> my question was (and still is): why is a taxonomy the best way to capture this? In a personality research course it became clear to me that the biggest succes

> my question was (and still is): why is a taxonomy the best way to capture this? In a personality research course it became clear to me that the biggest successful models are dimensional in nature (e.g. five factor model/big 5) they are not taxonomies. The types are labels for the extremes of a dimensional analysis of motivation: INTEREST GRAPH Consider the following abstract graph: ACTING Killers | Achievers | | | | | PLAYERS ---------+--------- WORLD | | | | | Socialisers | Explorers INTERACTING https://mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm https://mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm ed: much like archetypes in personality tests