preface <

part one <

part two <

part three >

part four <

observations <

addendum <

bibliography <

the author <

the forum <

  PART THREE
semantic space

The term Semantic Space was, to my knowledge, coined by the psychologist Charles E. Osgood. He used it to indicate the emotive distances between similar terms. I use it quite differently, and one might well say, more pretentiously, to indicate a universe of meanings. I see this Space as determined by six dimensions that separate , at a given moment, the meanings of our responses to problems. This results in Individual and Collective hypercubes each with sixty-four terms for responses to problems at their corners. (Part 4, entitled Isomorphisms, combines the hypercubes for Individuals and for Collectives to show the similarity of their problem-contexts and response-modes..) All languages may be expected to have equivalent responses on the sixty-four corners.

The dimensions of the sixteen cubic representations that follow are similar to the contrasts in activity, strength and valence described in Part One. The eight corner options, each calculated to characterize the combination of six binary variables, begin with their first letters capitalized. I see these sets of prototypes as reflecting the positive versus negative contrasts of the Style Cube shown in Part Two, i. e.,

Active & Strong as either Resilient or Tough,
Passive & Strong as either Stable or Rigid,
Active & Weak as either Flexible or Brittle, and
Passive & Weak as either Yielding or Collapsed.


For the paradigmatic Model of White versus Black, for example, you will see that shifts transform the spontaneity of Hedonism to the domestication of Governance. These dimensions change from:

  1. passive / active to protracted / immediate
  2. weak / strong to erratic / sustained
  3. negative / positive to undesirable / desirable

For individuals, the changes are:

  1. to expectations (from arousal)
  2. to involvement (from mobilization)
  3. to self-rejection / self-acceptance (from 'repelled / attracted')

For collectivities, they are changes:

  1. to authority (from force)
  2. to control (from influence)
  3. to disrespectable / respectable (from vulnerable / safe)

Thus, regarding the Individual hypercube's black of judgmental Governance, Identity combines:

  • low versus high expectations
  • mild versus salient involvement
  • - versus + values

and, for the Collective hypercube, Policy has:

  • slight versus great exigency
  • loose versus tight control
  • bad versus good

Inversely, for the white of situational Hedonism, the Dispositions of Individuals combine:

  • uninterested versus demanding
  • relaxed versus mobilized
  • against versus desired

while Interaction combines:

  • static versus dynamic
  • dull versus influential
  • defensive versus affirmative

I present the sixteen archetypes in sets of four according to the contrasting polar axes of their hypercubes, i. e.,

White for Hedonistic Reactions and Interaction versus
Black for Identify and Policy;

Yellow for Existeniality and Ideology versus
Violet for Character and Communality;

Orange for Personality and Organization versus
Blue for Emotions and Belonging;

Green for Probity and Piety versus
Red for Habits and Reciprocity.


My pattern of presentation for the archetypes will be the following:

Dimensions
Positive versusNegative
Active versusPassive
Strong versusWeak

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
Resilient versus Collapsed
Yielding versus Tough
Flexible versus Rigid
Stable versus Brittle

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Resilient versusTough
Yielding versusCollapsed
Flexible versusBrittle
Stable versusRigid


Important to recall is that the prototypic responses reflect meeting-points of the three 'zero / one' archetypal variables with those of the three similar bifurcated ones for variations in style.

White vs. Black
The immediacy of arousal, the potency of needs, and the '+/-' evaluations of their hedonistic significance are best illustrated by the response cubes underlying stylistic variations both in our reaction dispositions and in our interactions with others. Their shared dimensionson the Model are:

  PleasurableversusPainful
ArousedversusCasual
MobilizedversusRelaxed

For the White Cube of Individuals' Hedonistic Reactions, the elements are as follows:

Dimensions
For versusAgainst
Aroused
(stimulated / irritated)
versusCasual
(adaptable / unadaptable)
Mobilized
(motivated / frustrated)
versusRelaxed
(satisfied / disatisfied)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Creative versus  Wasting
  Consuming versus  Taking
  Using versus  Salvaging
  Saving versus  Abusing

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Creative versusTaking
Consuming versusWasting
Using versusAbusing
Saving versusSalvaging


Similarly, for the White Cube of Hedonistic Interaction Among Individuals, the elements are as follows:

Dimensions
Affirmative versusDefensive
Forceful
(stimulated / irritated)
versusLow Force
(adaptable / unadaptable)
Influential
(motivated / frustrated)
versusLow Influence
(satisfied / disatisfied)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Concerted versus  Mutual Avoidance
  Compromising versus  Conflictful
  Competitive versus  Confrontational
  Cooperative versus  Cutthroat Competition

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Concerted versusConflictful
Compromising versusMutual Avoidance
Competitive versusCutthroat Competition
Cooperative versusConfrontational


These two White cubes have similar connotations for their corners, despite their different dimensions. They show variations in our attractions and aversions to the vicisitudes of everyday life - its 'fun and games' and their downside.

