On this page you will find information about the "principles" that constitute the basis of the typology I have tried to develop for Timeless Education (the typology I usually refer to as "Psychosis-hylomorphisms" or "Energy-bias psychology") which identifies what you might call human types. These principles address questions regarding the typology's purpose, application, and various safety measures that are important to keep in mind when the typology is studied, used, transmitted, developed, and experimented with or researched.
The importance of why these principles are necessary will hopefully become clear after reading about them, so as an introduction I just want to mention that awareness of the problems and deficient (incompetent) history of development of other typologies has made it necessary to try to avoid having this typology run into the same traps and mistakes. These principles derive largely from my experience and observations after several years of participation in a number of typology groups, as well as contact with people who still participate in such communities and tell me about problems they encounter. So if you yourself are not sufficiently informed or lack experience with problems of this type, you should not take these principles too lightly. Because if you don't follow them, then even with the best of intentions you might cause great harm to the integrity or usefulness of the typology, and sometimes even to people's (and your own) mental well-being.
As I have collected quite a few of these principles over the years, and will likely add more in the future, I have tried to divide them into different categories. Much more could be said about these principles, but I have on this page attempted to be as concise as possible, which is my usual style.
Principles regarding the purpose of the typology:
Principle 1: Necessary complexity. One purpose of the typology is to provide necessary complexity to our analysis and view of the human being beyond "male and female," "young and old," "ancient man and modern man," "alpha and beta," "white, black, red and yellow," etc. Who are you talking about when you say 'the human being'? Is the human being Isaac Newton or is the human being Genghis Khan? Is she Margaret Thatcher or Mata Hari? Are Japanese people polite office workers or ruthless yakuza gangsters? These are different "human types" as they denote not only different patterns of character but also the recurrence of these patterns throughout history and simultaneously in different countries and cultures. We need to build a society adapted to us and not the other way around, and to do that we need to understand the human being without too many assumptions.
Principle 2: Context to analyze yourself from. Another purpose is to provide context to analyze ourselves from in order to give better insight or suggestions about what our own role among other people is and what we can contribute with, as well as a deeper appreciation for what other people contribute with and that there may exist like-minded individuals. A support for finding your meaning and purpose in the human organism. For this reason, it is important that the nature and inherent characteristics of types are analyzed and reflected upon seriously as essential social, cosmic, or species-defining functions without being mythologized or measured against a universal or cultural standard. Mythologizing (or excessive symbolization) tends to lead to exaggerated descriptions, flattery and expectations of types (common in typologies such as Astrology and Numerology, but also present in MBTI). Measurement or comparison with a universal standard tends to lead to pathologization and judgments (common in typologies such as Bioenergetics and the Enneagram of Personality). The aim is to be more similar to the personality analysis we find in the Five Factor Model, which is currently the model in personality psychology that is taken most seriously, but with a theoretical structure and not just statistically driven like the Five Factor Model is.
Principle 3: Increase receptivity (principle of acceptance) more than predicting behaviors. A common criticism of personality models and theories is the failure to really use them as explanations for behaviors or to be able to predict behaviors. The Five Factor Model has also been criticized for this. I'm also not sure if my typology can really explain or predict behaviors in the majority of cases even if one correctly identifies a type. There is an element of chaos and what I term "essential" or "cosmic" surprise as an important component of the configuration of reality, which provides a sense of risk and thus meaning to our lives, and which can be said to be connected with the aspect we usually call "the free will" in psychologically complex beings like humans. Even though this "will" is more elicited and random than free. Instead, the purpose should be to prepare people for the possible manifestations associated with types, if or when they appear, so that people can more easily tolerate or handle them in a flexible and constructive way and not fall into the frustration that most people find themselves in because of unrealistic expectations and so on. Thus, it can also be said that the purpose is not to "cure" behaviors (beyond the general improvement that usually occurs in people's attitude and mentality as they develop towards timeless, essential awareness).
