The MBTI®, the I Ching, and the Dynamics of Relationships
Copyright
© 2001-2005
C.
J. Lofting
Content
MBTI & I Ching
Appendix A - I Ching
Appendix B - Objects and Relationships
Appendix C - Relationships
Preliminaries
Through a careful analysis of the I Ching as well as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ® I have been
able to identify relational patterns that enable us to transcend the current MBTI categorisations. This allows
us to easily develop formal complex categorisations and in doing so identify refinements in categorisation properties
as well as methods.
This ability to extend MBTI categorisations has arisen from
achieving an understanding of the neurocognitive and affective (emotional) processes involved in the general determination
of meaning at the species level and then identifying the common elements of these processes encoded in the I Ching and MBTI, categorisation
systems that use the same methodology.
Since all meaning is determined by the method used to derive
it, so what is here implied is that any categorisation system will share meanings with any other like-derived categorisation
system; the words may be different but the feelings
of the meanings are not. (See Appendix B for more on this).
By being able to associate basic MBTI states with basic I Ching
states we can then recruit the I Ching symbolisms and in doing so extend the MBTI into over 4096 possible expressions
of both a single persona as well as relational consequences of combining personas. This extension can go further
into over 16 million possible types although this is not necessary.
The possible associations of MBTI types to I Ching trigrams
have been identified as follows:
I Ching Trigram
MBTI type
Keirsey equivalent
[1] Heaven
XSTP
Operators
[2] Lake
XSFP
Players
[3] Fire
XNTJ
Organizers
[4] Thunder
XNTP
Engineers
[5] Wind
XSTJ
Monitors
[6] Water
XSFJ
Conservators
[7] Mountain
XNFJ
Mentors
[8] Earth
XNFP
Advocates
Each of the I Ching trigrams is expressed as a three-line symbol
where each line is identified either as ‘yin’ or ‘yang’.
(Also note that the X element in the above MBTI- types reflects the I/E distinction
that is not differentiated at this level, nor needs to be since, as will be shown, it ‘pops out’ later in combinations)
Since the I Ching trigrams, although rich in associations,
are still too ‘general’ in meaning at this level of categorisation we recruit them and apply them to themselves
to create six line symbols made by placing one trigram atop another. This recruitment process gives us sixty-four
hexagrams with which to categorise,
and by association, allows us to take the related eight MBTI types and include them in the sixty-four hexagrams.
What this gives us is text-context relationships where the general nature of the trigram/MBTI-type is particularised
by associations with the other trigrams/MBTI-types as texts functioning within a context.
For example, lets lay-out all of the text-context relationships
for the trigram of Heaven
(we will use its above given number, [1]) and so, correspondingly, for the MBTI type of XSTP:
Context
:
Text
MBTI association
[1]
:
[1]
XSTP: XSTP
[1]
:
[2]
XSTP: XSFP
[1]
:
[3]
XSTP: XNTJ
[1]
:
[4]
XSTP: XNTP
[1]
:
[5]
XSTP: XSTJ
[1]
:
[6]
XSTP: XSFJ
[1]
:
[7]
XSTP: XNFJ
[1]
:
[8]
XSTP: XNFP
In the I Ching the trigrams are placed text atop context (reflecting
the 'upwards' movement) and as such would be expressed as:
[1] [2] [3] …
[1] [1] [1] …
Due to the above mentioned commonality in the I Ching and MBTI
categorisation systems the general underlying feelings for meanings in either system are to an extensive degree
shared such that the ‘singlemindedness’ of the
hexagram called Heaven, the ‘pure yang’ nature, is reflected as one of
a number of expressions in the general mindset of the XSTP/Operators types identified by the MBTI/Keirsey typologies.
Refinements
The refinement process is where we now formally identify eight
qualitative differences within
the general concept of Heaven/XSTP. As can be seen above, the XSTP state is coloured by the texts where XSTP:XSTP
reflects pure, refined, XSTP as compared to XSTP:XSFJ where the XSFJ text skews the expression of the XSTP in a
highly noticeable way and yet we still retain an overall sense of XSTP-ness.
Due to the shared semantic elements in these categorisation
systems I can use the concepts of the I Ching as analogies in identifying the subtle differences in expression
of the basic MBTI types. For
example, using the above associations we can associate an XSTP octet (set of eight) with a corresponding I Ching
octet:
Context
Text
Hexagram Name
MBTI (Keirsey) context:text associations
[1]
[1]
Singleminded
XSTP: XSTP (Operator: Operator)
[1]
[2]
Seeding
XSTP: XSFP (Operator: Player)
[1]
[3]
Directing
XSTP: XNTJ (Operator: Organiser)
[1]
[4]
Empowering
XSTP: XNTP (Operator: Engineer)
[1]
[5]
Small Gaining
XSTP: XSTJ (Operator: Monitor)
[1]
[6]
Wait/Serve
XSTP: XSFJ (Operator: Conservator/Protector)
[1]
[7]
Hold Firm
XSTP: XNFJ (Operator: Mentor)
[1]
[8]
Harmonising
XSTP: XNFP (Operator: Advocate)
What is identified here in the “Hexagram Name” column is the
general expression of the I Ching symbol and so by association the general expression of the MBTI context-text
associations. E.g. the XSTP: XNFP context:text association manifests the 'Operator' type relating with the 'Advocate'
type of XNFP and this relationship being associated with the I Ching hexagram expressed as a concern with ‘Harmonising’.
