To me #1 and #2 feel decently accurate but #3 maps to little that is in my sphere of thought.
As far as #1 goes, it’s worth pointing out that there are plenty of people in the Kegan 4 rational sense who don’t have any problem with being productive.
As Chapman said, explaining this is really hard and I don’t think I know of a good way either but it might be productive for you to look more of the concept of “relationship”.
It’s an important primitive for me and my general experience from doing Circling with rationalists is that the concept is elusive for most of them.
To me #1 and #2 feel decently accurate but #3 maps to little that is in my sphere of thought.
As far as #1 goes, it’s worth pointing out that there are plenty of people in the Kegan 4 rational sense who don’t have any problem with being productive.
As Chapman said, explaining this is really hard and I don’t think I know of a good way either but it might be productive for you to look more of the concept of “relationship”.
It’s an important primitive for me and my general experience from doing Circling with rationalists is that the concept is elusive for most of them.
Gordon Worley uses the word “relationship” quite a lot in https://medium.com/@gworley3/holonic-integration-927ba21d774b . It’s also important in Tantra.