The Symbolic World
families · separation

relation family

separation

assigned, not verified What this family covers, what it fails to cover, and every relation string in the graph that lands in it. A family is assigned: two models read the definitions document and named the same kind of relation, or a person ruled where they did not. Verified is the other layer: a quote checked letter-exact against its paragraph and judged by a model of a different family. That was already done before any of this began.

27 assigned relations 21 effective relation strings 3 queued items carry a string this family covers 0 declared pairs
graph-wide: 1669 assigned · 354 awaiting a ruling · 65 no family · 3 text undecided · 2091 relations

Definition

Quoted from docs/FAMILY_DEFINITIONS.md v0.7.2, family 11, added at v0.2 — review finding 11; reworked at v0.3. The atlas quotes that document; it never paraphrases it.

The separatio/solutio class, in BOTH its structures: (i) A is parted, extracted or freed from B; (ii) A dissolves, separates or splits B. The opus's counter-operation to union and as central.

Boundary: not transformation (where the subject BECOMES the object — so messiah splits-into the-opposites, whose quote says the split "becomes a complete polarity", is transformation-toward-opposition and goes per edge, not here); not psychic-effect (separation asserts the parting itself, not a dynamic residue — this is a definitional distinction, not just check-order).

Relation strings that land here

dissolves 4is-extracted-from 2separates 2splits-into 2achieved-by-separating 1delivered-from 1deviates-from 1differentiates-from 1dissociates-from 1emancipates-from 1extracts 1fragments 1and 9 more, 9 relations between them

The number beside a string is how many relations carry it. 17 of these strings occur exactly once. The tail is the informative part: a string used once usually carried its own qualifier in the sentence it came from. A string can appear under more than one family, and does: assignment is made to an edge in its paragraph, never to a string in the abstract.

seeds: the examples the definition names

pending a ruling: items carrying a string this family covers

Anthropos / Adam Kadmon splits-into The opposites CW 9ii §320
arms-disagree
The analytic process dissolves Projection CW 9i §160
arms-disagree
Consciousness (ego, diurnal psyche) deviates-from Archetype (archetype-as-such) CW 8 §724
arms-disagree

These are edges whose two model arms did not agree, or whose agreement the calibrated gate disputed. Carrying a string this family covers is not the same as belonging here; the ruling has not been made.

Checked against readers of Jung

Checked against 8 works of scholarship: across the sample, 8 of 16 treated items agreed with our family. The sample did not reach this family.the whole table
familyagreesdisagreessplitnot treated
archetypal-identity (incl. 26)0/31/32/32
correspondence (incl. 27)2/31/30/32
symbolization3/30/30/31
doctrinal-attribution1/21/20/21
amplification0/33/30/30
controls (personif., union)2/20/20/20
All8/166/162/166

A row this small is the items themselves; no rate over a handful of items carries precision worth reporting. The check asked which kind of relation a reader of the literature would say Jung asserts, not whether Jung's claim is true, which the verification chain had already asked of the paragraph. The disagreements stand beside the agreements because hiding them would make the table an argument rather than a record. Full worksheets: docs/experiments/external_validity_2026-08/.

Agreement is not endorsement: no scholar reviewed this vocabulary, and the sample is small enough to name in a sentence.

receipts counts read from seed.json sha256:9dc668bfff36 via web/family-map.mjs;
definition and seeds quoted from docs/FAMILY_DEFINITIONS.md v0.7.2;
external-validity row from docs/experiments/external_validity_2026-08/results.json (report v3, closed 2026-08-12);
built 2026-09-05

These families are this project's classification. They are calibrated inside this repository, checked once against outside scholarship on a small sample, and endorsed by nobody. What the layer records is how we sorted relations Jung wrote: a map of assertions, not a reading of him.