This I Ching name happens to reflect one of the general characteristics associated with the XSTP-type, namely that
of negotiators, trouble-shooters etc., individuals concerned with maintaining/restoring balance. These associations
are all possible, and meaningful, due to both categorisation systems, the I Ching and the MBTI, using the same
method for deriving meaning, and so ALL of the above I Ching hexagram names identify properties and methods contained
within the general MBTI categorisation of the XSTP persona.
What the above list shows is (a) The possible variations of
the XSTP type. (b) The set of archetypes built-in to the general type such that an individual of type XSTP will
‘live’ through some or all of these variations rather than just be one of them. (c) The relational mappings where
we take an XSTP perspective of relationships with other types. In other words the above associations manifest a
text element sourced within the XSTP individual or else sourced in the form of another individual. In this latter
case, the relationship identified above as concerning ‘harmonising’ also reflects the relationship dynamics of
an XSTP perspective relating with an XNFP individual; in other words rather than having a concern with harmonising the relationship is harmonising from the XSTP perspective; the
latter is more being, the former more doing.
From Raw to Refined : Strings of Quality
In addition to just recruiting the I Ching symbolisms and general
meanings we can also recruit basic algorithms within the I Ching itself to show us patterns within the MBTI. In
particular are the qualitative expressions within each MBTI type.
The qualitative expressions are where, as done above, we recruit
a set of symbols to refine our expressions. For example in the I Ching we recruited the trigrams to form hexagrams.
We can repeat this process where we use the sixty-four hexagrams as sources of analogy to use in describing the
qualitative differences for any ONE hexagram, thus the hexagram of pure yang, called ‘heaven’ or ‘singleminded’
when interpreted ‘as is’ reflects a general nature of ‘pure yang’. By recruiting all of the other hexagrams we
can ‘refine’ the generality of, the sameness
of, ‘pure yang’ into the form of a ‘string’ of all of the sixty-four hexagrams ordered by qualitative analogy to
identify all of the expressions of the qualitative differences within ‘pure yang’.
This string of hexagrams is ordered from ‘refined’ to ‘raw’
where the last hexagram in the list serves as the source of analogy to the qualitative expression of the bottom line position of the hexagram that identifies the ‘mud’ or ‘clay’
out of which the ‘refined’ top line position of the hexagram has developed.
For example, in the I Ching, for the hexagram of ‘pure yang’
or ‘singleminded’ the associated string has in the last position, the position of the ‘mud’ from which pure yang
emerged, the hexagram expressing the concept of ‘excess’, in other words ‘too much yang’.
In the context of the MBTI we have the SAME type of list and
as such we can identify qualitative differences in the general MBTI categorisations.
Thus, in the associated I Ching categorisation for ‘pure yang’
we associated the XSTP: XSTP type, Keirsey’s “Operators”, and from the I Ching 'string' associations we can identify
the complex persona type of XSTJ: XSFP , a Player in a Monitor context,
as describing by analogy the ‘mud’ from which the pure XSTP emerged.
Since the associated hexagram, ‘excess’, includes within it
the refined elements of ‘transcendence’ and of ‘going beyond what is required’ etc., so the complex persona type
of XSTJ: XSFP includes these properties when it is considered in its refined form rather than raw form.
In the following tables I have layed-out the sixty-four possible
expressions of the MBTI/I CHING in the form of octets relating a specific MBTI-type to its eight variations and
the accompanying hexagrams of the I Ching. I have then added the ‘mud’ relationship described above, I leave it
to the user as an exercise to derive the other members of the hexagram strings.
For all of the following diagrams note that:
(1) In the Text column, the number in brackets and to the right
is the traditional hexagram number in the I Ching representing the two trigrams, one atop the other; click on this
number to get more details regarding the hexagram. The number in braces and to the right is the trigram number
as given in earlier text. The link to details on the context trigram is part of the heading of the table (right
hand side). This link also contains references to the particular MBTI-type serving as context for the octet.
(2) The Context-Text columns reflect the trigrams forming the
hexagram whose name is also given. The Hexagrams Roots are NOT made-up of the same trigrams but reflect the best
descriptions of the ‘mud’ or ‘root’ out of which the entries in the
“Hexagram Name” column have developed.
(3) For interpretations, the meanings of the names in the "Hexagram
Root" column should be watered-down to reflect the ‘general’ or ‘raw’ nuances. The number in brackets in this
column is the traditional hexagram number and is linked to the hexagram.
Octet 1 – MBTI-type : XSTP, I Ching trigram : Heaven, pure yang
Appendix A
The I Ching : The Book of Changes
The I Ching (in Chinese pronounced as Yi Jing), or, in English,
The Book of Changes, has its origins in ancient China circa 1000 BC. Since that time it has developed not only
as a divination tool but also as a repository of philosophical thinking, both Chinese and otherwise, as well as
a general aide in everyday life.
