It may be helpful to ask participants in a work-shop focused upon helping each other to Mitigate-Our-Own Alienative-Conflicts - - - to construct lists of single and multiple words that they view as descriptive of single and/or multiple: ideals, values, principles, virtues, and Most-Trusted Primary-Foci/Priorities of True-Lovers in contrast to Domineering-Bullies. Then a survey document can be generated on the basis of the submitted single and multiple words - - - listed line-by-line with an ID Sequence-Number for each line; and a place for each respondent to put a response number regarding what the single-word or multiple-words suggest; from: 10 For "Likely to be Trusted-Most by Domineering-Bullies." down to 1 For "Likely to be Trusted-Most by True-Lovers" The numbers 6 and 5 would represent near-equivocation with a slight edge toward Domineering-Bullies and True-Lovers respectively. It would then be helpful to shuffle the orders of both the respondents and survey items and of the responses to generate As-Diagonal-as-Possible a representation of the responses in a two dimensional table with respondents represented by entries in different vertical columns; and survey items by entries on a horizontal lines. It will be interesting to see the correlation pattern which may emerge; and to talk about any such correlation pattern. A similar survey was generated by the author of these essays at in the 1980's where the survey asked college students to "What fraction of the people with whom you spend the most time, can be well described by each of the following statements?" The statements were about characteristics of Domineering-Bullies in contrast to characteristics of True- Lovers. A clear pattern emerged when the responses were "diagonalized" via a computer program which was told nothing about which statements were thought to be characteristic of Domineering-Bullies, in contrast to characteristics of True-Lovers. There were dozens of "statements". Students identified themselves only by a twelve digit random number. Responses were put through a thin slot in a big box which was shaken well. There were about 90 students and about 80 of them filled out the response form. There emerged a clear correlation between which students described themselves in terms of characteristics that were typical of Domineering-Bullies - - - moving toward character- istics that were typical of True-Lovers. There were about six students in clearly trying circumstances; i.e., spending most of their time with Domineering-Bullies. The computer had no information about the natures of the statements. The computer merely sought a pattern of reordering order of the students responses in vertical columns and the statements on horizontal lines. The number of possible orderings of either vertical-columns or horizontal-lines far exceeds the number of atoms in the whole cosmos! Needless to say, not all possible orders were tried! The two students who responded with the highest numbers to the same statement were put in the first two columns, with the two statement in the top two horizontal lines. The third student who responded most highly to the same statement was put in the third column, and the additional statement was put on the next down horizontal line. Each additional students was put in successive additional columns to the extent that their response pattern was most like the most recent previous students' responses to the recent few previous statements. Thus students who were similar to each other in how they responded to the just previous statements; were put next to each other. High response numbers thus ended up along a diagonal line in the final chart; with Statements characteristic of Domineering- Bullies at the top-or-bottom, and statements characteristic of True-Lovers at the opposite position; bottom-or-top. Students in contrasting circumstances were at the left and right of the set of vertical columns. The statement which was most equivocal in the designer's view; ended up exactly in the middle, between top and bottom! Reports of the above findings were given to all of the participants with comments on the findings - - - for them to consider as they might choose to do.