The fundamentals of Mind-Axes

Mind-Axes is a compass-based typology system that focuses mainly on the internal cognitions of two involved axes. The main goal of this theory is to educate people on cognition through generating an understanding of the power of cognition. This is involving the patterns of the cognition individuals starting from patterns of communication. The typology system is inspired by Neurotyping, which is similar to Mind-Axes in numerous ways such as the Lateral/Linear, Holistic thinking vs Linear thinking, though while Neurotyping explains more external patterns, Mind-Axes is more oriented on one's internal patterns of thought.

The compass acts on two axes. These axes involve Laterality (L)/Verticality (V) (the Y-axis) and Lexicality (Lx)/Impressionism (I) (the X-axis). The dichotomies of the two axes help to create four Quadrants on the graph. Alpha is (I, L), Bravo is (Lx, -L), Charlie is (-Lx, -V), and Delta is (-I, V). 

Each Quadrant has 9 ranges, adding up to a total of 36 possible ranges. These ranges tend to be deemed as specific "types" by typologists. These nine ranges each have its unique archetypes.

There are also ranges for the elements.

There exists:

- Extreme Laterality (B1, B2, B3, A3, A2, A1), Verticality (C1, C2, C3, D3, D2, D1), Lexicality (B1, B4, B7, C7, C4, C1), and Impressionism (A1, A4, A7, D7, D4, D1).
- High Laterality (B4, B5, B6, A6, A5, A4), Verticality (C4, C5, C6, D6, D5, D4), Lexicality (B2, B5, B8, C8, C5, C2), and Impressionism (A2, A5, A8, D8, D5, D2).
- Moderate Laterality (B7, B8, B9, A9, A8, A7), Verticality (C7, C8, C9, D9, D8, C7), Lexicality (B3, B6, B9, C9, C6, C3), and Impressionism (A3, A6, A9, D9, D6, D3).

To ensure that you are not lost, the definitions of the respective axes sourced from the Mind-Axes site itself.

X-Axes:

Laterality:

This side of the Y-axis prefers looking at the particles and divisions that exist within, and it should be noted that there is no inherent end to this 'within', as the divided particles and properties can be divided even further. The highest standard of this chain of divisions of the manifested reality, the most ultimate, human possibility of such an approach should be considered the peak of laterality. 

The average laterality (within the lateral range) can be summarised as the process of breaking things down to their core fundamentals and essences, and it's often the result of questioning the merits of things as they manifest, thus why the lateral mind prefers looking at the internal principles for the sake of it, or to explore novelty with the combination of the broken down aspects. Not only is the manifestation of things itself questioned, but so is the manifestation of the aspects and ideas behind them, and so on (in cases of higher laterality preference).

But laterality can't only be limited to such examples. As even the very consideration of possibilities and alternatives requires a subscription to at least a grain of tangible and conventional criteria. This is why peak laterality (thus extremely low verticality) may have a different core set of criteria altogether, and will not even value standards like achievement or execution, or even a solution or an answer of any sort, as laterality essentially opposes manifestation, and in higher cases, may prefer being lost in the internal alternatives a little too much to care about any established standards at all, as it may even question the very merits of having a standard itself. The quarks and their different potential combinations are valued much higher by the lateral mind, than the reality that they manifest.

Laterality, can thus, be considered a series of breakdowns of the boxes within the boxes within.............the boxes, and if a manifestation of any level (of ideas, or even the ideas within them), is cared about, the laterality is compromised accordingly to that preference, and such results in the lateral-leaning mind presenting an unconventional combination. And despite there being a variety of commonly associated traits with laterality, the only important trait it consists of is of an internal nature, where the internal novelty is explored for the sake of it. 

And due to this clear preference of exploring patterns within patterns, and onwards, the lateral mind may compare things that may not only be different but even categorise in very distinct manners. All of which is a clear example of preferring the vast withins, and increased use of relativity. 

Since the core idea has been established, and one of the two sides has already been described, verticality will be easy to think through, as it directly opposes it. But for the sake of the vertical kind, specificity has its importance. The highly vertical mind doesn't seek to multiply or add bits and pieces into a larger image, it sees, and prefers seeing what can be sensed. It'll see things as exactly how it's accustomed to using them, and even if a combination of ideas and definitions is valued by the vertical mind, it'll rely on the pre-established merits of it. 

Verticality values all the established forms of criteria, and even a relatively lateral person in the vertical range may seek to exert and execute their ideas. Still, though, the pre-established preference of standards, and the desire for succeeding within them is what characterises the vertical mind. And it is a classical conclusion, that exerting itself is not necessarily a trait of verticality, but the core principles of verticality itself lead all the way to it. Because the vertical mind judges and perceives mainly the established standards, as well as things in their rawest form, they would certainly want their own product to be tangible too, which results in this execution and action. 

This is where laterality differs, as it questions the very merits of taking an action or caring about the tangible reality itself. While a lateral mind's ambition may be to become an innovator, the vertical mind's ambition would be to manufacture a specific kind of hardware, with even more specifically adapted methods. Verticality deals in common sense, facts, and tangibility. The common vertical approach is to know and experience as many methods and approaches as possible, and the commonly established criteria, like, efficiency, survival, and achievement, are what'd be valued the most importantly. 

And as said above, being in the vertical range isn't an antonym of originality, as relatively more lateral people of the vertical quadrants can still bring forth original ideas. And even most visionary strategists or revolutionaries end up in the vertical range, but this is due to, as essentially said, their care for the conventional and pragmatic criteria. Problems are fundamentally met head-on, and the established forms of motivations are what govern the vertical person. The very existence of common sense summarises verticality enough, as it sees the establishment itself of most standards as reason enough to follow them.