The I Ching claims to identify 'all there is' based on an in-depth
analysis of the concepts of yin and yang. In general, the yin/yang concepts express two general biases in the minds
of our species. The first bias is to the archetypal where yang reflects light (positive, yes) and yin reflects
dark (negative, no). The second bias is to the typal where yang reflects the male (leadership) and yin reflects
the female (management). Note that this typal emphasis reflects the male/female distinctions as being metaphors
for characteristics that have become free of rigid gender associations.
The light/dark emphasis reflects situations of opposition and
of purity. The male/female emphasis adds to this opposition emphasis with the concept of cooperation and so of
mixing, genetic diversity.
Despite the clear identification of the characteristics of
yin and yang, the I Ching only develops a good sense of meaning when the yin/yang concepts are applied at least
three times to a situation. The first application sets a context and the other two are applied within this context
to add some detail.
The application method is to create symbols by using two forms
of lines to represent yin and yang. For yang we use an unbroken line whereas for yin we use a broken line:
With these basic symbols we can create ‘trigrams’, three line
symbols, ] ,
reflecting the development from a context (bottom line) up to
the top line. The nature of each line, whether the line is yin or yang, symbolises
the expression of a characteristic of the whole situation. For example, a bottom line of ‘yin’ reflects an overall
dark or female/values context as compared to a bottom line of ‘yang’ that reflects an overall light or male/facts
context.
Qualitatively the trigram reflects a pyramid where the bottom
line position is associated with the concepts of
‘raw’, or ‘worker’, or ‘background’, or ‘general’ and the top line position
is associated with the concepts of ‘refined’, or ‘sage’, or ‘foreground’, or ‘particular’.
With the application method described above we can derive a
set of eight trigrams that can be used to describe ‘all there is’ based on the use of yin/yang distinctions.
By starting any analysis of a situation with choosing one of
the eight general meanings of the trigrams we set a context. By then recruiting these same meanings we can apply
them to EACH trigram to give us details. For example, a symbol for 'pure yang' must reflect many qualitative differences
of 'pure yang' depending on the influence of the context; just like in everyday life where the context acts to
bring out an element of our overall behaviour, so too in the I Ching. Since the I Ching claims to identify 'all
there is' so we must use its symbolisms applied to itself to get details.
We achieve this by recruiting the eight trigrams to serve as
analogies that we can use to describe particular aspects of a particular, but general, trigram. For example, numbering
the trigrams from 1 to 8 we can have a general trigram represent the context (and so set the overall, general ‘feel’
of a situation, e.g. ‘pure yangness’) and on top of that trigram place one of the eight trigrams to form a hexagram,
6-line symbol. If the base trigram is trigram number 1 then we end up with eight variations in expression of that
1 :
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] ‘top’ trigram
[1] [1] [1] [1] [1] [1] [1] [1] ‘bottom’ trigram
We can also reverse these roles to manifest the concept of
‘pure yangness’, [1], in a context of the others (in the above particular example we have the concept of [1] as
text in its own context, [1].)
Just as we recruit the eight trigrams to serve as sources of
analogy for describing qualitative differences within the same eight trigrams, and so create sixty-four (8 x 8)
hexagrams, so we can also recruit the resulting sixty-four hexagrams to be used in the same way, we apply the sixty-four
hexagrams to each other. In
other words we can create over four thousand and ninety-six (64 x 64) possible symbolisms for ANY state in reality.
Furthermore, each of these symbolisms can be interpreted in an archetypal fashion
(emphasis on opposition) or a typal fashion (include cooperation). Within
the confines of the I Ching, reality, for us, is the resonance of the situation ‘out there’ with one of the hexagrams
or combinations-of created ‘in here’.
Each of the above-mentioned four thousand and ninety-six symbolisms
can be represented by a 12-line symbol made-up of yin/yang distinctions, reflecting the placing of one hexagram
atop another, but for ease of use these symbols are compressed into just six lines (a hexagram) with each line
now having four possible expressions:
- Pure
yang
- Pure
yin
- Yang
changing into Yin
- Yin
changing into Yang
These notions of ‘changing’ lines reflect the concept, captured
in the 12-line format, of one hexagram influencing another; in other words all change in one hexagram is caused
by the influences of another. The other hexagram represents the CONTEXT and the changing lines in a hexagram manifest
the affect of that context on the expression of the TEXT.
This notion of context influencing text is repeated all the
way through the I Ching where trigrams affect trigrams (as expressed in hexagrams with no changing line) and hexagrams
affecting hexagrams (expressed as hexagrams with changing lines).
The emphasis in the I Ching on prediction comes from the fact
that if the I Ching identifies 'all there is’, so all of the past and future fall within the realm of the I Ching,
in other words the future is identifiable and predictable to a general degree based on the inevitability of particular
processes, context influences on text, due to their perceived yin/yang nature. This inevitability comes from the
fact that if you have identified a particular situation with a hexagram then changing a line or lines in that hexagram
will transform that hexagram into another. If you can identify the lines that are changing then you can 'predict'
the future.
Since the I Ching describes ‘all there is’, any change in a
particular hexagram MUST be caused by the influence of another hexagram and with this information we can identify
a general movement from one situation to another.
This emphasis on change is the foundation of the I Ching -
the Book of Changes.