The cubes above show spontaneous individual and collective responses to incidental problems. In contrast, those shown below for Self-Identity and Collective Policy are postures reflecting the completion of systematization: demands externalized, needs internalized and evaluations objectified. Rather than their valence variables being either positive or negative reactions to anticipated pleasure or pain, they show opposition between worthy and unworthy reactions (for individuals the contrast is between self-acceptance and self-rejection, while for collectives, it is the contrast between respectability and disrepute). See Figure 6 and Figure 7.

The domesticated Governance cubes of Identity and Policy share these diensions on the Model:

  WorthyversusUnworthy
ImmediateversusProtracted
SustainedversusEpisodic

For the Black Cube of Individual Identity, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Self-Acceptance versusSelf-Rejection
Expectant
(free / coerced)
versusLow Expectations
(perfunctory / constrained)
Involved
(determined / threatened)
versusLow Involvement
(trusting / suspicious)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Autonomous versus  Deflated
  Submissive versus  Defiant
  Spontaneous versus  Retentive
  Steadfast versus  Disruptive

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Autonomous versusDefiant
Submissive versusDeflated
Spontaneous versusDisruptive
Steadfast versusRetentive


For the Black Cube of Collective Policy, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Respectable versusDisrespected
Authoritative
(free / coerced)
versusLow Authority
(perfunctory / constrained)
Controlling
(determined / threatened)
versusLow Control
(trusting / suspicious)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Performant versus  Decadent
  Pluralist versus  Partisan
  Cosmopolitan versus  Repressive
  Provincial versus  Agitated

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Performant versusPartisan
Pluralist versusDecadent
Cosmopolitan versusAgitated
Provincial versusRepressive


The stylistic modes on the corners of these two Black cubes may well remind you of a horoscope or of yhe typologies popularized in the literature of 'management. Here I specify their differing dimensions and their interrelationships.

The next four Figures do for the yellow / violet contrast of the Projective and Maintenance archetypes what Figures 4 and 5 and Figures 6 and 7 have done for the white / black of Hedonism versus Governance.

Thereafter, two more sets of four Figures do the same for the orange / blue Operative versus Expressive axis and the green / red one of Regulative versus Instrumental.

Yellow versus Violet
The Model's dimensions for the Existential Agendas and Ideological Orientations are

  DesirableversusUndesirable
ArousedversusCasual
MobilizedversusRelaxed

and its dimensions for the Maintenance Violet of Character and Community are:

  HarmonyversusDiscord
ImmediateversusProtracted
SustainedversusEpisodic

The Yellow for our personal agendas or fleeting projects is the archetype that is the key to the qualities we characterize as 'human' - ones where the subjective 'I' has become an objectified reflective 'me'.

For the Yellow Cube of Existential Orientations, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Resolute versusUnwilling
Demanding
(stimulated / irritated)
versusLow Demand
(adaptable / unadaptable)
Needful
(motivated / frustrated)
versusLow Need
(satisfied / dissatisfied)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Affirmative versus  Despairing
  Compliant versus  Vengeful
  Tolerant versus  Intolerant
  Responsible versus  Irrespossible

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Affirmative versusVengeful
Compliant versusDespairing
Tolerant versusIrresponsible
Responsible versusIntolerant


Below are the 'political' options open to us from moment to moment, depending upon the shifting combinations of the dimensions affecting our vital space. Here is the breeding ground of all social movements.

For the Yellow Cube of Idelogical Orientations, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Empathic versusBiggoted
Forceful
(stimulated / irritated)
versusLow Force
(adaptable / unadaptable)
Influential
(motivated / frustrated)
versusLow Influence
(satisfied / dissatisfied)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Progressive versus  Cynical
  Conformist versus  Insurgent
  Liberal versus  Reactionary
  Conservative versus  Radical

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Progressive versusCynical
Conformist versusInsurgent
Liberal versusRadical
Conservative versusReactionary


For the Violet Cube of Character, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Satiable versusInsatiasiable
Expectant
(free / coerced)
versusLow Expectations
(perfunctory / constrained)
Involved
(determined / threatened)
versusLow Involvement
(trusting / suspicious)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Productive versus  Squandering
  Receptive versus  Destructive
  Marketing versus  Hoarding
  Investing versus  Gambling

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Productive versusDestructive
Receptive versusPhlegmatic
Marketing versusGambling
Investing versusHoarding


For the Violet Cube of Community, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Fair versusUnfair
Authoritative
(free / coerced)
versusLow Authority
(perfunctory / constrained)
Controlling
(determined / threatened)
versusLow Control
(trusting / suspicious)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Integration versus  Escapism
  Accommodation versus  Contestation
  Assimilation versus  Separatism
  Amalgamation versus  Opportunism

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Integration versusContestation
Accommodation versusEscapism
Assimilation versusOpportunism
Amalgamation versusSeparatism


