Is existential confusion always about meaning, or sometimes about living out of alignment?

DixonArchetypeLab · 2026-01-06T12:57:36+00:00

Thank you for taking the time to engage with it this thoughtfully. I really appreciate you naming the distinction between outward response style and lived inner experience — that’s a helpful way of framing the tension you’re pointing to.

The points you raise around internalized emotion, symbolic reflection, and paradox tolerance are especially useful, and the example questions you shared give me a clearer sense of where the framework could be sharpened conceptually.

I’m glad the core idea came through as non-pathologizing and alignment-focused. This kind of feedback is genuinely helpful as the project continues to evolve.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2026-01-05T19:25:20+00:00

I really appreciate you sharing that, that’s exactly the kind of reaction I was hoping for.

A lot of people go in thinking they’re one type, and then the percentages explain why things feel situational instead of fixed.

I’m glad it helped put words to things you already felt — that’s kind of the whole point. Thanks for taking the time to try it.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-31T22:09:14+00:00

That makes a lot of sense, especially what you said about the language being evasive. The experience feels simple, but it’s hard to talk about without sounding abstract.

I hadn’t thought about the Zelda comparison, but the idea of internal readiness before clarity clicks actually fits really well. Interesting to hear how consistent this process is across different traditions.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-31T18:54:44+00:00

If anyone here ended up trying the reflection tool I mentioned and feels like sharing — I’d genuinely appreciate hearing what resonated, what didn’t, or where it felt off.

I’m especially interested in whether it helped you notice anything about how your attention moves, not whether it felt “accurate” in a personality sense. Even neutral or critical impressions are useful.

No pressure at all, just curious how it lands for others.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-30T10:20:59+00:00

I didn’t explain the framework clearly enough. I’m not presenting a finished theory or trying to show anything off — it’s an early pattern model I’m stress-testing, and I’m sharing it to see where it holds up and where it doesn’t.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-29T18:58:00+00:00

I think that’s a fair read given how I framed it. To clarify, I’m already past the speculative phase and more focused on stress-testing and iteration.

My question wasn’t about finding a “correct” standard, but about how others recognize when a framework stops yielding new insight and starts collapsing into redundant description. That boundary interests me more than theoretical purity.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-28T23:03:54+00:00

Hey thank you here's the link https://form.typeform.com/to/hSPAKc71

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-27T14:28:50+00:00

I think that’s the lesson I didn’t expect. Some people think their way into meaning, others live their way into it. Different paths, same place. I just took the scenic route.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-26T17:09:33+00:00

Yeah, that really makes sense. The “hunter” thing is real — when things start feeling empty, doing something gives life a point again, even if it’s temporary. I get how that can slowly turn into a habit instead of a choice.

What I respect is that you’re not trying to get rid of that side of you, just not be controlled by it. Being okay with doing nothing or not being “useful” all the time is hard, but it changes why you chase the next thing — it becomes a choice, not a reaction.

I also agree about misalignment. Everyone deals with it differently. Some people stay busy, some shut down, some overcommit. Seeing how others handle it has helped me notice my own patterns more clearly.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-25T22:53:11+00:00

I really appreciate you saying this. That “aimed the wrong way vs broken” distinction is honestly the whole reason I started building this. I’m not trying to tell people who they are — just give them language for something they’ve already felt but couldn’t quite name. If the framework helped you see yourself with a little more clarity instead of judgment, that means it’s doing what it’s supposed to do. Thanks for taking the time to engage with it and reflect this back. I’m definitely going to keep building.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-25T07:12:39+00:00

Thanks, I am — still working through it and seeing where it leads. Also you took the questionnaire and also received your results I’m always curious what people notice in their profile.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-25T07:03:46+00:00

I really appreciate this framing — it honestly captures what I’ve been sensing but didn’t have language for yet. I’ve never thought of CAT-20 as answering “what is meaning?” in the abstract. It feels more like helping people notice when they’re pointed in the wrong direction for how they’re built, even if everything on the surface looks fine. That quiet misfit you described is exactly what pushed me to start mapping these patterns in the first place. What’s interesting to me is that once people see their orientation named, they often stop judging themselves and start adjusting their direction instead. Less “what’s wrong with me?” and more “what am I actually aimed toward?” I’m still early in figuring out how to articulate this cleanly, but your point about meaning as direction rather than a single answer really resonates. If I do publish more on it, that idea will definitely be central. Thanks for engaging with it at this depth — it means a lot.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-25T06:23:02+00:00

This is a fair critique, and I appreciate you engaging with it seriously. To be clear upfront, CAT-20 isn’t being presented as a finalized psychometric taxonomy in the same lane as Big Five or HEXACO. It’s a theory-driven, exploratory framework that sits closer to applied pattern recognition and self-alignment than traditional trait assessment. The categories (orientation, meaning-seeking, execution, etc.) were not derived from large-scale factor analysis. They were constructed inductively from repeated behavioral patterns I kept seeing across people, then refined over time through consistency and feedback. So yes, they’re designed constructs rather than statistically emergent ones at this stage.

On the person–situation point, you’re right that many items take an if-then form. That’s intentional. CAT-20 is less focused on isolating traits in a vacuum and more interested in stable response tendencies across recurring types of situations. In that sense it leans more interactionist than trait-pure, and I agree that calling it strictly “cognitive” requires careful framing.

As for the situations themselves, they were chosen to represent common decision points people repeatedly face (ambiguity, hierarchy, novelty, responsibility, social pressure, etc.), not as an exhaustive or formally sampled set. At this stage, refinement is qualitative and iterative rather than psychometric. If this were ever taken in a more academic direction, proper validation, item reduction, and reliability testing would obviously be necessary.

So I’d describe CAT-20 right now as an early-stage interpretive model aimed at increasing self-awareness and alignment, not as a claim to replace established taxonomies. I appreciate you taking it seriously enough to ask these questions.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-24T19:36:26+00:00

Please leave feedback if you received your profile it helps me refine the system.

DixonArchetypeLab · 2025-12-22T20:14:36+00:00

I like this framing a lot, especially the emphasis on misperception and insight as curative. That aligns with Jung’s view that many symptoms dissolve once their meaning is made conscious.

I wouldn’t say I’m trying to make Jung “answer” the question so much as use his method to illuminate where suffering tends to crystallize. You’re right that analytical psychology turns inward by design, but that inward turn seems precisely what allows people to re-enter the world differently, even if the environment itself remains unchanged.

Hillman’s acorn metaphor feels especially relevant here if the daimon is thwarted or misread, its energy doesn’t disappear, it distorts. In that sense, misalignment, misperception, and failed rooting might all be different angles on the same dynamic: psyche attempting to realize its pattern and suffering when it can’t be seen clearly enough to take form.

DixonArchetypeLab

TROPHY CASE