy separates the internal, psychological dimensions of belonging and shared meaning from the external, actionable dimensions of engagement and functional contribution, ensuring mutual exclusivity as distinct facets of integration, and comprehensive exhaustion by covering the primary ways individuals are patterned into a collective's unity.
10
From: "Configurations of Instrumental-Behavioral Participation"
Split Justification: All configurations of instrumental-behavioral participation can be fundamentally divided based on whether individuals' patterned roles and contributions are primarily directed towards the direct accomplishment of the collective's specific tasks, goals, or output (e.g., directly solving problems, producing goods, achieving shared objectives), or whether they are primarily directed towards enabling, organizing, or providing resources for the collective's functional processes, coordination, and overall operational capacity (e.g., facilitating interaction, managing resources, structuring activities). This dichotomy separates contributions focused on the direct 'what' of collective achievement from those focused on the 'how' and 'enabling conditions' of that achievement, ensuring mutual exclusivity and comprehensive exhaustion within the realm of active, functional engagement.
11
From: "Configurations of Direct Task Contribution"
Split Justification: All configurations of direct task contribution can be fundamentally divided based on whether individuals' patterned contributions are primarily directed towards generating novel ideas, concepts, strategies, or solutions (Conceptual-Generative), or whether they are primarily directed towards implementing established plans, performing required actions, or executing specific operations to produce results (Execution-Performance). This dichotomy separates contributions focused on the 'design and ideation' aspect of direct task accomplishment from those focused on the 'active implementation and delivery' aspect, ensuring mutual exclusivity and comprehensive exhaustion.
12
From: "Configurations of Execution-Performance Task Contribution"
Split Justification: All configurations of execution-performance task contribution can be fundamentally divided based on whether individuals' patterned contributions primarily involve the consistent, predictable execution of established procedures, known methods, or repetitive actions (Routine Execution), or whether they primarily involve flexible adjustment, problem-solving, and responsive action in the face of emergent challenges, unforeseen circumstances, or non-standard requirements (Adaptive Execution). This dichotomy separates contributions characterized by adherence to known patterns from those characterized by real-time adjustment and innovation during execution, ensuring mutual exclusivity and comprehensive exhaustion within the realm of active task delivery.
✓
Topic: "Configurations of Adaptive Execution" (W7548)