Orange versus Blue
The Model's dimensions for the Operative Orange of Personality and Organization are:

  HonestversusDishonest
ImmediateversusProtracted
MobilizedversusRelaxed

and its dimensions for the Expressive Blue of Emotions and Belonging are:

  openversusvulnerable
arousedversuscasual
sustainedversusepisodic

For the Orange Cube of Personality, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Confident versusShamed
Expectant
(free / coerced)
versusLow Expectations
(perfunctory / constrained)
Needful
(motivated / frustrated)
versusLow Needs
(satisfied / dissatisfied)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Challenged versus  Resigned
  Adjustive versus  Subversive
  Innovative versus  Perfectionist
  Orthodox versus  Eccentric

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Challenged versusSubversive
Adjustive versusResigned
Innovative versusEccentric
Orthodox versusPerfectionism

For the Orange Cube of Organization, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Legitimate versusIllegitimate
Authoritative
(free / coerced)
versusLow Authority
(perfunctory / constrained)
Influential
(motivated / frustrated)
versusLow Influence
(satisfied / dissatisfied)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Self-Management versus  Alienation
  Attribution versus  Disciplined
  Alliance versus  Exploitation
  Paternalistic versus  Antagonistic

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Self-Management versusDisciplined
Attribute versusAlienation
Alliance versusAntagonistic
Paternalistic versusExploitation


For the Blue Cube of Emotions, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Security versusAnxiety
Demanding
(stimulated / irritated)
versusLow Demands
(adaptable / unadapteble)
Involved
(determined / threatened)
versusLow Involvement
(trusting / suspicious)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Love versus  Angst
  Happiness versus  Anger
  Joy versus  Grief
  Concern versus  Disgust

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Love versusAnger
Happiness versusAngst
Joy versusDisgust
Concern versusGrief


For the Blue Cube of Belonging, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Compassion versusPrejudice
Forceful
(stimulated / irritated)
versusLow Force
(adaptable / unadapteble)
Controlling
(determined / threatened)
versusLow Control
(trusting / suspicious)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Enthusiastic versus  Stagnent
  Friendly versus  Hostile
  Expansive versus  Constrained
  Supportive versus  Troubled

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Enthusiastic versusHostile
Friendly versusStagnent
Expensive versusTroubled
Supportive versusConstrained


Green versus Red
The Model's dimensions for the Regulative Green of Probity and of Piety are:

  GoodversusBad
ArousedversusCasual
SustainedversusEpisodic

and its dimensions for the Instrumental Red of habitual Dispositions and of Reciprocity are:

  OptimisticversusPessimistic
ImmediateversusProtracted
MobilizedversusRelaxed

For the Green Cube of Probity, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Innocent versusGuilty
Demanding
(stimulated / irritated)
versusLow Demands
(adaptable / unadapteble)
Involved
(determined / threatened)
versusLow Involvement
(trusting / suspicious)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Dedicated versus  Detached
  Benign versus  Malignant
  Liberated versus  Possessive
  Protective versus  Libertarian

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Dedicated versusMalignant
Benign versusDetached
Liberated versusLibertarian
Protective versusPossessive


For the Green Cube of Piety, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Virtuous versusVicious
Forcefjul
(stimulated / irritated)
versusLow Force
(adaptable / unadapteble)
Controlling
(determined / threatened)
versusLow Control
(trusting / suspicious)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Promethean versus  Anomic
  Buddhist versus  Satanic
  Bohemian versus  Christian
  Apollonian versus  Dionysian

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Promethean versusSatanic
Buddhist versusAnomic
Bohemian versusDionysian
Apollonian versusChristian


For the Red Cube of Habits, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Facilitating versusConstricted
Expectant
(free / coerced)
versusLow Expectations
(perfunctory / constrained)
Needful
(motivated / frustrated)
versusLow Needs
(satisfied / dissatisfied)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Imaginative versus  Desperate
  Hopeful versus  Agressive
  Attractive versus  Punishing
  Rewarding versus  Repelling

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Imaginative versusAggressive
Hopeful versusDesperate
Attractive versusRepelling
Rewarding versusPunishing


For the Red Cube of Reciprocity, the components are as follows:

Dimensions
Accepting versusDiscriminatory
Expectant
(free / coerced)
versusLow Expectations
(perfunctory / constrained)
Influential
(motivated / frustrated)
versusLow Influence
(satisfied / dissatisfied)

Three-Dimensional Oppositions
  Generative versus  Degenerative
  Superior/Inferior versus  Oppressor/Oppressed
  Dominant/Submissive versus  Victimizer/Victim
  Superordinate/Subordinate versus  Winner/Loser

Positive vs. Negative Contrasts
Generative versusOppressor/Oppressed
Superior/Inferior versusDegenerative
Dominant/Submissive versusWinner/Loser
Superordinate/Subordinate versusVictimizer/Victim


 
    >> more >>