Principle 4: A system for easier memorization and new discoveries. Just like the other systems, categories, and models in Timeless Education, this typology also has the purpose of functioning as a "memory system" - a way to simplify insights (in this case about recurring character phenomena) so that they are easier to remember and transmit. Beyond that, the model is just a theory or hypothesis, and actually secondary. So the focus should primarily be on understanding the human being and the factors behind the various character phenomena, not force every person you meet to fit a ready-made system you take as fact. At the same time as a new individual is identified as a primary type or exact configuration, an automatic "updating" of how a manifestation of the type in question might look and feel will occur. Diagnosis or identification is one thing, descriptions of the energy or type is another. Understanding the nature of energies is a process similar to how an artist gradually refines a sketch until it depicts a more concrete figure. Even when we know which type we ourselves belong to, we don't fully know what that means. To be ascribed to a type is to become a kind of head researcher about what this type actually is. But for that reason it is also important to identify types correctly since misidentifications can distort how a type is perceived. As such, the typology should inspire more towards conversations and interviews to better understand, instead of dogmatic categorization. Thus, we could also say that one purpose of the typology is to increase interest in ordinary people. The typology is almost more an attempt to understand the world, humanity, and cosmic energy components than to understand yourself.
Principle 5: A support for study, not an identity. This principle follows on from the previous one in that something that is inherently difficult to define also cannot serve as an identity or fully explain why someone is the way they are. It is healing to feel seen and understood, but typologies can often make it harder to be seen for who you are, even when people assign you the right type, since people develop their own idea of what a type is. In addition, most typologies tend to be erroneous in practice. Even if there are aspects of our psyche that we are blind to, people still usually understand themselves better than how a typology or personality theory explains them. Thus, disputes arise about what type certain individuals actually are. The conflicts usually arise because the attribution of specific type is a large part of how types can be defined to be recognized as examples, and individuals who identify more with a type other than the one they are ascribed do not feel seen or understood. This is another reason why my typology is more focused on investigation and study of the energy factors instead of repeating descriptions of them or starting from mythologized hypothesis to description, which is to start at the wrong end. Here, a major problem remains to be solved and other typologies must be considered as cautionary examples.
Principle 6: To give people a chance to tell the truth about themselves. Sometimes I have said that the typology has personally served as a way to increase my interest in people, as I rarely found socializing or interacting with people to be anything but time- or energy-consuming and dull (except for shorter periods), and having something to learn from people or reason to study them and gather information about them has definitely helped make interactions and socializing more tolerable. But this was never my intended purpose with the typology and has happened more as a by-product, even though it can be used for that. The original purpose, which is still relevant, was to give people a chance to inform how they are "wired" in a way that satisfactorily explains and justifies their, to me, often incomprehensible desires, reactions, behaviors, and motives. If people don't have a good explanation, it's next to impossible for me to feel empathy or sympathy for someone in most respects, something I intend to go into more detail on in an autobiography. And I have also come to the conclusion that the lack of empathy in the world in general is due precisely to the clash of people's various inherent "natures," "wiring," or "biases" of which only an unsatisfyingly small part can be explained by upbringing and life circumstances. We could therefore say that the basic purpose is "a last hope" for understanding and for sympathy/empathy. The typology thus also becomes secondary to the more important questions I usually ask (and really want to know, more than what "type" people are), namely "What repeats itself in your life?", "What are your biggest struggles in life?", "What are the manifestations you dislike in people?" and Why?" These questions should be the most important and of most interest to begin the most essential investigation.
Principle 7: Bring attention to less recognized behaviors. When I say "less recognized" I am mainly referring to behavioral patterns and manifestations that other typologies and personality models often miss or only touch on as secondary phenomena when I am of the view that these manifestations often are more essential when it comes to defining types and understanding problems in human relationships. In other words, focus on manifestations that are not usually described much in other typologies. Such as disdainfulness, peevishness, weak-hearted tendencies, social introversion without being analytically oriented, etc.
Principle 8: To be able to identify types quickly with minimal information. One thing that has interested me since I started recognizing recurring character patterns in new people I encounter has been whether or not one can identify them early since people with similar character patterns also often resemble each other in appearance or in their general energy and micro expressions. It is logical that a certain relationship exists between psychological manifestations and physically observable manifestations, even though physiognomy has been abandoned by science because of its often gross simplifications. Identifying energy types from photographs alone rarely works (although some energy types are evident in photographs), so a combination of photographs, moving pictures (video), way of speaking, and biographical anecdotes is often necessary to confirm type with greater certainty if personal acquaintance is lacking or a thorough interview is not possible.
