From Opasnet
Jump to: navigation, search

Archetypes are collections of values that are shared by a group, so that an individual can explicate their own values by simply saying that they are equal to those of an archetype. For example, political parties can develop archetypes to describe their political agendas and programs. Of course, individuals may support an archetype in most issues but diverge in some and document those separately. In this way, people may easily document value profiles in a shared understanding system. Practical tools for this do not yet exist, so little is known about how practical and accepted they would be.

Archetypes aim to save effort in gathering value data from the public, as not everyone needs to answer all possible questions, when archetypes are used. It also increases security when there is no need to handle individual people's answers but open aggregated value data instead.

⇤--#: . We must define whether archetype is a group or the group's value profile. My current suggestion is that it is a group but previous practices vary. --Jouni (talk) 09:09, 4 July 2018 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)


How should archetypes be used?


Archetypes are simply groups rather than individuals that describe their value profiles. The structure is identical to other value profiles. The main technical question is how individuals can merge (parts of) their value profiles with those of one or more archetypes and how this can be facilitated.


See also