In this particular interpretation of the I Ching you will find
two methods for determining a future state. One method uses randomness in that since the I Ching identifies 'all
there is' so ALL possible symbols are in fact expressed at any one moment. It is difficult for the novice to comprehend
all of these expressions at the one moment, they will have some idea but will 'miss' alternative perspectives.
The use of randomness acts to select 'at random' one of the possible symbols applicable to the moment and in doing
so 'refine' the user's understanding of the situation and where it seems to be going in that the derived hexagram
reflects an aspect possibly not considered in the user’s reflections on a given situation.
The other method of determining the future is by the user answering
a few questions. These questions are very general but they reflect the way our brains work when analysing situations.
This method lacks the 'randomness' element but contains a higher level of precision as long as you are reasonably
honest with yourself! (or get someone else to answer the questions for you!)
The questions are so general as to appear too general but in
fact they are not in that they reflect unconscious processes that function at the level of the species rather than
individual and as such 'filter' thought processes unknowingly.
The test as to which system is 'better' or preferred for specific
contexts is done by you the user, where over time you will discover your personal preferences. Enjoy.
(1) System for deriving a hexagram randomly.
(2)
System for deriving a hexagram from questions.
Appendix B
Objects & Relationships
Copyright © 2001
Chris Lofting
The intention of this text is to demonstrate the ease in which a complex set of meanings
can be derived from the simple act of recursive dichotomisation, where recursive dichotomisation is the process
by which a dichotomy (A/B, yin/yang, plus/minus) is repeatedly applied to itself.
When I make the abstract distinction of A and NOT A (~A), experience shows that the distinctions,
when used to ‘map’ reality, are somewhat lacking in depth or more so are too ‘intense’ in that as I try to apply
the distinctions I find states that seem to reflect ‘in-between’ conditions where the A and the NOT A seem to combine
or at least become entangled to a degree where the basic A/~A distinctions no longer serve.
Since the A/~A distinctions are only those available, we are forced to apply them to each
other. This process initially creates four distinctions that can better map reality. These are:
Pure A
An entanglement of A with NOT A.
An entanglement of NOT A with A.
Pure NOT A.
The middle two terms reflect an awareness of text/context relationship where in one term
A serves as context and NOT A as text, and in the other term NOT A serves as context and A as text. From a logic
perspective, the pure expressions manifest ALL and the middle expressions manifest the emergence of SOME. (the
ALL states are also text/context relationships but due to their sameness we cannot differentiate text from context).
If we continue to apply the recursion so we develop a list of states usable to describe
unique expressions of A/NOT A entanglements. These ordered expressions then serve as members of the set of possible
descriptions ranging from ‘pure’ A to ‘pure’ NOT A.
To give these distinctions more meat than A/~A, let us work with the distinctions of objects
and relationships (aka NOT objects).
Using recursion we can identify four basic distinctions out of the object/relationships
concepts:
Objects:
A sense of wholeness.
A sense of partness.
Relationships:
A sense of relational invariance (static relationship)
A sense of relational variance (dynamic relationship)
We can further extend these distinctions through the use of a qualifying dichotomy as
in text/context, positive/negative, or foreground/background. This qualifying dichotomy, when applied, gives us
eight basic states we can use to generally describe anything.
What is noticeable when we continue to apply the recursion is that the sixty-four expressions
derived after only six levels of recursion reflect the combining of the eight expressions derived after only three
levels of recursion. In other words level 6 reflects refinements of those expressions derived at level 3. For example
we can derive a state that reflects a ‘positive wholeness’ context within which operates a ‘negative dynamic relationship’
as text. The combination of the emotional encoding of the two distinctions forms a general feeling for that expression.
What is implied by this is that level 3 contains a set of basic expressions that are simple
enough to avoid too much complexity and yet complex enough to reflect useful ‘basic’ meanings. All future developments
act to extend these basics by producing composites. In other words the level 3 basics are like ‘prime’ numbers
that we add together to produce composites.
At level 6 we have sixty-four expressions of possible A/~A relationships. We can go beyond
this but there comes a level where we lose the ability to detect differences and so a continuum emerges reflecting
all possible expressions of A/~A relationships.
Although this set of expressions helps us differentiate differences between expressions,
it does not help differentiate qualitative differences within a single expression. For example the notion of ‘positive
wholeness’ is a general expression but reality points to the expression having subtle qualitative differences based
on context etc.
Since we are restricted to deriving meaning from the use of recursion, we cannot step
outside of the ‘box’ to acquire ‘new’ expressions, we are forced to remain ‘in’ the box, applying recursion until
we can no longer detect differences. With this limitation how can we describe qualitative differences within a single expression?
The answer to this question is to use the full set of expressions as a source of analogy
to describe qualitative differences within a single expression.
For example, if we number all expressions from 1 to 64 (at level 6) we can use the same
numbers to indicate a qualitative difference within an expression. In other words identifying a general state as
described by expression 56 we can then refine the identification by associating another number of the available
sixty-four descriptions as an analogy to the qualitative difference in 56. E.g. 56.47 reflects general state 56
expressing a qualitative bias best described by analogy to expression 47. Thus if expression 56 was a general expression
of ‘maleness’ then 47 acts to qualify the general nature as an adjective qualifies a noun; 56 sets the context
and 47 identifies textual bias affecting the expression of that context.
