And we're borrowing somebody else's terminology anyway. So don't expect precision.
Or is the idea that a very distracted person being honed into a focussed and aware person is a duality that's valued -- able to live in both worlds? (Rather than a very focussed person being taught to be distracted and highly integrative?)
title
subtitle
.. [two blank lines make a section break]
ingredients with 4 columns, last one is an optional comment for the row
..
method steps with 2 columns, last one is optional comment
..
then optional sections that just have to have:
section title (this is the collapsed title string too)
any rows included until the next .. etc. etc.
plus just a few tricks like if an ingredient comment has [] then it uses that as a URL for the ingredient, if a row in ingredients has just one column then it's a header etc.
This leads to a lot of confusion. Jung for example might call a type "Introverted Intuitive with Feeling", and in MBTI that is INFJ, where the J means they extrovert the Feeling, but are primarily actually perceivers! Then there's Introverted Feeling with Intuition, which in MBTI is INFP, the P here meaning they extrovert intuition, but since they're primarily introverted they are "introverted feelers" foremost. I think this MBTI formulation has really made Jung's ideas unnecessarily confusing.
Also, Jung himself was not fond of people typing others, and thought people ought to learn the ideas and type themselves and of course allowed and discussed that some are not differentiated strongly in some dimensions, although he did view that as being a sort of lack of development.
So is it science? I guess I'd call it an interesting analytical model and leave it at that.
there's something about this quote that i really like, going to have to use it out of context on people