Principle 9: To replace older typologies with a better and more correct one. One more purpose that should also be mentioned is the aim of replacing older typologies with a better, more correct, and more useful typology. It is natural that people have a preference for what interests they have, and thus also for what typology or personality model they prefer. If you already prefer and are committed to a typology, it is better to stick to that one since your mind will be full of ideas and assumptions that are often incompatible with this typology. This model is primarily aimed at people who are not already committed to a typology, as well as individuals who have become sufficiently disillusioned with other typologies that they are ready to try to forget the erroneous ideas and assumptions they have already learned so that they can start from scratch with a new typology. But there are also people who like to learn multiple typologies, and these individuals must become aware that not all typologies are equally true (even though all typologies may contain a degree of truth), and that all typologies tend to be built on the same principles, but either in a more or in a less competent way. Thus, what is true in other typologies I have already tried to include in this typology, and with a better theoretical explanation of their causal mechanisms and what it is that people are actually seeing. Thus, there is no reason to mix typologies as if they were all an equally large and valid piece of the puzzle ready to be connected to give an even more "whole picture" of yourself. Timeless Education revolves around an evaluation compass, which means that this typology will partly be used as an argument against other typologies. So if the occasional intellectual competitiveness and strife is something you do not have the stomach for (or think is necessary), you're probably better off staying away from this typology.
Principles regarding the study of the typology and types:
Principle 10: Supplement descriptions with audiovisual examples. To learn about types, regardless of typology, encounter and experience with the types is essential. Often it requires repeated encounters and experiences with types. Therefore, descriptions of types in text must be supplemented with audiovisual examples during the learning and studying process both at the beginning of learning a typology and during the continued expertise and further development of it. Words and descriptions are almost impossible to rely on when it comes to conveying insights and observations, especially to people who have not encountered all the variations of the types' behavior patterns and manifestations. Many words and phrases are easy for people to identify with and can often describe anyone in certain circumstances, while people instantly recognize a type and the difference in people's character when they see them. Here it is also important to understand that famous examples are often not enough as they either belong to extraordinary or extreme individuals who do not give a good picture of what the type is usually like, or they belong to a limited number of types whose particular characteristic is to be outgoing and thus more often become famous. Types are simply not evenly distributed among celebrities and famous people, and we also rarely get a natural or everyday picture of how a celebrity really behaves outside of the spotlight. My approach has been to collect as much of the behavior patterns I could find in various media. But most important for my typology are the examples from my own life and personal documentation which can be said to be the starting point for the identification and descriptions of the types. These appear in my autobiography and various interviews on the Youtube channel for Timeless Education.
Principle 11: Individuals with the same energy-configuration can still behave differently. Be careful not to let your own psychology and experience shape overly narrow or absolutist perceptions of the energies or their configurations. One thing that is a bit frustrating and hard to swallow is that someone who should be a like-minded individual or soulmate because of being of the same type as ourselves, in fact seem different enough that we want to place them in another category or invent new additions that make the typology more complicated. Remember that the energies are more like fuels we run on, or a skeleton that merely forms a framework to support more individual characteristics. In addition, the same energies can appear in different strengths or degrees in different individuals. The only thing that is relatively certain is that the energies form a hierarchy. But what each energy's strength in this hierarchy is can vary from individual to individual. In addition, we also find genetic differences and different life circumstances that also contribute to the fact that many people of the same energy-configuration are still perceived as being different from each other.
Principle 12: Contrast and comparison is essential for study. If you only read descriptions of traits, it is often easy to identify with most of the material since differences among "types" or these energies is more one of degree or amount, not exclusivity. You therefore cannot analyze yourself in isolation. You must contrast and compare by, while trying to identify your own energies (or someone else's), learning to identify and speculate about the energy-configurations of a larger group of individuals you can compare with, preferably those you meet or have met daily in life. Sometimes the best approach may be to first identify at least one example of each primary type, and then analyze which of these individuals you yourself most resemble in energy, behavior, appearance, mentality, and other manifestations. But the more examples you collect, the better. For a more impartial self-analysis, it can be essential to record yourself on video, especially during conversations with someone else, to better distinguish your real manifestations from fantasies and exaggerated assumptions you have about yourself.
