141 lines
4.5 KiB
Text
141 lines
4.5 KiB
Text
|
Soul Frame — Paper Dialogues
|
||
|
|
============================
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Purpose
|
||
|
|
-------
|
||
|
|
This research line takes one external paper (or book chapter / essay) at a time
|
||
|
|
and reads it *in dialogue* with Soul Frame.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The goal is not a full literature review and not a hostile refutation exercise.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The goal is:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
1. understand the paper on its own terms,
|
||
|
|
2. translate its claims into (or against) Soul Frame vocabulary,
|
||
|
|
3. record where Soul Frame is supported, extended, challenged, or forced
|
||
|
|
to revise terminology,
|
||
|
|
4. feed durable findings back into Claims.md, Terminology.md, OpenQuestions.md,
|
||
|
|
and concept notes when warranted.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
This line runs in parallel with the main research phases and the eventual paper.
|
||
|
|
It may delay or reshape the Soul Frame paper when a strong challenge appears.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
What a dialogue produces
|
||
|
|
------------------------
|
||
|
|
Each selected work gets its own subdirectory under:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
research/paper-dialogues/<NNN>-<author-short-slug>/
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Recommended contents:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
bibliographic-note.md
|
||
|
|
Full citation, language, access path, genre, one-paragraph abstract
|
||
|
|
in the paper's own vocabulary (not yet Soul Frame translation).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
reading-notes.md
|
||
|
|
Section-by-section or claim-by-claim notes while reading.
|
||
|
|
Prefer short quotations with page numbers where available.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
commentary.md
|
||
|
|
Structured comparative essay:
|
||
|
|
- paper thesis
|
||
|
|
- Soul Frame translation
|
||
|
|
- agreements
|
||
|
|
- tensions / challenges
|
||
|
|
- open questions raised for Soul Frame
|
||
|
|
- proposed follow-ups (claims, TEs, terminology edits)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
support-challenge-matrix.md
|
||
|
|
Table mapping paper claims -> Soul Frame concepts ->
|
||
|
|
support | challenge | orthogonal | unclear
|
||
|
|
with brief rationale.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Optional:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
glossary-bridge.md
|
||
|
|
Term-by-term map (paper term <-> Soul Frame term).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
excerpts.md
|
||
|
|
Longer excerpts reserved for fair-use/private working notes only;
|
||
|
|
do not publish copyrighted text beyond fair quotation practice.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Method (standing procedure)
|
||
|
|
---------------------------
|
||
|
|
For each paper:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Step 1 — Bibliographic lock
|
||
|
|
Fix citation, edition, language, and what counts as the unit of analysis
|
||
|
|
(whole book vs chapter vs essay).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Step 2 — Internal reconstruction
|
||
|
|
State the paper's problem, method, main claims, and conclusion *without*
|
||
|
|
Soul Frame jargon. Misrepresentation here invalidates the dialogue.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Step 3 — Vocabulary bridge
|
||
|
|
For each key term in the paper, note nearest Soul Frame terms and
|
||
|
|
mismatches (false friends).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Step 4 — Support / challenge pass
|
||
|
|
Explicitly mark:
|
||
|
|
SUPPORT — strengthens a Soul Frame claim or definition
|
||
|
|
CHALLENGE — pressures revision, rename, split, or abandonment
|
||
|
|
EXTEND — adds a useful distinction Soul Frame lacked
|
||
|
|
ORTHOGONAL — interesting but outside current scope
|
||
|
|
UNCLEAR — needs rereading or secondary sources
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Step 5 — Feedback into instruments
|
||
|
|
If a challenge is serious, open or update:
|
||
|
|
- OpenQuestions.md
|
||
|
|
- Claims.md (evidence / contradicting literature)
|
||
|
|
- concepts/*.md
|
||
|
|
- ThoughtExperiments.md (if a new edge case appears)
|
||
|
|
Do not silently rewrite Terminology to absorb the paper.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Step 6 — Close the dialogue
|
||
|
|
Commentary status: draft | reviewed | integrated
|
||
|
|
Note which Soul Frame instruments were updated (if any).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Comparison focus (Soul Frame side)
|
||
|
|
----------------------------------
|
||
|
|
Always ask at least:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- What counts as a system / individual / being?
|
||
|
|
- Body / Mind / Soul triad: fit, force-fit, or reject?
|
||
|
|
- Consciousness: first-person vs third-person recognition
|
||
|
|
- Identity / continuity / lineage
|
||
|
|
- Personhood (descriptive / social / moral / legal)
|
||
|
|
- Recognition and co-adaptive modeling
|
||
|
|
- Implications for artificial beings, Sp., Gh.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Naming convention
|
||
|
|
-----------------
|
||
|
|
NNN-author-short-slug/
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Examples:
|
||
|
|
001-deppert-evolution-des-bewusstseins/
|
||
|
|
002-park-generative-agents/
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
NNN is a local sequence number in this directory, not a claim ID.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Relation to other research dirs
|
||
|
|
-------------------------------
|
||
|
|
research/foundations/ long thematic notes
|
||
|
|
research/paper-dialogues/ one-paper comparative commentaries (this line)
|
||
|
|
sources/bibliography.md index entries for durable citations
|
||
|
|
sources/source-notes/ optional short notes linked from bibliography
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
After a dialogue matures, add a bibliography entry under sources/bibliography.md
|
||
|
|
with pointer path back here.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Status
|
||
|
|
------
|
||
|
|
Line established: 2026-08-12
|
||
|
|
First paper: Wolfgang Deppert — Die Evolution des Bewusstseins
|
||
|
|
-> 001-deppert-evolution-des-bewusstseins/
|