{ "model": { "rank": 3173, "code": "thing-q183225", "model_id": "vr.tr.toleration", "name": "toleration", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise toleration, assess whether objection and deliberate restraint coexist, and determine which responses remain available within the tolerator's authority and stated limits.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Activities and processes", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "ACT", "domain": "ACT.ACT", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q183225/", "tier": 2, "score": 90, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "tolerance in islam", "religious toleration", "pain tolerance", "superhuman pain tolerance" ], "aliasCount": 4, "merged": 4, "knownIn": 90, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q183225", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q183225", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-07T15:12:10Z", "providers": [ "Codex", "Grok" ], "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "usd": 0.00418608, "turns": 1, "seconds": 59.1, "error": null }, "codex": { "seconds": 73, "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: 01a07c6c-0006-77f1-9327-6ebe11fe801d\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: toleration\nRegistry id: vr.tr.toleration\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\nA V" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q183225", "registryId": "vr.tr.toleration", "name": "toleration", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q183225/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.toleration", "name": "toleration", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise toleration, assess whether objection and deliberate restraint coexist, and determine which responses remain available within the tolerator's authority and stated limits.", "definition": "Toleration is the practiced forbearance of a conduct, belief, or person that an authority or majority still judges false, harmful, or otherwise disapproved, without converting that forbearance into endorsement or into a right of the tolerated party.", "scope_statement": "This model owns acts, practices and policies of toleration: an actor's qualified decision to allow or refrain from interfering with something they object to, including its grounds, practical alternatives, conditions and effects.", "in_scope": [ "The tolerating actor, the tolerated conduct or difference, and the people affected", "The objection that distinguishes toleration from approval or indifference", "The actor's capacity to interfere and decision to exercise restraint", "Reasons, conditions and limits governing continued toleration", "Changes in toleration and their effects on those subject to it" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Approval, endorsement or celebration without a continuing objection", "Biological tolerance, engineering tolerances and statistical tolerances", "The complete moral or legal evaluation of the tolerated conduct", "The full rights, jurisdiction or institutional authority framework", "General conflict resolution, reconciliation and forgiveness" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "There is an identifiable objection to the tolerated object; mere lack of interest does not establish toleration.", "The actor allows the object to continue or deliberately withholds interference despite that objection; objection alone is opposition.", "Some meaningful alternative to restraint is available; inability to interfere must be distinguished from a decision not to interfere.", "The restraint has a discernible basis or policy; silence alone cannot establish whether toleration, ignorance or indecision explains noninterference.", "Acceptance is qualified: allowing a practice does not by itself imply endorsing it, forgiving a past act or recognising a right to perform it." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Tolerating actor", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Person, group or institution exercising the restraint", "why_it_matters": "Identifies whose objection, choices and authority support the attribution of toleration." }, { "name": "Object of toleration", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Specified conduct, expression, belief, practice or difference in a stated context", "why_it_matters": "Prevents a narrow permission from being interpreted as acceptance of everything associated with a person or group." }, { "name": "Objection basis", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Moral, religious, prudential, aesthetic, conventional, mixed, other or unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Makes the continuing objection inspectable without treating it as justified." }, { "name": "Interference capacity", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Available, constrained, unavailable or unknown, with feasible actions identified", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes chosen restraint from inability to act." }, { "name": "Authority to interfere", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Established, limited, contested, absent or unknown for each proposed intervention", "why_it_matters": "Separates practical power from legitimate permission to use it." }, { "name": "Grounds for restraint", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Respect, reciprocity, coexistence, proportionality, uncertainty, prudence, obligation, mixed or unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Explains why the actor refrains and which changes could affect that decision." }, { "name": "Restraint mode", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Explicit permission, deliberate noninterference, selective nonenforcement or another specified practice", "why_it_matters": "Clarifies what the actor actually withholds or permits." }, { "name": "Toleration status", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Proposed, operative, under review, suspended, withdrawn, superseded or uncertain", "why_it_matters": "Allows an agent to distinguish a current arrangement from a promise or past practice." }, { "name": "Review interval", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Elapsed days between scheduled reviews, or explicitly unscheduled", "why_it_matters": "Shows when a conditional arrangement should be reassessed." } ], "affordances": [ "Assess whether observed noninterference supports an attribution of toleration or requires another explanation.", "Record the precise tolerated object, continuing objection and grounds for restraint.", "Compare feasible interventions with the actor's authority and reasons for withholding them.", "Clarify conditions, exceptions and review triggers without implying unrestricted approval.", "Evaluate a proposed continuation, revision or withdrawal against evidence, rights constraints and effects on affected people." