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: "Individual-Prioritization Hierarchies"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes individual-prioritization hierarchies based on whether the individual designates a single, unique partner as their highest priority and most central committed romantic and sexual relationship, or if they designate multiple partners as occupying equally high priority and central roles in their committed romantic and sexual life, without an overarching core relationship unit defining this plurality. This is mutually exclusive, as an individual's highest tier of personal prioritization is either occupied by one partner or by more than one, and it is comprehensively exhaustive, covering all possibilities for an individual's internal hierarchical structure regarding primary partners.
11
From: "Plural Primary Individual Hierarchy"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes "Plural Primary Individual Hierarchy" relationships based on whether the multiple primary partners themselves form an explicitly or implicitly acknowledged interconnected relational constellation, with mutual awareness of their collective status and often interaction among some or all primary partners, or if the individual primarily manages their multiple primary relationships as distinct and largely independent dyads, where the primary status is defined predominantly within each individual relationship with the focal person, and there is no inherent expectation of a collective primary constellation. This split is mutually exclusive, as the configuration of multiple primary relationships is either constellated or parallel, and it is comprehensively exhaustive, covering all structural possibilities for an individual's plural primary partnerships.
12
From: "Parallel Primary Structure"
Split Justification: This dichotomy fundamentally categorizes parallel primary structures based on whether the multiple primary partners are mutually aware of and acknowledge the existence of each other as primary partners to the focal individual, or if the individual maintains distinct primary relationships without explicit disclosure or mutual awareness among all primary partners. This provides a comprehensive and mutually exclusive division, accounting for the varying levels of transparency within independently managed plural primary relationships.
✓
Topic: "Compartmentalized Parallel Primary Structure" (W8008)