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: "Egalitarian Non-Monogamous Relationships"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes egalitarian non-monogamous relationships based on the degree of structural integration of the partners' daily lives and resources. It distinguishes between relationships where partners primarily form a unified collective unit with shared households, integrated finances, and/or joint primary life decisions, versus relationships where partners maintain largely independent living situations, finances, and life structures, even while upholding multiple equally valid and committed romantic and/or sexual bonds. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division of how egalitarian non-monogamous commitments are practically implemented in terms of shared life and resources.
10
From: "Egalitarian Non-Monogamous Relationships with Independent Life Structures"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes egalitarian non-monogamous relationships with independent life structures based on whether the individual's multiple committed partners are intentionally integrated and socially connected within a shared broader relationship network, or whether they primarily exist as distinct, independent connections that do not extensively interact or integrate with each other's spheres. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division of how egalitarian non-monogamous commitments are structured in terms of social interaction and network integration among partners, while maintaining independent life structures.
11
From: "Interconnected Constellation Relationships"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes interconnected constellation relationships based on whether the individuals within the shared relationship network who are partners to the same person (meta-amours) also maintain romantic and/or sexual relationships with each other. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division, accounting for constellations where romantic/sexual bonds are exclusively individual-to-individual (e.g., a 'V' shape where the arms are not romantically/sexually involved with each other) versus those where romantic/sexual bonds form more complex webs, including between meta-amours (e.g., triads, quads, or other forms where all members may have romantic/sexual relationships with each other).
12
From: "Constellations With Meta-Amour Romantic/Sexual Relationships"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes constellations where meta-amours have romantic/sexual relationships based on whether all individuals within the defined constellation are romantically and/or sexually involved with every other individual within that constellation (a fully connected graph), or if only a subset of these potential romantic/sexual pairings exist among the constellation members (a partially connected graph). This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division, accounting for the completeness of the romantic/sexual network among all individuals who are part of such a constellation.
✓
Topic: "Partially Connected Meta-Amour Constellations" (W7624)