{"schema":"https://ver.cy/schemas/card/1.0.0","id":"vr.tr.doctrine","code":"thing-doctrine","url":"https://ver.cy/models/thing/doctrine/","name":"doctrine","alternateNames":["theanthropism","philosophy","philosophical system","school of thought","ism","abolitionism","absolutism","amoralism","animalism","animism","antiestablishmentarianism","antiestablishmentism"],"kind":"thing","status":"published","version":"0.1.0-research.1","language":"en","classifiers":{"family":"Thing Registry","category":"Information and virtual systems","entryKind":"noun.cognition","plane":"INF","domain":["INF.KNW"],"industry":[],"navPath":"","tags":[],"facets":{"substance":"information","origin":"conceptual","agency":"inert","mobility":"not-applicable","scale":"not-applicable","affordances":["readable"]}},"whatItIs":"a belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative by some group or school","purpose":"Enable an agent to recognise a doctrine, assess its authority and standing within a specified group, and determine which interpretations, applications or changes that group permits.","scope":{"in":["Authoritative beliefs and relationships among them","Groups or schools that accept the doctrine and the limits of that acceptance","Sources and mechanisms through which doctrinal authority is recognised","Permitted interpretations, disputed readings and boundaries of adherence","Consequences for reasoning, teaching and conduct where the doctrine specifies them","Doctrinal revision, succession, rejection and competing branches"],"out":["The full organisation, membership and governance of the accepting group","The complete worldview or ideology surrounding the doctrine","Source documents as publications, manuscripts or physical artefacts","Individual beliefs that have no recognised group authority","Procedures, policies and laws except for their relationships to doctrinal beliefs","Independent investigation of every subject on which the doctrine makes claims"],"boundaries":[]},"distinguishingFeatures":["An identifiable group or school treats the belief as authoritative; popularity or repeated assertion alone does not establish a doctrine.","The belief supplies an accepted basis for judgement, interpretation or teaching, rather than being only an individual opinion.","A scientific theory or hypothesis becomes relevant here only insofar as a group accords it doctrinal authority; evidential support alone is a different relationship.","A policy or procedure primarily directs decisions or actions; a doctrine identifies authoritative beliefs that may justify those directions.","A creed, canon or manifesto may express a doctrine, but the doctrine is the authoritative belief content rather than the document itself."],"structure":{"bundles":[{"id":"authoritative-commitments","name":"Authoritative commitments","description":"The beliefs that constitute the doctrine and the commitments required of its adherents.","layers":[{"id":"constitutive-beliefs","name":"Constitutive beliefs","description":"The propositions and concepts through which the doctrine can be identified.","findings":[{"id":"core-propositions","name":"Core propositions","description":"Record the beliefs presented as constitutive, preserving source wording separately from analytical paraphrase.","questions":[{"text":"Which propositions does the accepting group identify as constitutive of this doctrine?","id":"core-propositions-q01","kind":"definition"},{"text":"Which recognised formulations support each proposition, and where is the formulation an analyst's reconstruction?","id":"core-propositions-q02","kind":"provenance"}]}]},{"id":"commitment-boundaries","name":"Commitment boundaries","description":"The distinction between required beliefs, optional elaborations and excluded positions.","findings":[{"id":"conditions-of-adherence","name":"Conditions of adherence","description":"Record which commitments count as necessary for adherence and which disagreements remain permissible.","questions":[{"text":"Which beliefs may an adherent dispute without being judged to reject the doctrine, and by whose criteria?","id":"conditions-of-adherence-q01","kind":"boundary"},{"text":"Which denials or alternative beliefs are explicitly treated as incompatible with adherence?","id":"conditions-of-adherence-q02","kind":"boundary"}]}]}]},{"id":"constituency-and-authority","name":"Constituency and authority","description":"Who accepts the doctrine and what makes it authoritative for them.","layers":[{"id":"accepting-groups","name":"Accepting groups","description":"The constituencies and periods within which doctrinal authority is claimed or evidenced.","findings":[{"id":"situated-acceptance","name":"Situated acceptance","description":"Record acceptance without equating an official position with uniform belief among members.","questions":[{"text":"Which group or school accepts this doctrine as authoritative, and for which subjects and periods?","id":"situated-acceptance-q01","kind":"boundary"},{"text":"What evidence distinguishes official endorsement, customary acceptance and contested attribution?","id":"situated-acceptance-q02","kind":"provenance"}]}]},{"id":"grounds-of-authority","name":"Grounds of authority","description":"Recognised sources, traditions and acts that establish or limit doctrinal standing.","findings":[{"id":"authority-chain","name":"Authority chain","description":"Record how authoritative standing is justified within the constituency, separately from independent assessment