Principles regarding the use and application of the typology:
Principle 13: The typology is only one part of a larger teaching. Even though it is possible to research and use this typology separately from the rest of the elements of Timeless Education, there is always a risk involved with separation and special focus, namely the loss of a sensible big picture and the right context. So if a person is mostly interested in the typology above the other elements of Timeless Education, they should still acquire some idea of the overall context and check it out before they get inspired to connect the typology with other concepts or ideas beyond Timeless Education. Should someone, for example, want to experiment with merging the typology with Astrology, they must be informed that Timeless Education has already incorporated Astrology with another model in Timeless Education called "Wandering Shapes" (universal psychological process patterns) which is a direct interpretation of the real meaning behind the Zodiac in Astrology. If creative, inventive, "spiritual" and research prone types do not understand that the typology is already derived from an already fairly complete synthesis of ancient concepts, there is a danger that they will just mess things up. And if any person is of the opinion that the interpretation Timeless Education already has of the Zodiac and Astrology is incorrect, they must first dispute this, otherwise they reveal themselves as incompetent. Unfortunately, there are often few people who are informed or perceptive enough to really recognize such incompetence when it occurs, which is why many varieties and problematic additions are often added (and even uncritically welcomed) in various teachings which in the end makes it difficult to dig one's way through to the original idea of the concepts. This typology should not be merged with or supplemented with other existing personality typologies since its purpose is to be a competent alternative to them. In other words, a new typology that can completely replace already existing typologies. Do you think anyone creates a typology in 2016 without already being familiar with existing typologies? And do you think that someone creates a new typology if the person in question is satisfied with an already existing typology? Do not mix ideas and concepts as if everything were true.
Principle 14: An energy type model instead of a personality type model. Often, the specific types in this sort of typology are called "personality types." However, the word "personality" comes from the word "persona" which in psychology refers to an aspect of someone's character that is presented to or perceived by others. In other words, a kind of social mask. It thus seems incorrect to term the categories in a typology, but especially in this one, as "personality types" since it is not a typology about people's social masks. Nor is it a typology that encompasses everything in a person's manifestations, as people are ultimately unique (like the fingerprint). Some of the things the typology excludes are, for example, race, upbringing, cultural influence, biological inheritance, and life circumstances. It is, more specifically, a typology centered on particular psychological energies we frankly do not yet have a satisfactory explanation for. Raising attention towards these energies and that we don't actually have an explanation for them is part of the purpose of the typology, which brings me to the next principle...
Principle 15: We need to philosophically discover the biological purpose of these pre-heritable and timeless characteristics. By the term "pre-heritable" I refer here to the discontinuity not infrequently observed in temperament and character from parent to child. If anyone investigates this closely enough, they will find cases where children not only have a temperament different from both parents, but also different from the grandparents, and which cannot be explained by a "mixing" of the parents' temperaments. Nor can it be explained by it being a "mutation" as the temperament has often been observed in unrelated individuals throughout history. Why do certain character patterns recur among human beings throughout history, but not necessarily by passing them from parent to child? What is the real causal mechanism and is there any purpose or species-based function in these human character patterns? It is these types of questions and research that I hope the typology and increased awareness of these energy factors will lead towards.
Principle 16: The typology should be used in analysis of human history and social theory. If these character phenomena or "personality traits" have recurred and continue to recur throughout history, and also points to an inherent essence within humanity as a species, then the typology and its discoveries should also be employed in our analysis of human history and social theory, even if life circumstances in the form of resources and material assets often play an equally large role.
Principle 17: Do not use the energy names on people who are not familiar with the typology. A tip is not to call people who do not know the typology with terms such as "Fiduciam-type" or "Corpus-type" as in their ears it will only sound as either cult-like jargon or something that makes them feel separate from you or "out of touch" (a form of alienation with lack of trend awareness, even if what you're saying isn't technically a trend) and is unnecessary. It also makes you appear socially weird. Only in the right context and if the topic of conversation revolves around the typology is it appropriate.
