Area home

Spring Points

  an experiential mix of leanings
gary e. davis
June 2020
Relative to a relevant situation of both something A and something B, if A tends
to be more important or relevant than B, then there is situational leaning of A;
i.e., A tends to appeal more than B. That could apply to dispositions, values, contexts—anything.

introversional (receptive) / extraversional (responsive)

Usually, psychality shows both tendencies, because experience is actional, and action intends to be experientially apt. Actional experience and experiential action are each receptive and responsive, with one more explicit than the other for any given moment/instance, showing a preferred (more-interested) or more apt leaning which prevails.

s/p-differentiating action tends to be extraversional. S/s-differentiating action tends to be introversional.

Imputing to another s/S-relevant meaning/significance probably involves pros-pecting (if not projecting) relevant S/s aspects of oneSelf (mapping introversional relevance into extraversional interaction), which calls for care about real inter-psychal difference (e.g., in parenting, teaching, close relationships, and clinical psychology).

Extraversional psychality leans toward the interpersonal worldness of its life-world. Introversional psychality leans toward the Selfal life of its lifeworld.

The above expands an earlier (obtuse) assertion that “selfidentical lifeworldliness is a life (S/s-differential flow) world of s/p-differential engagements with persons….”

s/p differentiality is especially relevant for ethical life. S/s differentiality is espec-ially relevant for creative life. (Accordingly, by the way, artistic audacity owes its audience respect for ethical importances, due to the character of caring to have audience which wants fair consideration in sharing).

cognative / cognitive again

This distinction was obtusely represented last year, which makes better sense now, given what I’ve elaborated about inter-faciality: “I call interpersonal relations cognative because relationality prevails over other/selfidentity difference[; ideally: interSelfal relations prevail—e.g., intimacy—over merely interpersonal ones];…” I have a continuum of interpsychality in mind that I haven’t detailed, but it’s commonsense: Intimacy is more important than ordinary friendship; friend-
ship is more than solidarity; solidarity is more important (given the shared issue) than mere civility. We want intimacy that’s apt for partnered loves and intimacy that’s apt for family; kindredness apt for family, kindredness apt for longstanding friendship; friendship involving durable solidarities, solidarity that’s issue-centered in public life; civil engagement, civil flexibility.

“…whereas, in cognitive relations, the elements of the relationship (self to other / object) prevail over—assemble, comprise—a relationship [thereby representable as conjunctive] of self and other….” We want to appreciate differences as part of what makes shared identity appreciative and enriching.

“In cognative relations, the inter-ness instills [en-stances] the available difference between other and self [, i.e., between one’s personal engagement and another’s; or, ideally, Self differentiating with Self].” The latter idea is popularly integral with “soulmates,” romantic inspiration, and (for some persons, rarely) a thrill of thinking together as “one,” which creative collaborators enjoy (e.g., improvis-ational actors); or brainstorming inquirers playing off each other’s thinking.

So, feeling oneSelf as medial relation between [inter]personality and phenomenal appeals—largely experienced as depth-phenomenality of others/things—can be integral to fruitful generativity in inquiry, art, and teaching.

As I noted (obscurely again) last year, “flourishing life-oriental cohering of S/s/p differentiality potentially expresses an authentic Seflal reflectivity that is integral to there being fascinating phenomena; or—I would proffer—ethical artistry of generative mindfulness.”

next—> tropology



  Be fair. © 2020, gary e. davis