By using our set of expressions on themselves as markers of quality, what immediately
comes to mind is the ordering of the strings of expression used to describe qualitative differences within a particular
expression. What is meant here is the fact that a string of expressions ordering the qualitative differences of
a particular expression MUST have a different ordering for each expression. For example the ‘raw’ state of expression
56 has to be different to the raw state of 57 such that the string of expressions used in both states must have
differences in ordering.
At this point we have, working from 6 levels of recursion, sixty-four general expressions
that describe states of A/~A (object/relationship or object/object or relationship/relationship) entanglement,
together with the same sixty-four expressions now used as sources of analogy to describe the qualitative differences
possible within one particular expression.
I would here like to make the point that we are dealing with a methodology that allows
us to take ANY dichotomy and flesh it out to a degree where we can make very refined distinctions and so establish
very refined meanings without saying a word.
This latter emphasis on ‘saying a word’ is made to press the point that the seemingly
abstract methodology here created allows for the development of a rich set of meanings from the simple application
of the positive/negative emotions dichotomy overlaid upon the dichotomy of objects/relationships. In other words
the set of meanings form an internal ‘language’ without any need for vocalisation/words etc. Non verbal communications
can achieve good levels of precision through the use of resonance of emotions, emotions we all share at a general
level as members of the same species.
Can we identify, can we label, the feelings other than using the object/relationships
distinctions? Yes we can in that, since we are dealing with dichotomies and since the act of recursion entangles
the elements of the dichotomy so we ask a simple, general, question – How many general ways can we mix two things?
The answer seems to be four and these four ways correlate with the object/relationship
distinctions made earlier. The four ways are:
To Blend – a sense of wholeness (to become ‘one’)
To Bound – a sense of partness (boundaries, borders, this from that distinctions)
To Bond - a sense of invariant relationship (statics, share the same space but keep unique identities)
To Bind – a sense of variant relationship (dynamics, only observable over time, distant
links)
By adding a qualifying dichotomy (e.g. contract/expand) we have a set of eight feelings
that ‘map’ to the more abstract object/relationship distinctions:
Contractive blending
Contractive bonding
Contractive bounding
Contractive binding
Expansive binding
Expansive bounding
Expansive bonding
Expansive blending
The further recursion leads to composite formations such as a feeling akin to “contractive blending
context with an expansive binding text”.
The addition of the qualitative strings allows for the further refinement of this general
with one of sixty-four analogies, all of which are applicable at any one moment ( we include analogy to oneself).
In other words there is a dynamic involved where the general expression can ‘slide’ along the string and in doing
so ‘bring out’ qualitative aspects.
Work on the human brain seems to demonstrate that we use recursive dichotomisations when
we make maps of reality. In particular we utilise the general dichotomy of WHAT (objects) and WHERE (relationships)
to make general identifications (we can particularise these general distinctions to include the derivation of WHO
and WHICH out of the WHAT, with WHEN and HOW coming out of the WHERE. Note the subtle emphasis on a ‘dot’ sense,
the precision of WHO, vs a ‘field’ sense, the layout of HOW etc).
To communicate precisely we have to transcend the degree of sameness inherent in the above
process where all we have is ‘this object’ vs ‘that object’ or ‘state 15’ vs ‘state 45’ or ‘that who’ vs ‘this
which’ etc etc
What the brain seems to do, and in doing so we see the emergence of mind, is to contextualise
the identifications. This process involves the use of symbols, words, images etc to link object with context to
establish a communicatable meaning that is vocalised and so more precise than general non-verbal communications.
In general this process of linkage leads to the development of particular disciplines
containing their own lexicon. These disciplines aim to identify differences (which our senses are attuned to –
we habituate to sameness). However what is forgotten is that the words, symbols etc, although diverse across so
many disciplines still indicate the SAME invariant set of meanings sourced in our brain. In other words every discipline
can have its unique expression of ‘wholeness’ but the FEELING of wholeness is invariant, it is at the species level
of development and as such a potentially infinite number of words all set-off the SAME general feeling (cultural/personal
traits can ‘refine’ the feeling, colour it, but in general it is the same and it is that sameness that marks us
as a species).
Thus, all disciplines are rooted in A/~A distinction-making and are in fact metaphors
for describing object/relationship interactions within specific contexts.
What is implied here is that all these disciplines can form analogies between each other
due to the underlying invariant distinctions encoded in our emotions, it is the resonance of the underlying emotions
that allow for the analogies to ‘fit’.
To extend our analysis, the formation of a set of expressions seems to develop from having
a rigid, structural emphasis, with a focus on everything being in the ‘correct’ place, to a more casual, dynamic
emphasis allowing for the mixing of expressions giving degrees of diversity (and so a source of transformation).
What seems to be reflected here is the notion of the archetypal as compared to the typal.
In other words, the initial phase of expression creation up to the level of establishing the string of expressions
as a source of analogy to describe qualitative elements of a particular expression, favours a more archetypal perspective
where there is an emphasis on opposition (forced by the sense of rigid placement), on purity and with a time sense
limited to that of ‘eternity’. This is akin to stopping development at level 3, with the eight general forms that
are usable and have their own sense of identity.
