I have always been fascinated by the manner in which we experience space and time and the complementary links which connect both psychological and physical notions.
As I have mentioned several times before on these blogs, I find it striking that when Einstein was once asked to give a simple account of Relativity he is reputed to have stated:,
"Put you hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour and it seems like a minute. THAT'S Relativity."
However, this in fact relates to the psychological - rather than the physical - experience of time and Einstein seems to miss the highly important point that the psychological and physical aspects of time are themselves relative in complementary fashion!
The implications of this realisation are then enormous, for it implies that we cannot strictly hope to properly understand - as Einstein attempted - the physical world of relativity through the rigid mental apparatus of Classical Theory (which assumes that the world can be objectively interpreted independent of the inquiring mind).
When we move to the holistic - as opposed to the present analytic - interpretation of dimensions, complementary symmetrical relationships define the nature of both space and time.
Using our 4-dimensional model (as the circular holistic interpretation of "4") we have seen that all phenomena are defined by bi-directional positive and negative directions with respect to both real and imaginary aspects. As we have seen the directions are - relatively - external and internal, whereas the aspects are also conscious and unconscious with respect to each other.
This entails therefore that space and time are likewise defined by bi-directional positive and negative directions, with respect to both real and imaginary aspects.
And what does this precisely mean with respect to the dynamics of experience?
Basically, when for example we experience an object in space, this is thereby (consciously) posited in an external physical manner.
However, through the dynamics of experience, this will then be likewise (unconsciously) negated - to a degree - causing a switch in an internal psychological direction. One can then (consciously) posit the object in internal space (relating to the psychological construct involved in its understanding).
So, for example, the physical experience of an object e.g. a cat in space, entails both the positing of the external "object" and the internal perception of "cat", which are - relatively - positive (external) and negative (internal) with respect to each other.
Thus, the explicit recognition of spatial objects requires the implicit use of psychological perceptions. In like manner the explicit use of spatial perceptions requires the implicit recognition of physical objects!
However here the emphasis is primarily on object phenomena (in space).
So we also have the complementary experience of space dimensions (in relation to objects).
Therefore at one moment we are aware directly of object phenomena (that indirectly imply space dimensions). Then, at the next moment, experience has switched so that we are now directly aware of their space dimensional characteristics (and only indirectly of the objects contained therein).
And in psychological terms this experience is governed by the corresponding interaction of perceptions (objects) and concepts (as general space characteristics).
So again to come back to our cat, we keep switching from recognition of this phenomenon as an object (in space) to the more direct recognition of the general space dimensions (to which all cats relate).
However we also have the direct experience of subjective space (as self in relation to the environment).
Indeed we could refer to both subjective and objective experience of space and time as their personal and impersonal aspects respectively.
So again, experience keeps switching from experience of the physical world (in relation to the self) to the corresponding experience of the psychological self (in relation to the world).
Therefore we have physical and psychological interpretation of both objects in space dimensions (and space dimensions in relation to objects) in - relatively - external (positive) and internal (negative) terms.
And equally, these dynamics all apply in like manner with respect to time. Thus, when we experience an object phenomenon externally, this implies a corresponding mental perception internally in time.
And equally experience of both perceptions and concepts takes place with respect to time as well as space. And finally, we have the psychological subjective experience of time in contrast to the objective physical experience.
Then we can have both a real (conscious) and imaginary (unconscious) experience with respect to space and time.
And in the very dynamics of experience, real and imaginary keep switching in complementary fashion, through the corresponding switching of both cognitive and affective modes.
Thus, when experience say of an object in space is real (conscious), the corresponding experience with respect to time remains imaginary (unconscious). Then through interaction, experience of time now becomes real with corresponding experience of space imaginary.
It then struck me forcibly that the 16 Personality Types (based on either/or distinctions) with respect to the fundamental modes and directions, in fact represent unique configurations with respect to the manner in which space and time can be experienced.
So each Personality Type represents a distinctive manner in which space and time is holistically configured (in both physical and psychological terms) with respect to - relatively - real (conscious) and imaginary (unconscious) aspects of experience in positive (external) and negative (internal) directions.
Now to finish here, I will just briefly elaborate on the distinction as between real and imaginary dimensional experience.
The experience of a real object, for example in space relates directly to the conscious local nature of that object.
However the imaginary experience refers to its more holistic unconscious nature whereby one sees the object as an archetype (ultimately of an unseen ineffable meaning).
Fro example an Olympic final - say 100m - has a definite location in conscious space representing its "real" significance from this perspective..
However its "imaginary" significance relates to the holistic unconscious meaning that this event holds for the athletes taking place e.g. as the possibility for the fulfilment of a life-long dream!
Therefore because all experience entails the interaction of conscious with unconscious, this means in effect that all events necessarily entail a complex location in space and time (i.e. entailing both "real" and "imaginary" aspects).
Put even more simply, whereas the real is identified with actual, the imaginary is identified with potential meaning! And in dynamic interactive terms experience represents the continual transformation of the actual through reference to an emerging potential meaning!
Thus the belief that we live in a "real" world simply reflects the scientific approach used in its interpretation (where the unconscious is reduced to conscious meaning).
Finally, one may ask to what notions of space and time do the "missing" 8 personality types relate!
Well the answer here is, that in a primary sense, they all relate to the (spiritual) present moment.
This is especially evident, where these personalities achieve a substantial amount of integration. Then in a primary sense, their experience is deeply rooted in the present moment, though in secondary terms, varying relative configurations with respect to space and time necessarily apply.
This then leads to the profound realisation of the absolute nature of the present moment, from which all relative phenomenal expressions continually emerge in space and time.