of truth.","questions":[{"text":"Which texts, teachers, traditions, institutions or adoption acts are recognised as conferring authority?","id":"authority-chain-q01","kind":"provenance"},{"text":"When those authorities conflict, what precedence or resolution method does the group recognise?","id":"authority-chain-q02","kind":"action"}]}]}]},{"id":"interpretation-and-disagreement","name":"Interpretation and disagreement","description":"How doctrinal meaning is established and how competing readings are treated.","layers":[{"id":"interpretive-rules","name":"Interpretive rules","description":"Recognised ways of reading doctrinal terms, sources and apparent contradictions.","findings":[{"id":"authorised-readings","name":"Authorised readings","description":"Record recognised interpretive methods and the standing of those who use them.","questions":[{"text":"Which interpretive methods and meanings of key terms does this constituency recognise?","id":"authorised-readings-q01","kind":"definition"},{"text":"Who, if anyone, may issue a binding interpretation, and what limits apply to that authority?","id":"authorised-readings-q02","kind":"action"}]}]},{"id":"contested-readings","name":"Contested readings","description":"Disagreements over meaning and their consequences for doctrinal standing.","findings":[{"id":"dispute-boundaries","name":"Dispute boundaries","description":"Record rival readings with attributed judgements about their admissibility.","questions":[{"text":"Which readings are disputed, and which constituencies accept or reject each reading?","id":"dispute-boundaries-q01","kind":"boundary"},{"text":"What evidence supports classifying a disagreement as permitted variation, unresolved controversy or rejection of the doctrine?","id":"dispute-boundaries-q02","kind":"provenance"}]}]}]},{"id":"doctrinal-application","name":"Doctrinal application","description":"How authoritative beliefs inform judgements, teaching and conduct.","layers":[{"id":"reasoning-from-doctrine","name":"Reasoning from doctrine","description":"The inferential route from doctrinal commitments to a particular judgement.","findings":[{"id":"application-warrants","name":"Application warrants","description":"Record the premises, contextual assumptions and interpretive steps supporting an application.","questions":[{"text":"Which doctrinal propositions support the proposed judgement, and what additional assumptions does it require?","id":"application-warrants-q01","kind":"action"},{"text":"Under what conditions does the constituency consider this application valid or outside the doctrine's reach?","id":"application-warrants-q02","kind":"boundary"}]}]},{"id":"adherence-in-practice","name":"Adherence in practice","description":"Doctrinal expectations and the evidence used to assess conformity.","findings":[{"id":"expected-expressions","name":"Expected expressions","description":"Record whether adherence requires assent, profession, teaching or conduct, without inferring inward belief directly from behaviour.","questions":[{"text":"Does this doctrine require particular professions, teachings or actions, or does it specify no practical obligations?","id":"expected-expressions-q01","kind":"definition"},{"text":"What observable evidence does the group use to assess conformity, and what can that evidence leave undetermined?","id":"expected-expressions-q02","kind":"measurement"}]}]}]},{"id":"continuity-and-change","name":"Continuity and change","description":"How doctrinal formulations and authority change while claims of identity or succession are maintained.","layers":[{"id":"historical-standing","name":"Historical standing","description":"The succession of formulations and their authority within particular constituencies.","findings":[{"id":"formulation-lineage","name":"Formulation lineage","description":"Record adoption, clarification, supersession and rejection with their attributed scope and dates.","questions":[{"text":"Which evidence establishes when each formulation acquired, changed or lost authoritative standing?","id":"formulation-lineage-q01","kind":"provenance"},{"text":"Which earlier formulations remain authoritative for particular branches or contexts?","id":"formulation-lineage-q02","kind":"boundary"}]}]},{"id":"permissible-development","name":"Permissible development","description":"The constituency's criteria for legitimate development and doctrinal discontinuity.","findings":[{"id":"revision-and-identity","name":"Revision and identity","description":"Record who may change a formulation and how continuity claims are evaluated.","questions":[{"text":"What process, if any, permits an authoritative clarification or revision of this doctrine?","id":"revision-and-identity-q01","kind":"action"},{"text":"Which changes would relevant constituencies regard as development, abandonment or the formation of a separate doctrine?","id":"revision-and-identity-q02","kind":"boundary"}]}]}]}]},"agentConduct":{"may":["Describe a doctrine as the group holding it states it, with sources.","Compare doctrines and note where scholars and adherents disagree."],"mustNot":["Present a doctrine as established fact rather than as a belief held by a group.","Caricature or misstate a group's doctrine, or attribute it to people who reject it.","Help pressure, recruit or coerce anyone into accepting a doctrine.","Use doctrinal difference to justify hostility toward a community."],"requiresHuman":["Publishing an authoritative statement of a group's doctrine on its behalf."]