Principle 18: A useful language for naming manifestations which we previously did not have names for. Among those who are informed from the same source about the energy factors, however, this jargon can become an effective shortcut to understanding the nature of manifestations and character phenomena we talk about when we want to explain or describe people, or things related to people, to others. It can also help others who are familiar with the language to understand us more. We are better off when we feel that other people understand us. However, this only remains effective as long as the source of information is one and the same. The more sources of information people have access to, and the more these sources vary or diverge from each other, the greater the risk that people start to misinterpret what people mean with the language without realizing that they are talking about different things.
Principle 19: A starting point for hypotheses and interpretations due to a lack of people's honesty. Even though I would prefer to minimize too much theories and assumptions about people's repeating behaviors, it is sometimes difficult not to since it can be difficult to get access to a dialogue with people, and that it can also be difficult to get satisfactory or clear answers from individuals in an interview or conversation. I have occasionally had individuals tell me that something I claim or speculate about is "not true" without providing more information or clarification. Sometimes they also don't want to show photos of themselves or be categorized as a type at all. People can of course do what they want, but if they don't open up, share of themselves in some capacity, or speak the truth about themselves, then they have to be prepared that others will come up with their own interpretations, hypotheses and typological categorization of them. If you want people to understand you and interpret you correctly, you have to open up, show yourself, make your own effort to understand yourself, and then speak the truth about yourself. Otherwise, you have no right to complain if people come up with their own odd interpretations.
Principle 20: Self-questioning is key to the correct use. What is of interest and essential is the causal mechanisms behind tendencies, motivations, and characteristics. Not just a definition of traits. Not just an identification game. You should be interested in understanding why you find yourself in a problematic pattern. However, it seems that not all people perceive themselves to be in a problematic pattern or deficient existence, and if they do, they tend to perceive it to be solely due to external circumstances and mostly blame others for their problems. It is only when the individual begins to understand that they themselves act and are driven by a personal "wiring" from their own nature that they can begin to question themselves, their own role in the situation, look inward, and appreciate the value of a typology that assists in paying attention to this aspect. Since Abstractum-types, Misericordem-types, and Magnitudinem-types tend to be the individuals who have the hardest time deceiving themselves about their own role in their problematic situation, I have sometimes asked myself whether this typology is perhaps only of real urgent interest to these particular energy types, although it should be of interest to everyone.
Principles in regards to security measures of the typology:
Principle 21: Avoid correlations because correlations invite assumptions. It can be tempting to try to explain or teach the typology and energy factors to people by referring to ideas and concepts they are already familiar with. The problem with this approach is that it easily leads to assumptions that are not precise or even correct as things that resemble each other still tend to differ in a lot of details, and often exist in different contexts where too much correlation leads to a kind of intellectual "contamination" and cognitive confusion. Discussions can of course be conducted between informed individuals who both are familiar with two different but similar concepts or ideas. However, presenting a concept someone is unfamiliar with by referring to or comparing it to one they are familiar with is a harmful teaching method. There are no shortcuts when it comes to getting into and truly understanding something. Assumptions and prejudices must be reduced to a minimum.
Principle 22: Avoid Constructing Personality Tests. I have not created a personality test for my typology since I have noticed that other systems have not had good results in creating reliable tests. On the MBTI tests, for example, many people get the results INTJ and INTP, even though they are supposed to be some of the rarer personality types. Tests are very difficult to create, while people often find it difficult to judge themselves objectively. I also find that they distract from true self-assessment and self-observation. I also don't like how many people out there flippantly or dismissively refer to typologies as "personality tests" just because test forms were their first encounter with typologies. Also, personality tests promote misdiagnosis and misidentification since people all too easily label themselves with something they think is valid because they got it on a test (I used to say I was an INTJ myself because that was usually my Myers-Briggs test result, but later on me and others thought INTP seemed to fit me better). The best way to find out your energy type is to study them and read what I have written and said about them so far in videos and on the website, and to consult with me or someone familiar with the typology. For a scientific study of whether this typology is valid, I want empirical study of the brain through, for example, brain scanning and how its parts can appear different in different individuals, not statistical surveys or distribution of personality tests.