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "lock-1689", "title": "A Letter Concerning Toleration", "url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7370", "what_it_supports": "Classical liberal definition: civil magistrate must not coerce conscience; church and commonwealth have distinct ends.", "url_status": "live" }, { "id": "sep-toleration", "title": "Toleration (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)", "url": "https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/toleration/", "what_it_supports": "Analytic definition (objection + acceptance + power to interfere), kinds, neighbours (indifference, recognition, endorsement), and regional/philosophical variation.", "url_status": "live" }, { "id": "iep-toleration", "title": "Toleration (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "", "url_status": "dead" }, { "id": "unesco-1995", "title": "Declaration of Principles on Tolerance", "url": "https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/declaration-principles-tolerance", "what_it_supports": "International-law framing that distinguishes tolerance as a duty of states and persons from mere sufferance, and names 16 November as International Day for Tolerance.", "url_status": "live" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "object-and-objection", "name": "Object and objection", "description": "Establishes what is being tolerated and what the actor objects to.", "rationale": "Without a specific object and continuing objection, toleration is easily confused with approval, indifference or a vague attitude toward a group.", "layers": [ { "id": "tolerated-object", "name": "Tolerated object", "description": "Locates the conduct or difference to which restraint applies.", "findings": [ { "id": "object-specificity", "name": "Object specificity", "description": "Records the precise object and context without extending the attribution to an entire person or community.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which conduct, expression, belief, practice or difference is the actor allowing to persist?", "kind": "definition", "id": "object-specificity-q01" }, { "text": "Which associated activities or people fall outside this particular toleration?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "object-specificity-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "continuing-objection", "name": "Continuing objection", "description": "Identifies disapproval that remains present alongside restraint.", "findings": [ { "id": "objection-evidence", "name": "Objection evidence", "description": "Separates the actor's stated or evidenced objection from an observer's assumption.", "questions": [ { "text": "What does the actor judge objectionable about this object?", "kind": "definition", "id": "objection-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "Which statements or actions establish that the objection persists during the period of restraint?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "objection-evidence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "power-and-restraint", "name": "Power and restraint", "description": "Examines whether noninterference represents a meaningful choice and what interference is withheld.", "rationale": "An actor's failure to suppress something does not by itself establish toleration.", "layers": [ { "id": "interference-alternatives", "name": "Interference alternatives", "description": "Distinguishes feasible intervention from hypothetical power and legitimate authority.", "findings": [ { "id": "capacity-and-authority", "name": "Capacity and authority", "description": "Records available interventions separately from whether the actor is entitled to undertake them.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which concrete forms of interference could the actor realistically undertake?", "kind": "action", "id": "capacity-and-authority-q01" }, { "text": "For each feasible intervention, what establishes or limits the actor's authority to act?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "capacity-and-authority-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "chosen-noninterference", "name": "Chosen noninterference", "description": "Identifies restraint attributable to a decision or established practice.", "findings": [ { "id": "restraint-attribution", "name": "Restraint attribution", "description": "Tests whether observed allowance reflects toleration rather than ignorance, incapacity, delay or oversight.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which evidence shows that the actor knowingly withholds interference despite the objection?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "restraint-attribution-q01" }, { "text": "Which alternative explanations for noninterference remain plausible?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "restraint-attribution-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "grounds-and-standing", "name": "Grounds and standing", "description": "Explains why restraint is maintained and how the arrangement positions those whose conduct is tolerated.", "rationale": "Toleration based on discretionary permission can have different implications from restraint grounded in equal standing or acknowledged rights.", "layers": [ { "id": "reasons-for-restraint", "name": "Reasons for restraint", "description": "Records the considerations supporting allowance despite objection.", "findings": [ { "id": "reason-balance", "name": "Reason balance", "description": "Makes explicit how the actor relates reasons for interference to reasons for restraint.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which reasons does the actor give for allowing what they continue to object to?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "reason-balance-q01" }, { "text": "What change in those reasons would warrant reconsidering restraint according to the actor's stated position?", "kind": "action", "id": "reason-balance-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "position-of-the-tolerated", "name": "Position of the tolerated", "description": "Examines whether those affected depend on permission or can invoke an independent entitlement.", "findings": [ { "id": "permission-and-entitlement", "name": "Permission and entitlement", "description": "Distinguishes the tolerator's framing from the standing claimed or held by those subject to it.", "questions": [ { "text": "Is the allowance presented as a revocable concession, reciprocal accommodation or recognition of an entitlement?", "kind": "definition", "id": "permission-and-entitlement-q01" }, { "text": "Do affected people contest the actor's claimed discretion to permit or prohibit the object?