Overview

Temporistics uses four aspects representing different orientations in time.

The Four Aspects

Aspect Description Thinking process Focus
P (Past) Past orientation Causal reasoning (causal analysis) “Why did this happen?”: memory, origins, precedents, causal links
N (Present / Now) Present orientation Situational-experiential reasoning (contact with the moment) “What is happening now and where is my place?”: involvement, direct conditions
F (Future) Future orientation Scenario-probabilistic reasoning (trajectory modeling) “Where are we going?”: probabilistic scenarios, planning, course revision
E (Eternity) Eternity orientation Meaning-making and sense-making (teleological analysis) “Why and to what end?”: overarching meaning, purpose, enduring values

Distinguishing Past and Eternity: Causality vs Meaning-Making

It is critically important not to conflate retrospective causal analysis (Past) with meaning-making processes (Eternity):

Criterion Past ($P$) — Causal Reasoning Eternity ($E$) — Meaning-Making / Sense-Making
Core question “Why?” / “Where did this come from?” “To what end?” / “Why is this significant?”
Link type Causal (causes, chronology, conditions, consequences) Teleological and axiological (overarching meaning, values)
Focus of operation Memory, facts, drawing lessons from past successes and errors Principles, purpose, relating the immediate situation to broader meaning
Verification focus Factual accuracy: “Did $X$ actually cause $Y$?” Meaning coherence: “Does this carry enduring significance?”
Potential imbalance Fixation on causes and past errors without a clear “why keep going” Formulating grand missions and meanings disconnected from historical experience and causes

Academic Foundations and Literature

The four thinking processes operationalized in Before We Build correspond to established cognitive mechanisms in cognitive science and psychology:

  • Past ($P$) — Causal Reasoning and Counterfactual Simulation:
  • Pearl, J. (2009). Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511803161
  • Byrne, R. M. (2016). Counterfactual thought. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 135–157. PubMed: 26361053 | DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033249
  • Present ($N$) — Situation Awareness and Situated Cognition:
  • Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 32–64. DOI: 10.1518/001872095779049543
  • Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human-Machine Communication. Cambridge University Press.
  • Future ($F$) — Episodic Future Thinking and Prospection:
  • Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R., & Szpunar, K. K. (2012). The future of memory: remembering, imagining, and the brain. Neuron, 76(4), 677–694. PubMed: 23177955 | DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.11.001
  • Seligman, M. E., Railton, P., Baumeister, R. F., & Sripada, C. (2013). Navigating into the future or driven by the past. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(2), 119–141. PubMed: 26172480 | DOI: 10.1177/1745691612474317
  • Eternity ($E$) — Meaning-Making and Teleological Reasoning:
  • Park, C. L. (2010). Making sense of the meaning literature: An integrative review of meaning making and its effects on adjustment to stressful life events. Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 257–301. PubMed: 20192563 | DOI: 10.1037/a0018301
  • Kelemen, D. (2012). Teleological minds: How natural intuitions about agency and purpose shape cognition. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 43, 295–323. PubMed: 23145498 | DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-397919-3.00010-8
  • McAdams, D. P. (2001). The psychology of life stories. Review of General Psychology, 5(2), 100–122. DOI: 10.1037/1089-2680.5.2.100
  • Trait Time Perspective:
  • Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271

It is critical to distinguish cognitive domains of temporal aspects ($P, N, F, E$) from dispositional temperament traits. Motivational exploratory drive (Novelty Seeking in Cloninger's TCI, BAS in Gray's RST) or error sensitivity (Harm Avoidance / BIS) map in BWB to positional modes of resource allocation (positions 1 and 3), rather than being monopolized by any single temporal aspect (see Temporistics as a Cognitive-Resource Routing Hypothesis).

See Neural Correlates of Analysis and Integration — Research Note (2026) for the complete neuroimaging and cognitive evidence ledger.

Eternity-Oriented Wishes

Use Eternity-oriented wishes when the intent is to support a person's relationship with meaning, meaning-making processes, purpose, values, or existential continuity. These formulations should not imply that Eternity position determines a person's social rank or human worth.

Good wishes for the Eternity aspect name the person's right to meaning-making and meaning without forcing a fixed doctrine:

Theme Example wish
Meaning "May your life feel connected to something that is truly meaningful to you."
Integrity "May your values stay alive in your everyday choices."
Continuity "May difficult experiences find a place in a larger, kinder story."
Openness "May you meet ideas, teachers, and traditions that expand rather than imprison you."
Humility "May your worldview stay strong enough to guide you and flexible enough to learn."

Avoid caste-like or rank-like wishes such as "become higher," "rise above ordinary people," or "find your superior mission." Before We Build treats Eternity as a temporal/existential process (meaning-making), not as a model of human value.

See Also