Principle 23: Avoid overly long descriptions of an energy factor or human type. A useful typology must inspire active self-analysis, not passive identification with a description. Besides, the energies are at their core relatively simple components while behaviors often described in profile descriptions are secondary manifestations often mixed with secondary energies. My personal approach is to gather a group of useful words or shorter phrases for an energy type that are not easily repeated as useful words for the other energy types.
Principle 24: If you cannot find yourself in the typology, it is better to ignore it. The most important thing is accurate self-knowledge, not finding yourself in a system. Create your own profile from scratch, and maybe even your own typology. That is what I did, since I did not find myself described satisfactorily or accurately in any existing typology. The problem with most typologies is that they manage to describe some human types well, but miss others. It is also often the case that people become devoted to a favorite system, namely the typology with a type profile that describes them particularly well. Thus, should my typology fail to be useful to others, it may still be of interest to those who wish to examine what I, as a philosopher and seeker of wisdom, have arrived at in my own self-knowledge and what I have managed to "understand" about others through observation and interviews.
Principle 25: Do not assume that people are the type they think they are until you have seen them on video and analyzed them sufficiently. One mistake I made in the beginning was to assume that anonymous individuals I spoke to on various online typology forums really were the "type" they said they were. Thus, I absorbed their self-descriptions as true information about the type in question. When I later realized that some were a different type and that even experts often misidentify themselves, I had to throw away all the information I had gathered as I realized it was confusing, potentially misleading, and useless. Therefore, I would like to propose a rule that someone who does not present themselves openly by photo or video online has no right to present themselves as any type at all and that their self-diagnosis should be ignored until some type of public confirmation is reached with archived and accessible information. In this way, we can avoid "type policing" that have arisen in other typologies, something that has unfortunately become necessary. I have nothing against a type police who openly point out misdiagnoses, but we don't need much of such measures if a rule or agreement is established from the beginning that information about yourself cannot be taken as valid information unless you are prepared to cooperate as a visible example in order to promote truth. Having been "confirmed" by an expert during a private Skype call or similar is not enough. As long as you engage in discussions around the topic and present yourself as a type, you have to show yourself in some way, otherwise it is still legitimate to ignore you as a reliable example. This rule is especially important for people who really want to appear as spokespersons for a specific energy-type in order to prevent misconceptions or misinformation.
Principle 26: A good foundation is essential for a system. A stable and robust foundation is important for a system to have, otherwise interpretations of terminology and descriptions easily drift apart. Even the relatively simplistic and silly categories of masculinity are well-known examples of confusion where there are tons of disagreements and different interpretations of what defines a so-called "alpha male," a "beta male," a "delta male," "gamma male," "sigma male," "omega male," etc. In order to make my typology as robust as possible, I have attempted, among other things, to understand the correlation between people's observable manifestations and the larger parts of the brain. Even though the basis of the emotional brain is anxiety, I have not seen any other typology define "emotional" or "feeling" types as fear-based. This is just one example of what hopefully makes my typology more robust. Another is the avoidance of defining basic types as the plain old "thinking," "feeling," and "sensing" or "action-oriented" in favor of better definitions such as "mental-fantastical," "social-anxious," and "vital-desensitized" types. Of course, this also means avoiding putting too much emphasis on vague or broad words such as "introvert," "perfectionist," "fun-loving," "envious," "dreamer," "analytical," etc., since far too many people easily identify with these traits.
Principles regarding the transmission of the typology:
Principle 27: My texts must remain the common and enduring source of information. Lack of authority turned several earlier typologies into a mess. The more popular something becomes, the more will creative and analytical types often want to further develop or establish their own expertise in the field by writing their own books and texts. I am not against people coming up with new suggestions or improvements, but these must be presented and justified within a foundational context along with my original texts, otherwise there will be confusion and slow but sure segregation of knowledge into different factions and "schools." This in turn will only lead to strife and conflict. If someone appreciates my typology, they should have no problem with my material remaining basic reading. If anyone wants to dispute or "improve" most of what I have written and said in videos, it is better if you create your own typology and separate it as much as possible from mine. I also discourage "good intentions" such as trying to simplify my information in hopes of reaching a larger audience. Stability in information dissemination and teaching is more important than trying to reach out widely. The broader and more "mainstream" something is, the harder it is to have control, expertise, or influence over it.
