And Now for One Completely Different
Now the review of similarities in designs brings up one difference in this small constellation of charts based on the author here as Case Study #1.
- Case Studies #2 and 3 are associates of Case Study #1;
- Case Studies #4 and 5 are relatives, her father and son, whose similar temperaments do show up in the comparison of their charts.
What really stands out at first glance in the comparison of all these first 5 charts is found in the colored vs. white space that denotes open vs. closed centers, where we either have definition (closed) in our own personality and design or we don’t (open) and must obtain it from those around us.
Chart #6 supplied the answer to the question about one divergence in Case Study #1, who otherwise affirms a strong genetic pattern in thinking–manner of thinking, thought processes–with Case #s 4 and 5, validating a small notion of inheritability discussed in the previous post. Case #s 4 and 5 have definition in thinking center; #1 does not, suggesting this characteristic, if it also follows x-chromosome inheritability would come from the mother, as did prove to be the case.
This chart #6 shows strong inclination towards the definition that #s 1, 4 and 5 could supply. And her defined heart and spleen are open among all them. They need each other and seek for the definition found in the other.