The movement beyond this archetypal phase is where we mix the basics, purity gives way
to ‘genetic’ diversity and time is refined to introduce a sense of mortality in the form of ‘begin/end’. Thus we
shift from an archetypal perspective to a typal perspective. This is reflected in the transformation of the light/dark
dichotomy, a dichotomy of opposition, to be extended into the male/female dichotomy introducing cooperation (mixing).
The development of the strings of expression, including the original set of expressions,
is open to levels of interpretation as suggested by Chomsky in that his hierarchy of grammar is applicable to these
expression sequences.
This hierarchy is in the order of:
Regular, where each expression in the sequence has its place and no other and is interpreted
‘as is’, as a ‘pure’ form.
Reflection, where the expression sequence is ‘cut’ into two, fours, eights etc showing
mirror relationships from pairs upto sequence-size/2.
Repetition, where the sequences previously cut for reflection can be mapped to show repetitions,
expressions of variations on a theme only observable through association ACROSS the cuts produced in reflection.
Unrestricted, where working on the foundations set by the previous members of the hierarchy,
more qualitatively precise links can be made free of particular, but all encompassing, algorithms.
Note how in this hierarchy, we develop from a rigid ‘dot’ emphasis of each expression
to a more ‘field’ emphasis at the level of unrestricted. This format, of a precision emphasis at the ‘dot’ level
and the ‘field’ level seems to reflect (!)
a fundamental property inherent in our map making.
By sticking to the distinctions of object/relationships and using the methodology of recursive
dichotomisations we have been able to derive a rich set of expressions usable in the determination of meaning at
the level of the species. Combined with the interpretive choices inherent in Chomsky’s hierarchy of grammar as
well as the recognition of object/relationship processing as being fundamental to our brains we have potentially
identified the source of meaning derivation used by our species.
The refinements in meaning produced by our cultures/individuals may emphasise difference
but behind all of these refinements is the ever-present set of emotions we all share and which we use to communicate;
the moment we select a word to use we have extracted ‘one’ from ‘many’ and so made an A/~A distinction.
In this particular text the emphasis is on the categorisation systems of the I Ching and
the MBTI, two categorisation systems that reflect the above-described ‘template’ of object/relationships distinctions
and so allow us to recruit one system, the I Ching, to refine and so extend the other, the MBTI.
Through analysis of some patterns of recursion that appear in the I Ching we
can work backwards to identify development patterns in human personas - thus a particular persona is made-up of
generic properties of two others, and so reflecting the focus in IDM etc of the whole being encoded in all parts
etc.
(the X in the below MBTI types means 'undifferentiated' where it reflects the I/E dichotomy of the MBTI/KeirseyTC
that is not required at this level of analysis)
XSTP persona (operators, sensation seeking) - hexagram 01
What this means is that the MBTI type XSTP (Keirsey temperament type of 'operators') is reflected in general in
the I Ching in the qualities of hexagram 01.
From analysis of the methodology in deriving meaning from recursion, and so the IDM material, we can use pattern
detection to come up with analogies based on the specialisation that is the I Ching to describe persona elements
in the specialisation that is the MBTI. Thus, using that method, we can map the root persona reflected in hexagram
01 as being a mix of two types - player/operator (reflected in hexagram 43) and player/monitor (reflected in hexagram
28)
hexagram 43 reflects a generic focus on being 'pushy', whereas hexagram 28 reflects a generic bias on being extreme,
too much 'yang'. Hexagram 01 is the manifestation of this 'mix' of types and so the 'pure' form of XSTP (as XSTP/XSTP,
meaning XSTP text operating in an XSTP context) comes from XSFP[text]/XSTP[context] and XSFP[text]/XSTJ[context].
This process can be extended to not only describe persona development but also identify the overall nature of a
relationship, thus two individuals of type X and Y will 'join' to express themselves as a group Z.
Thus a persona that types to hexagram-43, label that person as a type-43, together with another that types to hexagram-28,
aka a type-28, will express themselves as a team of type-01 just as the individual of type-01 will reflect the
basics of type-43 and type-28. There will be nuances here in group expressions where the group type-01 can express
characteristics not expressed by an individual or more so not expressed at a single moment.
I here summarise the patterns for the eight main categories (noting that using IDM/I Ching we can extend these
to 64, 4096, etc etc) - for analysis of generic properties of hexagrams use the hexagram table)
XSFP persona (players, sensation seeking) - hexagram 58
Root persona is a mix of operator/player (hex 10) and operator/conservator (hex 06)
XNTJ persona (organisers, solution seekers (problem solvers)) - hexagram 30
Root persona is a mix of engineers/organisers (hex 55) and engineers/mentors (hex 62)
XNTP persona (engineers, solution seekers) - hexagram 51
Root persona is a mix of organisers/engineers (hex 21) and organisers/advocates(disciples)(hex 35)
XSTJ persona (monitors, security seekers) - hexagram 57
Root persona type is a mix of protectors/monitors (hex 48) and protectors/operators (hex 05)
XSFJ persona (conservators-protectors, security seekers) - hexagram 29
Root persona type is a mix of monitors/protectors (hex 59) and monitors/players (hex 61)
XNFJ persona (mentors, identity seekers) - hexagram 52
Root persona type is a mix of advocates/mentors (hex 15) and advocates/organisers (hex 36)
XNFP persona (advocates, identity seekers) - hexagram 02
Root persona type is a mix of mentors/advocates (hex 23) and mentors/engineers (hex 27)
Summary
At this general level we have:
(a) hex A + hex B = generic qualities of hex C.
