The Shadows of Totalization, Part XLIV

Continuing to examine Fido the Yak’s recent post, Asymmetries of the Question:

What I assume is that if faced with Totalization there are thought-moves I can make to weaken the stranglehold and hopefully get myself out of there.

The thought-moves I assume I can make are these,

1. Openness.
2. Possibility.
3. Question.
4. Extroversion (a very strange and startlingly inaccurate concept both philosophically and psychologically—but nevertheless important.)
5. Experiment.
6. Problem-posing.

(Or combinations of these.)

I assume these are motion-making and therefore Totalization overcoming. Maybe so—in some cases, certainly so. However, in general the assumption is too bland—sometimes a question works to make a motion, and other times a question will do nothing at all. Until I can find a way to distinguish the cases when motion is produced from those doing nothing, I will refer to the above list as atropic-tropic. The goal is to be able to predict how to produce a motion.

In Fido’s comment,

“Taking a cue from Morris, who posits a deep connection between asymmetrical postures, openness and extroversion (Sense, pp. 164 ff.), let's provisionally categorize questions as either being symmetrical or asymmetrical.”-Fido, from above.

I appreciate the effort to distinguish between questions. It appears to me Fido considers the questions he categorizes as asymmetrical to be those I consider motion-producing. If so, if Fido can accurately categorize questions as asymmetrical, Fido will be able to predict which questions will be motion-producing. I will examine this further.