tegwick
bd79b100c2
- T01 (RQ4): retain "Soul" - resolved with operator; Terminology.md, concepts/soul.md, OpenQuestions.md, Claims.md, paper/draft.md updated. - T02: lexicographic continuity-weighting procedure in concepts/identity.md, validated against TE-02/03/04/08. - T03: testable Being-vs-Social-Being boundary (three-part recognition test) in concepts/recognition.md and concepts/being.md, validated against TE-05/09. - T04: research/metrics-scoping-note.md - per-axis measurability scoping. - T05: research/law-governance/moral-legal-personhood-charter.md - bounded companion-line charter, explicitly not the mapping itself. - T06: publication pathway resolved with operator - internal circulation only, as paper-one for coulomb-research, following the same staged trajectory as coulomb-research's own paper-zero. Marks SOUL-WP-0009 finished. Opens SOUL-WP-0010 (proposed, not started) to carry forward the two multi-step residuals from T04/T05. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: sonnet Assistant-Process: 136745@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: 2e334b58-ed31-48ed-8156-d09f8ed0781f
88 lines
3.9 KiB
Markdown
88 lines
3.9 KiB
Markdown
# Recognition
|
||
|
||
**Status:** revised (Phase II, 2026-08-12)
|
||
**See also:** H7, RQ6, TE-09, `research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md`
|
||
|
||
## Three senses
|
||
|
||
| Sense | Meaning | Adjacent work |
|
||
|---|---|---|
|
||
| **Epistemic** | Identify/track as the same entity | reidentification, addressability |
|
||
| **Intentional** | Treat as agent with goals/beliefs | Dennett intentional stance; Theory of Mind |
|
||
| **Social / normative** | Standing, perspective, claims matter among us | Honneth recognition theory; Mead; trust/reputation |
|
||
|
||
Do not collapse these senses.
|
||
|
||
## Layer model
|
||
|
||
```text
|
||
Autonomous individuality → may exist unrecognized
|
||
Intentional recognition → treated as agent-like
|
||
Addressability → can be specifically targeted
|
||
Social Beinghood → persistent reciprocal models, relations,
|
||
expectations, commitments, reputation
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
## Role in Beinghood
|
||
|
||
| Level | Role of recognition |
|
||
|---|---|
|
||
| Autonomous individuality | **not required** |
|
||
| Social Beinghood | **constitutive** (H7) |
|
||
| Soul Frame “Being” as *someone another can know* | recognition + personhood + addressability on autonomous base (Beinghood v0.2), with TE-09 pressure |
|
||
|
||
**Caution:** intentional recognition **over-generates** (APE false positives).
|
||
Recognition alone does not create systemic individuality (RN-001 Finding 10).
|
||
|
||
## Working social principle
|
||
|
||
> A system becomes **socially** relevant as a Being when other beings can
|
||
> distinguish it, address it, expect continuity from it, maintain models of it,
|
||
> and enter persistent relationships with it.
|
||
|
||
## Testable boundary: Being vs. Social Being (SOUL-WP-0009-T03, resolved 2026-09-28)
|
||
|
||
**Boundary condition:** Social Beinghood begins, for a given recognizer,
|
||
the moment that recognizer holds a **persistent, addressable model** of the
|
||
candidate across more than one interaction episode — not merely a one-off
|
||
epistemic classification. Concretely, three things must hold simultaneously
|
||
on at least one side of the relation:
|
||
|
||
1. **Intentional recognition** — the recognizer treats the candidate as an
|
||
agent with goals/beliefs, not just a classified pattern.
|
||
2. **Addressability** — the recognizer can specifically target the same
|
||
candidate again (name, ID, channel), not just re-classify a similar one.
|
||
3. **Model persistence across episodes** — the recognizer's model of the
|
||
candidate carries over from one interaction to the next (expectations,
|
||
history, revisable beliefs about it), rather than being recomputed from
|
||
scratch each time.
|
||
|
||
**Reciprocity is explicitly not required to start it** (TE-09): the three
|
||
conditions above need to hold for only *one* party. A single Being's
|
||
persistent, addressable, intentional model of an otherwise-unrecognizing
|
||
system is sufficient to open Social Beinghood on that Being's side of the
|
||
relation — this is what makes the asymmetric case in `paper/draft.md` §1
|
||
and §5 well-formed rather than circular.
|
||
|
||
**What this rules out:** a system that is epistemically classified fresh
|
||
each time (no model persistence) is not Socially a Being to that recognizer,
|
||
however accurately it is classified — this is the stateless-agent case
|
||
(TE-01) restated from the recognizer's side. A system recognized once and
|
||
never modeled again likewise does not cross the boundary.
|
||
|
||
**Nested/collective test (TE-05):** apply the same three-part test
|
||
independently at each candidate level. A collective can be Socially a Being
|
||
at the collective level (some recognizer holds a persistent, addressable,
|
||
intentional model of *the collective as one thing*) without that implying
|
||
or requiring Social Beinghood at the member level, and vice versa — the
|
||
levels are tested separately, not inherited automatically in either
|
||
direction.
|
||
|
||
## TE-09 (summary)
|
||
|
||
Unrecognized coherent intelligence can be an autonomous individual without
|
||
Social Beinghood. See sociology map for full judgment.
|
||
|
||
## Sources
|
||
|
||
RN-001 §9–10; Mead; Dennett; Honneth; Phase II sociology map; RN-006 (mutual models)
|