Principles of research, experimentation, verification, etc., of the typology:
Principle 28: Fewer basic components is better than more. The components should be of such a nature that they can give rise to a variety of manifestations. But don't try to explain every single trait or difference between individuals with the energy factors or its components. There can sometimes be other explanations for differences as people are not only made up of psychosis-hylemorphisms.
Principle 29: Do not make assumptions that we fully understand evolution and the origin of species. Typologies and Darwinian theory of evolution are, in my opinion, not fully compatible. Evolutionary psychology is a contradiction in that evolution refers to something that is constantly developing and changing. What our current theory of evolution lacks is an explanation for stable life forms and stable psychology over a longer period of time. A phenomenon like "personality types" should not even exist in a context of random mutations combined with natural selection. The truth about human types may well belong to a domain higher than the strictly biological. That typologies are often connected with spirituality is no coincidence. But even spirituality and hitherto invisible but real aspects of reality can still be reconciled with scientific research.
Principles regarding development of the typology and future updates:
Principle 30: Do not play around with concepts too hypothetically and symbolically. In order to avoid too much mythologizing of types and energy factors, it is important not to play too much with hypotheses and symbolic analogies in attempts to explain and describe them. Empirical observations and interviews are what is most important for information. As I have said, the model and its explanation is only a secondary memorization system. However, analogy with universal aspects or "functions" is of interest in scientific study.
Principle 31: Observable manifestations are the surest basis to return to. Even though the causal mechanisms and fundamental nature of the energies are of the greatest interest to understand and investigate, it is likely that this will also remain the most hypothetical. You can observe behavioral patterns and manifestations concretely, but almost never understand the causal mechanisms behind them. So be open and humble when speculating or presenting ideas about what the causal mechanisms might be.
Principle 32: The less known the typology, the easier it is to improve it. The typology should primarily be developed and updated while it is still relatively young and unknown. The more texts that are written about it, the more people who learn about it and continue to pass it on in its most famous form, the harder it is to change opinions about it on a broad front. You simply cannot improve something that is old, well-established, and well-known. If you want to introduce something new and better, you need to create a new thing from scratch and be prepared to fight for it to replace the old and obsolete.
Principle 33: Do not take too much inspiration from already existing typologies. Most typologies that exist have already suffered from the phenomenon of mythologization and if the language and terminology become too similar to other typologies, incorrect assumptions can arise such as for example that an energy-type in our typology has exactly the same attributes as a personality type in another typology. However, it can be useful to study personality theories that have a certain scientific legitimacy such as the Five Factor Model and the DSM manuals regarding personality disorders.
Principle 34: Do not invent nicknames for the different energy-types or configurations. Nicknames are common in other typologies, such as "The Analyst," "The Debater," "The Mediator," "The Boss," "The Romantic," "The Enthusiast, " "The Protector," etc. These nicknames mostly lead to distortions, prejudices and laziness in really trying to understand the components. I have used cryptic names in Latin precisely so that people do not make too quick assumptions based on the names of the energies alone.
Principle 35: Avoid adding new components and additions to the typology. Compared to other personality systems that have already been around for a while, my typology may appear a bit simple and lacking in details. But I see the simplicity as a strength rather than a weakness. Complexity is not always a virtue, and often systems and ideas become unnecessarily complex and convoluted over time simply because they were poorly designed to begin with. When it comes to personality systems, people are not different enough from one another to justify many additions beyond a few basic types or components. It is also more difficult to contrast and compare examples of types if there are too many different possible configurations. If every bit of difference between people is to be explained with another addition to the system, we might as well create as many types as there are people. The philosophy my system is based on is, like real science, to reduce phenomena down to their basic elements in order to understand them. The more manifestations fewer basic components can explain, the stronger and more robust the system is, and the closer it tends to be to the truth.
