1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
The gist of this method is understanding why different people make specific decisions. Each Identity is based on various objectives, which involves decisions specific to each.
In ascertaining the dynamic of any given Identity one might first identify its objectives. Firemen fight fires, bomb disposal people dispose of bombs, the ambulance driver drives fast to save lives. Identities can be reduced to archetypes, as common denominators by means of the commonalities of objectives. In the above example each Identity has its own element of danger and considerations of life and death. In essence one commonality of these Identities is an evaluation of the value of one's own life, as compared to the objective of saving others. This kind of assessment might involve things like the degree of one's own bravery, the value of one's own life, the ability to confront danger or the degree of one's compassion.
Archetypes are such as fame, fortune, merchant, farmer, adventurer, explorer, artist, writer, inventor or sanitation worker. Each has a primary objective, and often more than one objective is involved. For instance one might claim the motive of altruism, as a drug company CEO, but actually an unconscious or un-admitted objective may be involved as money, or maintaining class status or living the good life. Decisions then may often be conflicted. Thus the individual can explore singular Identities, but knowing that they are similar to others with similar objectives, exploring one is like exploring all of a type.
However the actual degree of understanding may be relative to the degree of identification by the individual with adopted Identities. The degree of identification involves degrees of belief. There greater the belief, the greater is the sense of involvement and thus Consequence, in any given character, and the more import one may give and gain from the Identities one is reflecting. This capacity of belief can be enhanced by creating a Transcendent Identity, which is meant to replicate aspects of the Metaphysical-I, and which may represent a
transcended personality, character and individual, which is unlimited in its capacities. The Transcendent Identity represents all persons in all capacities and potentials, and this universal Identity is thought to be capable of assuming any Identity that can be imagined as an exploratory character.
With this perspective comes a conflict of
Comparative Authority, as the primary standard one uses to evaluate oneself. There is considered to be two archetypal authorities of which the individual uses as comparative evaluation, in this instance the singular, individual, finite self of
Definitive Value, and the open, multi-self, Metaphysical-I of Olamic Value.
Metaphysical Psychology Part 2 (14 of x) Next Page