It is very human to have a set of criteria that govern one’s thoughts, judgment, and thus one’s course of life itself. Those who think with more defined criteria are bound to have a close-minded approach towards pattern-based comparisons and to treat matters more pragmatically, instead of exploring for the sake. But those with a more divided set of criteria would seek internal, novel, and conceptual connections instead, and in excess, may be completely detached from reality.
A core aspect of the Y-axis is how criteria are treated by the individual. It may have been established that in extremes, the vertical mind may need boxed, and defined thoughts and a lateral would need several, broken particles of what would normally merge into ‘defined’ thoughts. It can be said that the thinking criteria divide, the more lateral you are, while for the vertical mind, the criteria multiply. The criteria of perception and judgment is something the vertical mind prefers in a more immediate, and predefined state, whereas the lateral mind would question the endless ‘within(s)’ of the established criteria.
It may be mistaken that a common trait of the extremely lateral kind would be to question the established methods of things, but of a mind that would question even the criteria of efficiency itself, or even of the root causes that establish such a question, that would only be a subset. And the divided criteria aren’t questioned for the sake of answers, but either as a precursor to, or a result of the lateral mind having found subconscious or mildly conscious alternatives to the established (within the many withins). A slightly lateral mind may pioneer an ideology, a very lateral mind may philosophise having an ideology itself, and an extremely lateral mind may as well end up questioning the need for meaning, or philosophy itself. It is a dichotomy of seeking, and altering the very essence at a certain point of essences.
The same formulas of thought can be applied towards the approach of the vertical mind but in reverse. Though if one had to describe even that, it can be summarized that the vertical may not always be present in the immediate reality, or that it may think too pragmatically. A lot of the visionary masterminds might end up more commonly in the vertical range, which is due to the relative laterality providing some breakdown of criteria, which would lead for the causation of a revolution. And note that while even the slightly lateral type would typically be vertical enough to pioneer pragmatic ideologies, a vertical type would typically prefer achieving such ideologies in real-time, and that’s not due to the concrete achievement itself being a trait of verticality, but more so due to the vertical preference seeking to perceive immediate, and defined reality.
Comments
Post a Comment