{ "model": { "rank": 3450, "code": "thing-q160590", "model_id": "vr.tr.utilitarianism", "name": "utilitarianism", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise a utilitarian ethical position, assess how completely its commitments are specified, and determine which evaluations or recommendations those commitments support.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Information and virtual systems", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "INF", "domain": "INF.KNW", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q160590/", "tier": 2, "score": 86, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "negative utilitarianism", "act utilitarianism", "Preference ulilitarianism", "rule utilitarianism", "two-level utilitarianism" ], "aliasCount": 5, "merged": 5, "knownIn": 86, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q160590", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q160590", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-07T14:47:42Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 22.2, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.3\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a07c55-a909-7a20-aeec-9c49efd5d836\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: utilitarianism\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: INF.KNW\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 546 things:\n# Batch 003: 1001 r", "usd": 0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 79.4, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.3\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a07c55-a91a-7e72-b7d6-8b49cd0399ea\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: utilitarianism\nRegistry id: vr.tr.utilitarianism\nPlane / domain: INF / INF.KNW\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (no" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q160590", "registryId": "vr.tr.utilitarianism", "name": "utilitarianism", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "INF.KNW" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q160590/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.utilitarianism", "name": "utilitarianism", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise a utilitarian ethical position, assess how completely its commitments are specified, and determine which evaluations or recommendations those commitments support.", "definition": "Utilitarianism is a family of consequentialist ethical theories holding that moral evaluation ultimately depends on promoting aggregate well-being, with each affected individual's welfare given impartial consideration.", "scope_statement": "This model owns utilitarianism as a family of normative ethical theories that evaluates conduct through impartial aggregate welfare, including its variants, decision criteria, application requirements and unresolved tensions.", "in_scope": [ "Accounts of welfare and whose welfare receives moral consideration", "Impartial aggregation and the treatment of competing interests", "Act, rule and other forms of utilitarian evaluation", "Actual and expected consequences, uncertainty and practical deliberation", "Treatment of rights, distribution, demandingness and population effects" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Consequentialist theories that ultimately value goods other than welfare", "Egoism and theories that privilege the decision maker's welfare", "Empirical psychology and economics as independent fields", "Biographies of utilitarian thinkers and histories of philosophical institutions", "Specific policy decisions and their empirical evidence, except as applications of a stated utilitarian position" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "Ask whether welfare is the sole ultimate good used to assess outcomes; valuing consequences alone establishes consequentialism, not specifically utilitarianism.", "Ask whether equivalent welfare interests receive equivalent weight regardless of whose interests they are; systematic personal privilege indicates a departure from utilitarian impartiality.", "Ask whether interests are aggregated across affected individuals; maximising the number of beneficiaries or following majority preference alone is insufficient.", "Ask whether rights and rules derive their justification from welfare consequences or impose independent constraints that can override them.", "Ask whether 'utility' denotes morally relevant welfare; usefulness, profitability and economic preference representation do not by themselves establish utilitarianism." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Account of welfare", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Pleasure and suffering; preference satisfaction; objective-list welfare; mixed; unspecified", "why_it_matters": "Determines which changes count as benefits or harms and what evidence could establish them." }, { "name": "Moral constituency", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Explicit inclusion criteria for present humans, future humans, nonhuman animals and other candidate welfare subjects", "why_it_matters": "Defines whose gains and losses enter the evaluation." }, { "name": "Aggregation rule", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Total welfare; average welfare; another explicitly defined rule; unspecified", "why_it_matters": "Different aggregation rules can rank the same alternatives differently, particularly when populations change." }, { "name": "Object of evaluation", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Acts; rules; motives; institutions; explicitly specified combination", "why_it_matters": "Identifies what must produce favourable welfare consequences for the position's criterion to be satisfied." }, { "name": "Consequence standard", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Actual consequences; expected