Making Changes MenuMind & Consciousness MenuTalk Therapy MenuEducation & Learning MenuHealthy Relationships MenuAutism Spectrum MenuAddictions, Risk, and Recovery MenuWeight & Fitness MenuHuman Personality MenuScientific Method Menu

Using Fractals to Define Personality

Why Fractals?

baby onion prism

The First Fractal - Character Type

"Finite Infinities"

Most people who attempt to define the structure of human personality make the same classic mistake. They try to know something whose nature is non linear in a linear way. This results in linear expressions which at best reflect only partial truths, and to see this as true, all you need do is to look at how they arrive at these "truths." They arrive at them by eliminating any and all real world aspects present which would make the result non linear.

In effect, they remove the very things which make something natural; its fractility. Moreover, this spurious effort is the very foundation upon which all statistics are built. Statisticians eliminate everything which would prevent a linear answer from appearing. They create a proper "test situation" if you will. Unfortunately, eliminating this non linearity invalidates the answer. At least with regard to defining real world things.

Take for example a fourth grade girl's math skills, or a second grade boy's ability to be quiet in class. Most schools claim to be able to measure such things. In essence, they use statistics to try to describe individual aspects of children, and report cards are where they post their findings. The first thing you learn about statistics though is that in order for the results to be valid, you must use a big enough sample size. Why is this necessary? Because linear trends and typical patterns appear only in large sample sizes. Groups the size of all the math scores of all fourth grade girls in the state of New York, or all the second grade boys in the State of California.

What happens when we then try to apply these results to individual cases? We find that they are no longer valid. The truth we believed we'd find in those numbers quickly dissipates, because nothing in the real world is truly linear. Nothing. The truth about statistics then is that they cannot be used to describe real world patterns, not if you're trying to know the truth about anything in the real world.

Fortunately there is a way to find truth in small numbers. Find the fractal patterns present in the data. Fractals can accurately reflect non linear things at any and all scales, from an individual person to humanity as a whole. Which is why I define fractals as "recognizable patterns which always repeat differently."

Has anyone else noticed this disparity? We all have. We just ignore it. Including Noam Chomsky, said to be one of the smartest men in the world, who misses the very nature of his own famous description for language. He calls language, a "finite infinity." In essence he is saying that language is like all things in the natural world. A group of recognizable patterns of non linearity. A finite infinity. Yet he never notices how aptly his wonderful description applies to the whole of the natural world.

My point is, fractals are the only way we can define things in the real world, because only fractals can accurately describe and define non linearity. This means they are capable of measuring real world things with one hundred percent accuracy. All of the real world cases. Every recognizable pattern from snow flakes to oak leaf, and including human personality.

Unfortunately, understanding how fractals can represent the real world this accurately requires you know how to find these "recognizable patterns which always repeat differently." Beginning with that you realizethat all the non linerar things you could ever wish to measrue are fractal. Even Chomsky, though, said to be one of the smartest men in the world, never mentions this fractal nature. Only that language is a "finite infinity." This said, I still see him as one of the smartest men in the world. His comment about language is only the second true definition for fractility I've found.

My point is, learning how to fractally measure real world things easy. Thus what follows may do more to confuse you about this aspect of human nature than to clarify it. If you allow that all learning includes equal amounts of realizing what you have and have not learned though, it may ease some of this difficulty, in that what I am about to present includes and honors both the possibility you will, and will not, learn equally well.

How can you best cope with this potentially distressing admission? You can voice your doubts about what I present here to yourself on paper. Write them down as questions about what you do not understand, rather than as polemics against what you see as incorrectly voiced hypotheses.

Now consider what I said a moment ago; that all learning includes equal amounts of realizing what you have not learned. How many questions this would require with regard to what you learn? Ideally, it would require an amount of questions equal in number to the amount of statements you make about what you have learned.

The thing to know of course is that we avoid using fractals because we can never know them completely. The recognizable patterns, yes. But the entirety? Never. This means, whenever you study something fractal, you will suffer the true student's curse. Because there will be both a finite infinity of what you can know and a finite infinity of what you cannot know, and because not knowing hurts, you will suffer in direct proportion to your efforts.

I, myself, know this to be the truth. Thus I make no apology for the suffering I may cause. A complex gift given generates complex responses in the receiver. And being as blame is suffering disowned, I will not disown the suffering I am about to cause. We students can take it. We are up to the task.

All this said, now let's explore the basics of the topic at hand; the four levels, or prisms, of Layer 7. Character Types. Social Priorities. Decision Trees. And Gender Identities.

What Is Layer Seven?

Start with that Emergence Personality Theory see personality as a nested set of ten layers. Layer Seven is the fourth from the core. Moreover, the best way to envision Layer Seven is to see it as a set of 4 nested prisms, each of which divides personality into a set of 4 Primary Colors.

Before considering what each prism does, take a moment to imagine these prisms in context; as the four nested glass prisms through which the pre birth light of connection shines and emerges as our basic, core, uninjured personality. Can you imagine this? Four nested bowls of glass, each of which adds its own beautiful colors to the mix.

What do these prisms actually do?

Each of them acts like a lens which divides the light coming into it into varying amounts of four possible colors. And yes, all four sets of four colors emerge within every human being, albeit, in intensities which vary over time based both on how connected we currently are to our pre birth light and on the naturally beautiful distortions present in all personality prisms.

In effect, these four prisms make our personalities resemble psychophysical kaleidoscopes, each of us beautiful in our own infinitely interesting ways. Each of us a finite infinity.

Now let's look at the individual prisms, starting with the first to appear, the Character Type prism.