(b) working backwards to identity basic elements of an expression, given C we can identify A and B. This is GENERAL,
more specifics allow for context to make these associations less rigid. In the context of the binary ordering of
the I Ching, and so the elements that reflect the MBTI, the focus here is on competitive/cooperative exchanges
only. We need to walk before we run! ;-) What will come up here is the 'best fit' relationships for persona types
and from that will then emerge variations.
(c) given the trigram mappings of personas (use the hexagram table link above to click on the trigrams to get their
details) so we map eight basic personas to 64 derived personas and from there identity properties of relationships
- in the above I have only listed the 'pure' forms of eight basic personas, forms applicable to not just individuals
but to collectives and their interactions.
In the following list I have focused on relational issues of identifying the roots of a hexagram, and so (a) above
where we have "hexagram Z is made up of hexagram X and hexagram Y") given the associations of trigrams
and hexagrams to MBTI-sourced personas it should be easy for the user to identify MBTI equivalents:
We start by recognising that the I Ching hexagrams are derived through the
recursion of yin/yang (see
diagram on recursion)
This process of recursion acts to encode the basic elements of the WHOLE in all PARTS such that the I Ching is
the WHOLE and the trigrams, hexagrams, etc etc are the PARTS but given a part we can recreate the whole (IOW from
one hexagram I can derive all of the others)
This process means that 'all that is possible' is contained WITHIN the WHOLE, and so, in this case, within the
WHOLE that is the I Ching - IOW the I Ching acts as a specialist filter in interacting with reality and as such
comes with its own language etc., that serves to identify 'all there is'.
With all of this in mind, we can in fact go through each hexagram of the I Ching and identify a PAIR of hexagrams
that serve, by analogy, to identify the raw elements, and so the base quality, that go towards making the refined
expression of that hexagram. You should be able to pick this up as we go through the hexagrams but the basic method
is (a) change the top line of the hexagram in question to give hexagram A and then, using hexagram A, (b) change
the bottom line to give hexagram B. Qualitatively, A + B = C, the raw quality of the hexagram in question.
I have ordered the hexagrams in their traditional numbering, but note that the methodology was derived from working
on the binary sequence of the hexagrams (as shown in act of recursion diagram that gives us an ordering of yin/yang,
or 0/1, into a 64-symbol sequence from 000000 to 111111). To limit space in this email I have used a very general
set of interpretations of meanings but you can use your own and will get the same patterns in that the relationships
identified are a natural product of recursion (the method can also aid in creating one's own I Ching).
hexagram 01 :- the mould is made-up of under-exaggerated qualities of hexagram 43 - robustness, seeding, 'being
pushy', and the basic quality of hexagram 28 - excess (too much yang etc).
hexagram 02 :- hexagram 23 - pruning ( focus on the 'true' faith) - and hexagram 27 - hungering (need to be filled,
nourished).
hexagram 03 :- hexagram 42 - augmentation (increase) - and hexagram 20 - admiration (being an example)
hexagram 04 :- hexagram 07 - uniforming (the army) - and hexagram 19 - approach the 'high', defer to the 'low'
hexagram 05 :- hexagram 09 - make small gains to be noticed - and hexagram 57 - cultivate/become influencial
hexagram 06 :- hexagram 47 - forced enclosure - and hexagram 58 - intensity in expression
hexagram 07 :- hexagram 04 - masking, socialising-through-education - and hexagram 41 concentrating (distilling)
hexagram 08 :- hexagram 20 - admiration that motivates - and hexagram 42, augmentation (increase)
hexagram 09 :- hexagram 05 - calculated waiting for an opportunity - and hexagram 48 - foundation setting (the
well)
hexagram 10 :- hexagram 58 - intense reflection (of/upon self) - and hexagram 47 - forced enclosure
hexagram 11 :- hexagram 26 - holding firm - and hexagram 04 - masking
hexagram 12 :- hexagram 45 - celebration of faith - and hexagram 07 - asserting uniformity (the army)
hexagram 13 :- hexagram 49 - revelation, revolution - and hexagram 31 - wooing, intense stimulation
hexagram 14 :- hexagram 34 - invigoration - and hexagram 32 - commitment
hexagram 15 :- hexagram 52 - discernment, block, (quality control) - and hexagram 22 - facading, cover up, gloss
over, beautify
hexagram 16 :- hexagram 35 - bring something into the light - and hexagram 21 - solve a problem (solution seeking)