consequences; another stated epistemic standard; unspecified", "why_it_matters": "Separates outcome-based rightness from what an agent can justify using available information." }, { "name": "Interpersonal comparison basis", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Explicitly justified; proxy-based; partially specified; disputed; absent", "why_it_matters": "Shows whether aggregating welfare across individuals has a defensible interpretation." }, { "name": "Treatment of welfare maximisation", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Required; replaced by a stated threshold; qualified by additional commitments; unspecified", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes standard maximising formulations from variants whose classification needs explanation." }, { "name": "Relationship to rights and constraints", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Welfare-derived protections; independent overriding constraints; mixed justification; unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Reveals whether the position remains utilitarian throughout or combines it with another ethical framework." } ], "affordances": [ "Classify a stated ethical argument as utilitarian, a qualified variant, or insufficiently specified.", "Identify missing commitments before comparing actions, rules or institutions.", "Translate a specified position into explicit welfare comparisons with visible assumptions.", "Test whether recommendations change under alternative welfare measures, probabilities or population assumptions.", "Audit claims of impartiality and expose omitted affected parties.", "Explain objections and tradeoffs without treating the theory's disputed premises as settled." ] }, "sources": [], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "utilitarian-identity", "name": "Utilitarian identity", "description": "The commitments that make a position utilitarian and delimit the sense being modelled.", "rationale": "An agent must distinguish an ethical theory from ordinary usefulness and from neighbouring moral theories.", "layers": [ { "id": "constitutive-commitments", "name": "Constitutive commitments", "description": "Welfare, impartiality and aggregation as identifying commitments.", "findings": [ { "id": "welfare-based-moral-criterion", "name": "Welfare-based moral criterion", "description": "Record how the position connects moral evaluation to welfare consequences and whether it recognises independent ultimate goods.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the position make welfare the sole ultimate good, and how does it connect that good to moral rightness?", "kind": "definition", "id": "welfare-based-moral-criterion-q01" }, { "text": "What distinguishes this position from broader consequentialism, ethical egoism and ordinary claims of usefulness?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "welfare-based-moral-criterion-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "formulation-and-attribution", "name": "Formulation and attribution", "description": "The particular formulation being represented and the basis for its classification.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-utilitarian-variant", "name": "Attributed utilitarian variant", "description": "Record the formulation's own commitments separately from an interpreter's label or reconstruction.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which primary passage or explicit formulation supports classifying this position as utilitarian?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attributed-utilitarian-variant-q01" }, { "text": "Which qualifications make its inclusion within utilitarianism contested or dependent on a named classification convention?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "attributed-utilitarian-variant-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "welfare-and-moral-standing", "name": "Welfare and moral standing", "description": "What makes a life go better or worse and which beings can possess morally relevant welfare.", "rationale": "A welfare calculation is uninterpretable until both welfare and its subjects are specified.", "layers": [ { "id": "theory-of-welfare", "name": "Theory of welfare", "description": "The substantive account of benefits and harms.", "findings": [ { "id": "welfare-content-and-evidence", "name": "Welfare content and evidence", "description": "Record whether welfare consists in experience, satisfied preferences, objective goods or another account, together with acceptable evidence.", "questions": [ { "text": "What constitutes welfare, and how are pleasure, suffering, preferences and non-experiential goods treated?", "kind": "definition", "id": "welfare-content-and-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "What observations or proxies support welfare estimates, and which aspects of welfare do those proxies omit?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "welfare-content-and-evidence-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "subjects-and-impartiality", "name": "Subjects and impartiality", "description": "The constituency of welfare subjects and the interpretation of equal consideration.", "findings": [ { "id": "standing-and-equal-consideration", "name": "Standing and equal consideration", "description": "Record inclusion criteria and whether differences in weighting reflect welfare differences or privileges attached to identity.", "questions": [ { "text": "What qualifies an entity for moral consideration, including nonhuman animals, future persons and uncertain cases of sentience?