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: "Shared Meaning and Norms"
Split Justification: The node "Shared Meaning and Norms" encompasses both the collective cognitive frameworks by which a group understands and interprets the world (its 'meaning' and 'beliefs') and the collective evaluative and prescriptive frameworks that guide appropriate action and interaction (its 'values' and 'norms'). This split fundamentally divides these two aspects into a category focused on the descriptive understanding of reality and a category focused on the prescriptive principles and patterns of behavior within that reality.
7
From: "Shared Values and Behavioral Norms"
Split Justification: This node fundamentally comprises two distinct types of collective prescriptions: the abstract, guiding principles and ideals that a group deems good, desirable, or important (Shared Values), and the specific, often unwritten rules and expectations for conduct that dictate appropriate behavior in various situations (Shared Behavioral Norms). This split separates the underlying ethical/moral compass from its practical manifestations in collective conduct, creating a mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive division of the parent concept.
8
From: "Shared Behavioral Norms"
Split Justification: This dichotomy categorizes shared behavioral norms based on their perceived importance for group welfare and the severity of social sanctions for their violation. Social Mores are norms deemed essential for the group's moral integrity or survival, violations of which evoke strong social condemnation. Social Folkways are norms of customary conduct and etiquette, violations of which elicit milder disapproval or social awkwardness. This creates a mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive division by the fundamental 'weight' or 'gravity' of the behavioral expectation within informal social systems.
9
From: "Social Mores"
Split Justification: Social Mores, representing norms deemed essential for a group's moral integrity or survival, can be fundamentally divided based on the primary aspect of the group's existence they are intended to safeguard. The first category encompasses norms that prohibit actions directly threatening the physical safety, health, or material resources of individuals or the collective (Mores Safeguarding Physical and Material Well-being). The second category includes norms that prohibit actions seen as undermining the group's fundamental moral principles, shared identity, social cohesion, or spiritual integrity, often manifesting as prohibitions against deep-seated taboos or sacrilege (Mores Safeguarding Moral and Social Identity). This dichotomy is mutually exclusive, as each more primarily addresses one type of threat, and comprehensively exhaustive, covering all critical dimensions of a group's 'moral integrity' and 'survival'.
10
From: "Mores Safeguarding Physical and Material Well-being"
Split Justification: The node "Mores Safeguarding Physical and Material Well-being" fundamentally encompasses two distinct categories of protection: one concerning the bodily integrity, health, and safety of individuals and the collective, and another concerning the security, allocation, and preservation of tangible assets, goods, and shared property. This split creates a mutually exclusive division by separating norms that prohibit direct physical harm, injury, or health threats from those that prohibit actions like theft, damage to property, or unjust appropriation of resources. Together, these two categories comprehensively cover all aspects of a group's physical and material well-being.
11
From: "Mores Safeguarding Material Resources and Property"
Split Justification: This split fundamentally distinguishes between mores that protect material resources and property by prohibiting their direct removal, seizure, or physical damage (appropriation, destruction) from those that protect them by prohibiting their inefficient use, squandering, or improper application (waste, misuse). One category focuses on preventing the direct loss of existence or integrity of assets, while the other focuses on ensuring their responsible and effective utilization and longevity. This creates a mutually exclusive division, as an act is primarily either one of taking/destroying or one of wasting/misusing, and together they comprehensively cover how a group safeguards its material well-being through essential informal norms.
12
From: "Mores Prohibiting Waste or Misuse of Material Assets"
Split Justification: This split fundamentally distinguishes between mores that protect material assets by prohibiting their unnecessary quantitative reduction, premature wear, or squandering through carelessness or overindulgence (Negligent Depletion or Excessive Consumption), and those that protect them by prohibiting their deployment for purposes not intended, not approved, or deemed harmful (Misapplication or Unauthorized Use). The first category focuses on the preservation of the asset's physical existence, quantity, and longevity, while the second focuses on the integrity of its intended function, purpose, and legitimate scope of use. This creates a mutually exclusive division, as an act is primarily a matter of wasting/depleting or misapplying/using without authority, and together they comprehensively cover all aspects of prohibiting waste or misuse within essential informal norms.
✓
Topic: "Mores Prohibiting Misapplication or Unauthorized Use of Assets" (W7788)