Within this theoretical framework, cognitive zones are conceptualized as emerging from a foundational duality. In the typological schema, a Perceiving-led (P-lead) type may give rise to either of the Judging (J) functions, whereas in a Judging-led (J-lead) type, either of the Perceiving (P) elements may manifest. This dichotomy forms the basis of most typological models, including the widely recognized sixteen-type system, which fundamentally relies on the duality of Conducting (Pi+Je) and Revision (Pe+Ji).
Expanding beyond this, certain cognitive models, such as the Cognitive Personality Theory and traditional Jungian formulations, have developed by incorporating the foundational duality present between Interaction (Pe+Je) and Analysis (Pi+Ji). However, AXIS XII proposes a more inclusive approach, recognizing the existence of four foundational dualities rather than confining the framework to a singular dichotomous structure. This recognition aligns with the observation that cognitive energy, or libido, may transfer more fluidly within similar attitudinal realms, as seen in Interaction and Analysis, or across contrasting functions and attitudes, as seen in Conducting and Revision.
Crucially, the latter combination – opposite functions of opposite attitudes – garners significant attention due to its inherent balance. This balanced dyad, which will be explored in greater depth, presents a unique equilibrium within the cognitive landscape. In light of its intrinsic stability, Conducting and Revision are thus designated as primary zones within the psychological architecture. These zones not only represent key components of cognitive processing but also offer a comprehensive framework for understanding the dynamic interplay of cognitive functions.
Cognitive modalities are depicted within a Cartesian coordinate system, elucidating the relational dynamics between distinct cognitive zones. This graphical representation delineates how the prioritization of Conducting as the primary cognitive zone inherently situates Revision as its antithetical counterpart within this delineated psychological framework (refer to Figure A for a visual illustration).
Conducting epitomizes a cognitive mode that amalgamates the anticipatory acumen of Pi with the pragmatic acuity of Je. This modality accentuates a continuous time analysis, prioritizing the progression and evolution of events over the dissection of reality into discrete, static segments, thereby distinguishing it from the Mode of Revision. In this context, Conductors are focused on not only comprehending temporal event sequences but also on discerning inter-event causality. This leads to the construction of cause-and-effect structures and the formulation of actionable strategies, all anchored in their subjective narrative. This paradigm enables them to extrapolate historical patterns into prospective scenarios while concurrently organizing and maneuvering present conditions to actualize these projections. Consequently, Conductors exhibit a nuanced equilibrium between maintaining a coherent internal worldview and possessing the adaptive capacity to effectuate change within its confines.
In the absence of Revision modality’s (Pe+Ji) dynamic cognitive flexibility, individuals may exhibit pronounced cognitive rigidity. This often manifests as a steadfast adherence to established societal norms and cognitive narratives, thereby limiting the assimilation of new and incongruent information. Such reliance on historical patterns and conventional wisdom can obscure the recognition of emerging paradigms and novel solutions, potentially curtailing innovative problem-solving. Further, the absence of Ji’s introspective capabilities leads to a diminished capacity for critical self-evaluation and cognitive reappraisal. This deficiency manifests as a shortfall in systematically questioning and reevaluating internal cognitive schemas and strategies, particularly in light of new empirical evidence or alternative viewpoints.
Cognitive modalities are depicted within a Cartesian coordinate system, elucidating the relational dynamics between distinct cognitive zones. This graphical representation delineates how the prioritization of Revision as the primary cognitive zone inherently situates Conducting as its diametric counterpart within the specified psychological framework (refer to Figure B for a visual illustration). Revision (Pe+Ji): Revision represents a cognitive mode that combines the dynamic perceptiveness of Pe with the introspective discernment of Ji. Unlike Conducting, which emphasizes a continuous time analysis and the progressive unfolding of events, Revision is characterized by discrete time analysis, focusing on the detailed examination of specific moments or snapshots of reality. Revisers use Pe to capture these vivid snapshots of the external world, be they sensory experiences, interactions, abstract associations, or conceptual insights. Upon their capture, they are subjected to the exacting scrutiny of Ji. This process is characterized by an emphasis on internal coherence and consistency within these snapshots, identifying what is valid or invalid, and what is resonant or dissonant against the individual's foundational beliefs and epistemological frameworks. A defining feature of the Revision mode is its recognition of the malleability of these internal paradigms, acknowledging their adaptability and refinement in response to the fluctuating subtleties of the external environment. This aspect underscores an inherent cognitive flexibility and an ongoing process of dissection, connection, and recalibration. Revision, therefore, is marked by a focus on the present moment, with a strong emphasis on the quality and texture of immediate experiences.
In the absence of Conducting's (Pi+Je) pragmatic, action-centric methodologies, there's a risk of decision-making inertia (analysis paralysis). This often results from challenges in transforming Revision's abstract ideation into actionable steps. Without Je's directive force, a split between theoretical contemplation and practical execution can lead to ineffective operationalization of insights. Additionally, when Revision dominates, maintaining a consistent long-term strategic vision becomes challenging, attributable to a lack of Conducting's forward-looking and organizational capabilities. This often results in a fragmented planning approach, with focus shifting in response to immediate stimuli rather than adhering to a sustained, overarching strategy.
All content on this site, authored by Jason Fillion or guest contributors, is protected intellectual property. We kindly request that any external use or reproduction of our content be duly credited. Your cooperation and respect for our work is greatly appreciated.
I extend my profound gratitude to Federico M. for his crucial contributions to this study. As a co-author, Federico's involvement was comprehensive, significantly shaping the development of core concepts. His insights were pivotal in articulating the nuances of Conducting and Revision, addressing both their conscious and unconscious dimensions. Particularly, his formulation of discrete and continuous time analyses has fundamentally enriched our discourse. This paper, indeed, reflects a collaborative academic endeavor, profoundly enhanced by Federico's intellectual input.