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "standing-and-equal-consideration-q01" }, { "text": "How does the position give equal consideration to equivalent interests while allowing different needs and capacities?", "kind": "definition", "id": "standing-and-equal-consideration-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "aggregation-and-population", "name": "Aggregation and population", "description": "How individual welfare changes become an overall ranking of outcomes.", "rationale": "Utilitarian conclusions depend on comparison and aggregation choices that a generic appeal to greater happiness leaves hidden.", "layers": [ { "id": "interpersonal-aggregation", "name": "Interpersonal aggregation", "description": "Comparability, distribution and compensation across individuals.", "findings": [ { "id": "comparison-and-distribution", "name": "Comparison and distribution", "description": "Record the aggregation operation, its measurement assumptions and how concentrated harms compare with dispersed benefits.", "questions": [ { "text": "What scale permits interpersonal comparison, and which assumptions justify adding or otherwise aggregating welfare estimates?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "comparison-and-distribution-q01" }, { "text": "Can many small benefits outweigh one person's severe harm, and does inequality matter intrinsically or through its welfare effects?", "kind": "definition", "id": "comparison-and-distribution-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "population-and-time", "name": "Population and time", "description": "Comparisons involving different numbers of lives and different times.", "findings": [ { "id": "variable-population-comparison", "name": "Variable-population comparison", "description": "Record how creating lives, changing population size and placing welfare in the future affect outcome rankings.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the position compare total welfare, average welfare or another quantity when alternatives contain different populations?", "kind": "definition", "id": "variable-population-comparison-q01" }, { "text": "How are future welfare, the welfare level of a neutral life and any discounting assumptions represented and justified?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "variable-population-comparison-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "rightness-and-deliberation", "name": "Rightness and deliberation", "description": "What the theory evaluates and how a bounded agent should reason under uncertainty.", "rationale": "A criterion of moral rightness does not automatically specify a feasible procedure for choosing actions.", "layers": [ { "id": "acts-rules-and-criteria", "name": "Acts, rules and criteria", "description": "The unit of evaluation and its relationship to particular decisions.", "findings": [ { "id": "evaluation-target-and-rule-conditions", "name": "Evaluation target and rule conditions", "description": "Record whether welfare evaluates individual acts or another target, including the acceptance or compliance conditions used to evaluate rules.", "questions": [ { "text": "Are acts assessed directly, or through rules, motives or institutions selected for their welfare consequences?", "kind": "definition", "id": "evaluation-target-and-rule-conditions-q01" }, { "text": "For a rule-based formulation, whose acceptance or compliance is assumed, and when are exceptions permitted?", "kind": "action", "id": "evaluation-target-and-rule-conditions-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "uncertainty-and-practical-choice", "name": "Uncertainty and practical choice", "description": "The transition from incomplete evidence to a defensible recommendation.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-sensitive-decision-procedure", "name": "Evidence-sensitive decision procedure", "description": "Record consequence probabilities, deliberation costs and the relationship between justified choice and eventual outcomes.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does evaluation use actual outcomes or expected welfare, and what evidence supports the probabilities and consequence estimates?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "evidence-sensitive-decision-procedure-q01" }, { "text": "When should an agent calculate explicitly, follow an established heuristic, seek more evidence or report that no stable ranking is available?", "kind": "action", "id": "evidence-sensitive-decision-procedure-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "objections-and-application-limits", "name": "Objections and application limits", "description": "Tests of what the position permits, requires and can responsibly support in practice.", "rationale": "An agent must expose difficult implications and missing premises before turning an aggregate welfare claim into advice.", "layers": [ { "id": "rights-and-demandingness", "name": "Rights and demandingness", "description": "The treatment of individual protections, personal commitments and sacrifice.", "findings": [ { "id": "protections-and-sacrifice", "name": "Protections and sacrifice", "description": "Record whether welfare grounds protections and whether the theory requires substantial sacrifices from individuals.", "questions": [ { "text": "How does the position justify rights, promises and protections against harming individuals, and can welfare gains override them?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "protections-and-sacrifice-q01" }, { "text": "What limits, if any, does it place on required sacrifice and on the displacement of personal projects or special obligations?", "kind": "definition", "id": "protections-and-sacrifice-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "application-audit", "name": "Application audit", "description": "Checks on the adequacy and robustness of a proposed utilitarian evaluation.", "findings": [ { "id": "recommendation-robustness", "name": "Recommendation robustness", "description": "Record the feasible alternatives, omitted effects and assumptions that determine whether a recommendation is warranted.