Trom (The Resolution of Mind)

Ok - I believe I now have this understood, it's not an easy cognition to get...

I had to go back to a basic evaluation question - "what needs to be true for this to be true?"

I found that answer in the Level 5 process:

The being, in life, enters games with an effect at 8b; after many vicissitudes he quits playing games with this effect at 1a. 

This reconfirmed that 1A is where it should be, we leave where we came in but the mirrored impression. (as a side note, I've never said the chart was wrong, I've been saying I don't understand how it is formulated in the way it is)

So this post is a form of exercising my cognitive flow - kind of writing up a win, but also a way to consolidate my thinking - I hope it may be useful to another.

On reviewing the PFCC - there were some items that I had not fully explored. This was the 'Recurring Pattern' and 'Break in Pattern' references, again I was looking at 'what had to be true for this to be true?'

I could see that SELF moved from 8B -> 1A and the recurring pattern fit to each set of four, with three of the same postulate then a change on the fourth. The pattern of the OTHER initially eluded me until I saw that their pattern runs from 1A -> 8B on the chart, the exact counter-flow to ours.

Double checking definitions for Overt and Motivator:

Overwhelming the postulate of an opponent in a game is known as an overt act.

Having one’s own postulates overwhelmed is called a motivator.

Everything became clear, the chart does not exactly reflect the Postulate Failure Cycle (Thank you David for your comment on this last year, it didn't fully land until last night - comm cycles can take awhile sometimes!). The meta-view of the chart does this i.e. each sector of four shows the legs, though within them we see the full expression of the Postulate itself.

In the OVERT we see ourselves causing failure on another through vanquishment - FORCING or PREVENTING
In the MOTIVATOR (the exact counter opposite flow) we see ourselves being vanquished by another - FORCED or PREVENTED

and we have the two game conditions - one where we start the game and one where they start the game.

The end result of these two game conditions is not provided, and this is where I have dubbed in a result from the Postulate Failure Cycle, based on who started the game, finished the game. This was never a requirement, at least I currently don't think so, and potentially is where the contention between myself and TromFan got entangled.

Simply each sector of four offers all the possible options a being may experience within that scope of postulate.

Therefore, a being holding the MBK postulate will start by INFLICTING on another and at a later point will be REJECTED, ultimately moving them to MNBK where they will DEPRIVE until they are REVEALED - At this point, the 'shift' occurs and they become the other at MK where they go into REVELATION until they are DEPRIVED from knowing, moving them to MNK where they will REJECT until they experience that INFLICTION they started the whole cycle off with when they came in.

Many thanks people - that was quite a ride!

Perspective and viewpoints are wonderful things - especially when they move and are adopted!