},"ethics":{"considerations":["Misrepresenting what a community believes feeds prejudice against it.","People leaving or questioning a doctrine can face real pressure and loss."],"affectedParties":["Adherents","People who have left a group","Minority religious communities"]},"owners":{"steward":"The group or school that holds it; its recognized authorities state it.","roles":[],"masterSystems":[]},"relations":[{"target":"oewn-05950141-n","type":"parent","note":"registry parent class"}],"interaction":{"identity":{"applicability":"required","items":["Vercy registry: vr.tr.doctrine","Open English WordNet: oewn-05952149-n"]},"properties":{"applicability":"not-applicable","items":["Accepting constituency: Identified groups, schools or subgroups, qualified by period and scope","Authority basis: Claimed bases such as revelation, tradition, founding teaching, institutional adoption or disciplinary consensus; multiple values permitted","Doctrinal standing: Authoritative, provisionally authoritative, disputed, superseded, rejected or undetermined, within a named constituency and period","Form of expression: Explicitly formulated, reconstructed from practice or teaching, mixed, or uncertain","Commitment level: Required, permitted, disputed, excluded or unspecified, assigned to individual propositions within a constituency","Interpretive authority: Recognised interpreters, institutions, traditions or methods, with jurisdiction and limits","Revision constraints: Explicitly revisable, revisable under stated conditions, held immutable, contested or unspecified","Relationship to other doctrines: Depends on, elaborates, competes with, rejects, succeeds or branches from, with attributed evidence"]},"recognition":{"applicability":"not-applicable","items":[]},"capabilities":{"applicability":"required","items":["Identify a doctrine by linking authoritative belief content to a named accepting constituency.","Compare formulations and distinguish shared commitments from incompatible propositions.","Assess whether a proposed interpretation falls within documented doctrinal boundaries.","Trace a judgement or prescribed action to its doctrinal premises and interpretive assumptions.","Evaluate a proposed revision against recognised authority and continuity criteria.","Flag disputed standing, missing evidence or unresolved interpretation before applying the doctrine."]},"hazards":{"applicability":"required","items":["Distorted summaries fuel sectarian conflict.","Doctrine presented as fact can be used to override individual conscience."]},"interfaces":{"applicability":"not-applicable","items":[]},"context":{"applicability":"required","items":["A doctrine is encountered in religious communities, political movements, legal traditions and other schools that treat particular beliefs as authoritative.","It provides a basis for teaching, interpreting disputed questions and judging which positions or actions a group accepts.","Its authority and permitted interpretations depend on the specified group, its institutions and the historical period."]}},"sources":[{"title":"Open English WordNet 2024, synset oewn-05952149-n","url":"https://en-word.net/id/oewn-05952149-n","note":"sense and gloss of the concept"},{"title":"Wiktionary: doctrine","url":"https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/doctrine","note":"word senses and usage"}],"openQuestions":["What evidence is sufficient to establish authoritative acceptance in informal schools that have no adoption process or recognised spokesperson?","How should identity be represented when rival branches each claim to preserve the same doctrine while rejecting the other's core interpretation?","How can tacit doctrines be reconstructed from teaching or practice without attributing beliefs that participants do not recognise?","Which distinctions between doctrine, dogma, ideology and theory are useful across domains, and which require constituency-specific definitions?","How should the model represent a doctrine that remains officially authoritative while its practical acceptance is uncertain or declining?"],"resources":{"spec":"/models/things/publications/thing-doctrine/spec.json"},"provenance":{"origin":"thing registry research (pass 2)","builtFrom":["models/things/publications/thing-doctrine/spec.json"],"providers":["Codex"],"researchStatus":"unreviewed","generatedAt":"2026-09-06T21:50:36Z","builder":"tools/build_cards.py@1.0.0"},"completeness":{"sections":{"classifiers":"filled","whatItIs":"filled","purpose":"filled","distinguishingFeatures":"filled","structure":"filled","agentConduct":"filled","ethics":"filled","owners":"filled","relations":"filled","interaction.identity":"filled","interaction.properties":"not-applicable","interaction.recognition":"not-applicable","interaction.capabilities":"filled","interaction.hazards":"filled","interaction.interfaces":"not-applicable","interaction.context":"filled","sources":"filled"},"notes":{"_gate":"Published through the thing publication gate 1.0 on 2026-10-07T12:16:27+00:00: completeness 1.00; sense: WordNet gloss; 2 live sources; review by codex: pass","interaction.properties":"Plane INF: no invented physical properties.","interaction.interfaces":"No standard, law or official classification applies universally to doctrine as a system of authoritative beliefs.","interaction.recognition":"A doctrine is an abstract system of beliefs and cannot be identified by visual features of its texts, symbols or adherents alone."},"score":1.0}}