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which feasible alternatives, affected parties, indirect effects and opportunity costs must be included before recommending an option?", "kind": "action", "id": "recommendation-robustness-q01" }, { "text": "Which changes in welfare estimates, probabilities or aggregation assumptions reverse the ranking, and how should that instability qualify the recommendation?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "recommendation-robustness-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes", "name": "Check these first", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "The sense described is an ethical doctrine and family of theories, not a standalone academic discipline or an everyday preference for usefulness.", "The listed kinds represent intersecting distinctions about moral rules, the nature of welfare, and aggregation; they are not mutually exclusive categories.", "No sources were consulted; utilitarianism has no universally accepted numerical welfare scale, and a research pass should distinguish particular authors' formulations." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of utilitarianism this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Act utilitarianism", "Rule utilitarianism", "Hedonistic utilitarianism", "Preference utilitarianism", "Total utilitarianism", "Average utilitarianism" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of utilitarianism this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Evaluating public policies by their consequences for overall well-being.", "Informing debates about health-resource allocation and population health.", "Supporting ethical arguments concerning animal welfare and the interests of sentient beings.", "Guiding debates about charitable giving and the comparative benefits of interventions.", "Analyzing obligations to future generations." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of utilitarianism this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Interpersonal comparisons and aggregation of well-being may lack an agreed measurement basis.", "Maximizing aggregate welfare can appear to justify violating individual rights or imposing severe burdens on minorities.", "Uncertain consequences and selective forecasting can undermine practical judgments.", "Impartial maximization can impose demanding obligations that conflict with personal projects and special relationships.", "Different aggregation rules yield disputed conclusions about population size and the welfare of future people." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of utilitarianism this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "name": "Consequentialism", "difference": "Consequentialism evaluates morality through consequences; utilitarianism specifically centers impartial aggregate well-being, whereas other consequentialist theories value additional or different outcomes." }, { "name": "Deontological ethics", "difference": "Deontological theories recognize duties or constraints that need not yield to maximizing aggregate well-being." }, { "name": "Virtue ethics", "difference": "Virtue ethics gives explanatory priority to character and virtues rather than treating their moral importance as ultimately derived from aggregate welfare." }, { "name": "Ethical egoism", "difference": "Ethical egoism privileges the agent's own good; utilitarianism counts the welfare of all affected individuals impartially." }, { "name": "Welfarism", "difference": "Welfarism makes welfare the sole basis of evaluating outcomes but does not by itself require utilitarian aggregation or maximization." }, { "name": "Cost-benefit analysis", "difference": "Cost-benefit analysis is an appraisal method, often using monetary valuations; its use does not establish a commitment to utilitarian ethics." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of utilitarianism this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Which sourced classification convention should determine whether negative, satisficing and other qualified formulations belong within this registry entry?", "Which primary formulations should anchor the model's coverage of act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism without implying that either exhausts the family?", "What interpersonal welfare comparisons can be justified for intended applications, and how should irreducible uncertainty be represented?", "How should the model represent unresolved disputes about population ethics, future welfare and uncertain moral standing without selecting one position as the default?", "Does the existing world-model catalogue already cover utilitarianism or an equivalent concept that this registry entry should reference?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 15, "questions": 25 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "discipline or field of knowledge", "method": "Written from the archetype playbook - what this kind of thing needs beyond identity and provenance - and from the structure that recurred across 6,333 models already researched by two engines. Applied to this entry by rule. No source was read for this thing and no claim here is researched. This entry carries no facets of its own, so they were inferred from its domain - a guess about a whole domain applied to one thing.", "facetsInferred": true, "nextPass": "A researcher replaces this draft with a sourced specification. Treat every sentence below as a proposal to argue with.", "purpose": "Give an agent a durable, checkable way to recognise a utilitarianism, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an agent to recognise a utilitarian ethical position, assess how completely its commitments are specified, and determine which evaluations or recommendations those commitments support.", "characteristics": { "substance": "information", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "read