Generally, symmetry is regarded as the degree dimension in which very superior one and very inferior one in relative correspondence.

Meanwhile, asymmetry is generally done as from the beginning, perfectly different from each other at two things. That assessing coule be seen correct.

Nevertheless, in human society, these two things we generally regard as mutually completely divided could be at so ambiguously made some fusion.

Because at human society, between two ones as one is so active, and aggressive at doing everything, another is inactive at anything, necessarily one could take control and leadership to another, there must appear one active one’s reign and another one’s passive submission which necessarily is outputted or dragged.

But, originally, these very mutually distanced stance’s generating aspect must be caused from that each one subconsciously has own stance at each mindset and naturally two ones could have mutual role each takes part in.

However in society, or community, as the group of human, anyone is subconsciously aware of own powered degree, thus, actually, Paul Ricoer at SOI-MÊME COMME UN AUTRE claimed that socially dragged one s reign as active stance and another’s submission to one are relevance with asymmetry, but to my view, this socially phenomenal mutual difference must originate in each one’s mind causing intuitive strategical stance’s option.

There, by the way, how does asymmetry work toward symmetry? Are these intrinsic differentiated discrimination so correct assessment?

First, let check two of them as symmetry and asymmetry through formulation.

Symmetric relation is repleaced with

∀a,b X, a R b ⇒ b R a

Toward it, Asymmetric relation is replaced with

∀a,b ∈ X, a R b ⇒ ¬(b R a)

We can grasp what our society has and obliges us follow is obviously that each group has each class, hierarchy, and functionally set order to efficiency rating standard, thus necessarily, any employee or so is obliged to allot own role and necessity demanded to establish, in that reality, to some extent, ogirinally our equipped personally indentified character and merit could be neglected at only systematically ordered and compelling each member to be one gear or cog of it.

To these realities, Ricoer in larger extent, defined active and passive one in relevance with the concept “asymmetry”.

To it, I additionally complement several interpretations.
In other words, at rhis procedure, necessarily, whole systematized social convention makes us autonomously executed symmetrization to originally necessarily asymmetrical relavance with each other. At the matter of fact, we all as social members are involved with that systematized switching. That must be some so necessary outcome at any group order.

By the way, at engaging us to some specified working, we all are funneled at symmetrizational standard. Because any necessary working content could be rationalized at averaged skill and versatilly utilizable it. Though, that process’s necessity means so simplifying intention, thus necessarily each one’s so uniqueness not only at equipped personality but also at demanded skill at particular procedure of working.
This truth must never discriminate the kind of working mission and engaging occupational genre.

To these, we can get next diagram and formulation.

Tendency and Disposition around Personal capability and ability(A, B, C, D, E, F….)

Arbitrarily, at one company’s one section, occasionally only E is needed to apply the section’s function. Thereby, necessarily, if somebody(let’s call it β, and the one could have the one’s their superiority’s order from the most skillful it, A→D→B→E→L….) could be taken charge of its procedure’s mission, necessarily, his originally capably and skillful A→D→B must be neglected, and generally according to the extent of company’s scale, that thing could come up to so frequently.
Then, funneled option can be composed.

                                                                     To β, 
                            (A, B, C, D, E, F....) as submitted optional items as working content
　　　　　　　　　　　　Reversed cone is used by β's supeior officer α,

                                   
                                                      (A, B, C, D, E, F....)
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　∨
                                                                     E
And, very importatly regarded fact, is to β's boss α could opt execective position, however, to β, the kind of opting right is not given.
That thing is ultimate asymmetry between α and β, because their relevance is not up to degree's relative comparaison, but up to only one way traffic authority and powered and ordered one as being and nothing at having power in terms of business or service content, necessarily, to some extent, anybody as lower class one could have been given option, nevertheless, ultimately last decision is constantly given only to each section's boss.

Though, at β's mind, he or she could have assessing toward colleague δ as his the same mission given one, β can have symmetrical comparaison to the one's capability and his it.
Necessarily its doing is possible only at the same content thing as now β is taken charge of at his work.

Nevertheless, at each job content's difficulty degree at his mind's own assessing, each item is on the same base as the difficuluty to the one, (here, β), on his assessing numerical value,
his assessing or judgment is symmetrical levelled mind.
Otherwise, at relative comparaison with δ, to one focused job content item, α, β, δ can have each own it too.

If we stand on that view, we could interpret that any asymmetrical approach to one assessment or judgement, at own personal levell, we'd output any relevance could be regarded either as symmetrical. Just here submitted example shows us that in terms of the right to decide personnel and to allocate work contents in the workplace, that right holder as supeior one and the one's ones are at asymmetry.
At this term, Ricoer could have done his concept "active and passive" at allocation of work contents and the right to allot role and team's own functional signification to each member. 

Until now, this analysis reached to next interpretation for the present.
At allocate each member's role as job mission content, any section's leader or boss could have a right to make any personnel's own symmetrical value neglected and only output asymmetrically executed arbitrary judgement.

                〇Symmetrization to each member's asymmetrical nature (Because 
               at work, only demended work content is previously decided)
                                                              ⇩
　　　　〇To the section's top leader or boss, at one forcused post or station, only
                 the one can decide any allocation to any it. And there, the one can execute 
                 one spefified content and the most suitable member for executing it without  
                 any account of each one's capable and able degree as personal properness at                       each content.(Generally, necessarily, that account could be really done and                             executed so properly, nevetheless, it could be done only at not even and not had                     account to each member's condition as the top priority, that nature is very now                         integral.)
                 In other words, socially any site of workplace must have decisively asymmetrical 
                 each member's post's order and that decision at allotment and turning down,                           rejecting and overruling could be possible only for the boss positioned one.

Paul Ricoer is noticed to that decisive unevenness, for guiding readers into managing and managed in relevance as one of typical asymmetrical composition.
That notice was consequently utilzed with ethical human proposition either with quatation from the Bible as he had taken not only any philosopher's texts but also the Bible or that relevant contents by other authors.

Next chance at debating this theme, I'd address myself to ethically and morally regarded symmetry and asymmetry in relevance around several each distinctive texts or so.

(to be continued)

Sep. 6., 9th.      2021

Memorandum; Only for α, suitable at opting β's for some work content, and it is never for suitble for β for taking advantage of the one's the ideal capablility and ablility, in other words, β has no right to opt nor be opted by α. This factual truth is so integral at interpreting this series the first. Even if some account to β's demand, that must be limited so necessarily, and that thing is very important.