hexagram 17 :- hexagram 25 - assertion of one's perspective - and hexagram 12 - neutralise attacks of others on
faith
hexagram 18 :- hexagram 46 - getting 'involved' - and hexagram 11 - balancing, harmonising
hexagram 19 :- hexagram 41 - concentration (distill) - and hexagram 04 - masking, educating, socialisation
hexagram 20 :- hexagram 08 - unifying - and hexagram 42 - augmenting
hexagram 21 :- hexagram 51 - enlighten/sudden awareness - and hexagram 16 - foresight, plan, enthuse
hexagram 22 :- hexagram 36 - uncompromising, hide within - and hexagram 15 - modesty, even-out, level
hexagram 23 :- hexagram 02 - devotion to another/others - and hexagram 24 - return to the 'true' faith/way etc
hexagram 24 :- hexagram 27 - hungering - and hexagram 23 - pruning
hexagram 25 :- hexagram 17 - believing, following ( a 'new' faith etc) - hexagram 45 - celebration of, public assertion
of, belief
hexagram 26 :- hexagram 11 - harmonise, balance - and hexagram 46 - entanglement (getting more involved)
hexagram 27 :- hexagram 24 - returning - and hexagram 02 - devotion, trust in another/others
hexagram 28 :- hexagram 44 - persuading, seducing - and hexagram 01 - singlemindedness
hexagram 29 :- hexagram 59 - dispell illusions - and hexagram 61 - softening [armouring] (hard exterior, soft interior)
hexagram 30 :- hexagram 55 - abundance, diversity - and hexagram 62 - exaggerating traditions to retain structure
hexagram 31 :- hexagram 33 - trickary, to draw-in - and hexagram 13 - likemindedness, association with others
hexagram 32 :- hexagram 50 - transformation ('cook') - and hexagram 14 - direction setting, center of attention
hexagram 33 :- hexagram 31 - intense stimulation - and hexagram 49 - revolution, revelation
hexagram 34 :- hexagram 14 - direction setting, center of attention - and hexagram 50 - transformation
hexagram 35 :- hexagram 16 - foresight, plan, enthuse - and hexagram 51 - enlighten, sudden awareness
hexagram 36 :- hexagram 22 - beautify, gloss over, hide behind - and hexagram 52 - discernment, quality control,
block
hexagram 37 :- hexagram 63 - closure, completion, 'correctness' - and hexagram 39 - block the 'flow', obstruct
but also exploit that obstruction
hexagram 38 :- hexagram 54 - excess expenditure of initial, or 'surface' energy, immature - and hexagram 40 - release
of, relaxation of, structure (tension release)
hexagram 39 :- hexagram 53 - maturing, gradual development - and hexagram 37 - rigid structure (as tension release)
hexagram 40 :- hexagram 64 - incomplete, remain open - and hexagram 38 - opposition, tension
hexagram 41 :- hexagram 19 - approach the high/defer to the low, mix - and hexagram 07 uniformity
hexagram 42 :- hexagram 51 - enlighten/sudden awareness - and hexagram 16 foresight, plan, enthuse
hexagram 43 :- hexagram 01 - singlemindedness - and hexagram 44 - persuasion/seduction
hexagram 44 :- hexagram 28 - excess - and hexagram 43 - 'spreading the word'
hexagram 45 :- hexagram 12 - neutralising - and hexagram 25 - assertion of perspective
hexagram 46 :- hexagram 18 - correcting corruption - and hexagram 26 - holding firm (to tradition)
hexagram 47 :- hexagram 06 - compromising - and hexagram 10 - treading (a path)
hexagram 48 :- hexagram 57 - cultivation/become influencial - and hexagram 09 - make small gains
hexagram 49 :- hexagram 13 - likemindedness - and hexagram 33 - trickary
hexagram 50 :- hexagram 32 - commitment - and hexagram 34 invigorating
hexagram 51 :- hexagram 21 - problem solve - and hexagram 35 progress (bring into the light)
hexagram 52 :- hexagram 15 - modesty, level out - and hexagram 36 - uncompromising, hide the light
hexagram 53 :- hexagram 39 - obstructions, obsticles - and hexagram 63 completion, closure, 'correctness'
hexagram 54 :- hexagram 38 - opposition, mirroring - and hexagram 64 incomplete, remain open, 'incorrect, error'
hexagram 55 :- hexagram 30 - guidence/direction setting - and hexagram 56 - loyalty
hexagram 56 :- hexagram 62 - exaggerate traditions - and hexagram 55 diversity, abundance
hexagram 57 :- hexagram 48 - the well, foundation setting - and hexagram 05 - waiting, serving
hexagram 58 :- hexagram 10 - treading (a path) - and hexagram 06 - compromising
hexagram 59 :- hexagram 29 - containment/control - and hexagram 61 - softening, yielding, 'inner truth'
hexagram 60 :- hexagram 61 - softening, yielding, inner softness, hard exterior - and hexagram 59 dispell illusions
hexagram 61 :- hexagram 60 - limitations, impose standards - and hexagram 29 containment/control
hexagram 62 :- hexagram 56 - loyalty - and hexagram 30 - guidance/direction setting
hexagram 63 :- hexagram 37 - rigid structure (family/clan - tension release) - and hexagram 53 - maturing, development
hexagram 64 :- hexagram 40 - relaxed structure, (tension release) - and hexagram 54 - immaturing, error, initial
energy