and interpreted" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Names folded into this entry, which a task may need to split apart again: negative utilitarianism, act utilitarianism, Preference ulilitarianism, rule utilitarianism, two-level utilitarianism.", "5 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 86 Wikipedia languages, which is a measure of how widely the thing is known, not of how important it is." ], "openQuestionsForResearch": [ "Which of the bundles below does a real task actually need, and which are ceremony?", "What does this thing have that the facets do not capture at all?", "Which neighbouring kind is most often confused with a utilitarianism, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "content that has to be carried by something else", "physicalCharacter": [ "Does nothing on its own; everything it does, something else did to it.", "These come from the domain this entry sits in rather than from the entry itself, so treat them as a first guess about the whole domain applied to one thing." ], "whatCanBeDoneWithIt": [ "read it and act on what it says" ], "howItIsRecognised": [], "relatedModels": [ { "relation": "covers", "note": "Finer kinds folded into this entry because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it. Each is a model waiting to be split out when one does.", "targets": [ "negative utilitarianism", "act utilitarianism", "Preference ulilitarianism", "rule utilitarianism", "two-level utilitarianism" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 86 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 5 finer distinctions are held inside this entry as names rather than as separate models.", "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "identity-and-classification", "name": "Identity, naming and classification", "description": "How an agent tells one utilitarianism from another, and a utilitarianism from things that resemble it.", "rationale": "Recognition comes before every other claim. Without stable identity nothing else in the model can be trusted to be about the same thing twice.", "layers": [ { "id": "naming-and-identifiers", "name": "Names and identifiers", "description": "The names this thing goes by and the identifiers that survive translation and time.", "findings": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases", "name": "Preferred name, aliases and local names", "description": "Which name to use, which names mean the same thing, and which merely sound similar.", "questions": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the name of a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the name of a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the name of a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers", "name": "Stable identifiers and external keys", "description": "Identifiers that keep pointing at this kind of thing across systems and languages.", "questions": [ { "id": "stable-identifiers-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an identifier for a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an identifier for a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an identifier for a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification-and-granularity", "name": "Classification and granularity", "description": "Where a utilitarianism sits among kinds, and how finely a task needs to cut it.", "findings": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents", "name": "Kind, parents and neighbouring kinds", "description": "The classes this thing belongs to and the ones it is next to.", "questions": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the kind of a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the kind of a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the kind of a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features", "name": "Distinguishing features", "description": "What separates a utilitarianism from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about what distinguishes a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once what distinguishes a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "state-and-lifecycle", "name": "State and lifecycle", "description": "The states a utilitarianism passes through and the events that move it between them.", "rationale": "Most decisions about a thing depend on what state it is in now, which is a claim with a time on it, not a property.", "layers": [ { "id": "lifecycle-stages", "name": "Lifecycle stages", "description": "From coming into existence to ceasing to be one of these.", "findings": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions", "name": "Stages and transitions", "description": "The stages worth naming and what moves a utilitarianism between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the lifecycle of a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the lifecycle of a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "observations-and-status", "name": "Observations and current status", "description": "What is observed about a utilitarianism, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a utilitarianism is recorded so that it can be superseded rather than overwritten.", "questions": [ { "id": "observation-record-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an observation of a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an observation of a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an observation of a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "content-and-access", "name": "Content, encoding and access", "description": "What a utilitarianism says, how it is encoded and who may read it.", "rationale": "An informational thing carries content that can be copied, versioned and withheld, none of which its physical carrier explains.", "layers": [ { "id": "content-and-encoding", "name": "Content and encoding", "description": "The content itself, its format and its language.", "findings": [ { "id": "content-and-format", "name": "Content, format and language", "description": "What a utilitarianism contains and in what form it is held.", "questions": [ { "id": "content-and-format-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the content of a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "content-and-format-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the content of a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "content-and-format-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the content of a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "access-and-rights", "name": "Access, rights and retention", "description": "Who may read, copy or change it, and for how long it is kept.", "findings": [ { "id": "access-rules", "name": "Access rules and retention", "description": "The permissions attached to a utilitarianism and the period it survives.", "questions": [ { "id": "access-rules-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes access to a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "access-rules-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about access to a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "access-rules-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once access to a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "subject-and-method", "name": "Subject matter and method", "description": "What utilitarianism studies and how it establishes anything.", "rationale": "A field is identified by its questions and its methods, and those are what distinguish it from the fields next to it.", "layers": [ { "id": "subject", "name": "Subject matter", "description": "The questions it takes as its own.", "findings": [ { "id": "subject-record", "name": "Questions and objects of study", "description": "What it is about, stated so a neighbouring field can be told apart.", "questions": [ { "id": "subject-record-q01", "text": "What questions and objects does utilitarianism take as its own?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "subject-record-q02", "text": "Which questions does it share with a neighbouring field, and who claims them?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "method", "name": "Method and evidence", "description": "How claims are established and what counts as evidence.", "findings": [ { "id": "method-record", "name": "Methods and standards of evidence", "description": "The methods used and what they are taken to establish.", "questions": [ { "id": "method-record-q01", "text": "By what methods does utilitarianism establish claims, and what counts as sufficient evidence?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "method-record-q02", "text": "What kind of claim can this field not settle, and where should an agent look instead?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "institutions-and-classification", "name": "Institutions and classification", "description": "Where utilitarianism is practised and how catalogues place it.", "rationale": "The institutional footprint is the evidence that a field exists as a field rather than as a topic.", "layers": [ { "id": "institutions", "name": "Institutional markers", "description": "Societies, journals, degrees and departments.", "findings": [ { "id": "institution-record", "name": "Bodies and venues", "description": "Where the field organises itself.", "questions": [ { "id": "institution-record-q01", "text": "Which societies, journals or degrees mark utilitarianism as an established field?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "institution-record-q02", "text": "What would show that it is emerging or dissolving rather than established?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification", "name": "Classification schemes", "description": "Where library and research classifications put it.", "findings": [ { "id": "classification-record", "name": "Codes and their disagreements", "description": "The classification codes that place it, and where they differ.", "questions": [ { "id": "classification-record-q01", "text": "Which classification schemes place utilitarianism, under what codes?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "classification-record-q02", "text": "Where do those schemes disagree about its scope?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a utilitarianism came from and when it held.", "rationale": "A claim without a source and a time cannot be superseded, only overwritten, and an agent that overwrites loses the ability to explain itself.", "layers": [ { "id": "source-and-authority", "name": "Source and authority", "description": "Who said it, on what evidence, and how strongly.", "findings": [ { "id": "claim-provenance", "name": "Claim provenance and confidence", "description": "The authority behind each claim about a utilitarianism and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a claim about a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a claim about a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "time-and-versions", "name": "Time, versions and supersession", "description": "When a claim was true, when it was learnt, and what replaced it.", "findings": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession", "name": "Validity period and supersession", "description": "How an old claim about a utilitarianism is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a utilitarianism, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the validity of a claim about a utilitarianism, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the validity of a claim about a utilitarianism is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 12, "findings": 14, "questions": 38 } } } }