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "permission-and-entitlement-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "limits-and-revision", "name": "Limits and revision", "description": "Defines where toleration applies and how it may change.", "rationale": "Qualified restraint requires intelligible limits and a way to assess proposed exceptions or withdrawal.", "layers": [ { "id": "conditions-of-allowance", "name": "Conditions of allowance", "description": "Specifies the circumstances within which objection is accompanied by restraint.", "findings": [ { "id": "toleration-boundary", "name": "Toleration boundary", "description": "Records conditions and exceptions without assuming that every asserted limit is justified.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which settings, forms of conduct and conditions are covered by the allowance?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "toleration-boundary-q01" }, { "text": "What observable evidence would establish that a stated limit has been crossed?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "toleration-boundary-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "review-and-withdrawal", "name": "Review and withdrawal", "description": "Tracks proposed changes to restraint and the process for evaluating them.", "findings": [ { "id": "revision-grounds", "name": "Revision grounds", "description": "Connects continuation, restriction or withdrawal to stated triggers, decision authority and opportunities to contest the change.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who may revise the arrangement, on what grounds, and subject to which constraints?", "kind": "action", "id": "revision-grounds-q01" }, { "text": "What notice, explanation or opportunity to contest a proposed withdrawal is available to affected people?", "kind": "action", "id": "revision-grounds-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "practice-and-effects", "name": "Practice and effects", "description": "Assesses how declared toleration operates and what it means for affected people.", "rationale": "An allowance can be nominal, inconsistently applied or accompanied by burdens that materially undermine the promised restraint.", "layers": [ { "id": "enacted-restraint", "name": "Enacted restraint", "description": "Compares declared allowance with actual treatment of the tolerated object.", "findings": [ { "id": "declaration-practice-consistency", "name": "Declaration and practice consistency", "description": "Records instances of noninterference and intervention, including indirect penalties and inconsistent application.", "questions": [ { "text": "Across observed instances, when was the object allowed and when did the actor interfere?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "declaration-practice-consistency-q01" }, { "text": "Do indirect sanctions or selectively imposed conditions undermine the declared allowance?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "declaration-practice-consistency-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "experienced-consequences", "name": "Experienced consequences", "description": "Records the practical security, burdens and wider effects associated with the arrangement.", "findings": [ { "id": "security-and-burdens", "name": "Security and burdens", "description": "Examines whether people can rely on the restraint and which consequences are evidenced rather than assumed.", "questions": [ { "text": "What evidence shows whether affected people can rely on the allowance when deciding how to act?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "security-and-burdens-q01" }, { "text": "Which benefits, burdens or harms to participants and third parties are attributable to this arrangement, and with what uncertainty?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "security-and-burdens-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-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "religious toleration", "political and civic toleration", "legal-institutional toleration", "social and interpersonal toleration", "negative vs positive toleration", "modus-vivendi (pragmatic) toleration", "principled or respect-based toleration" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of toleration this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-identifiers", "name": "Identifiers and schemes", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "scheme": "Wikidata", "value_or_pattern": "Q181708", "note": "item 'toleration' (English label); aliases include 'tolerance' in some languages" }, { "scheme": "Library of Congress Subject Headings", "value_or_pattern": "sh85135882", "note": "LCSH 'Toleration'; related headings Religious tolerance, Liberty of conscience" }, { "scheme": "UNESCO Thesaurus", "value_or_pattern": "concept of tolerance / MT 6.05", "note": "used in education and human-rights documentation; English preferred term often 'tolerance'" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of toleration this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation", "name": "Standards and regulation", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "UNESCO Declaration of Principles on Tolerance (16 November 1995), UNESCO General Conference", "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, arts. 18-19 and 27 (freedom of thought, expression, minorities), UN General Assembly / Human Rights Committee", "European Convention on Human Rights, arts. 9-10 and 14, Council of Europe", "U.S. First Amendment (religion and speech clauses) and related case law on establishment, free exercise, and viewpoint neutrality", "EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, arts. 10-11 and 21, European Union" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation-q01", "text": "Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of toleration this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "State policy toward dissenting religions, sects, and non-belief (permits, registration of houses of worship, blasphemy and apostasy rules, conscientious objection).", "Workplace and school codes that require non-interference with colleagues' protected beliefs or identities while not requiring agreement.", "Legislative and judicial balancing of public-order, equality, and speech/religion claims (hate-speech limits, reasonable accommodation, exemptions).", "Peace settlements and modus-vivendi arrangements after confessional or ethnic conflict (e.g. millet-type communal autonomy, consociational power-sharing).", "Civil-society campaigns and UNESCO/UN 'International Day for Tolerance' (16 November) programming." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of toleration this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "legal protection of religious freedom (composite indices)", "typical_range": "0-10 (Pew Government Restrictions Index) or 0-1 (V-Dem religious freedom)", "unit": "index score" }, { "quantity": "incidence of reported hate crimes / bias-motivated incidents", "typical_range": "highly jurisdiction-specific; often tens to thousands per year in large democracies", "unit": "count per year (or per 100,000 population)" }, { "quantity": "surveyed social distance / willingness to have a disliked group as neighbour", "typical_range": "0-100 percent of respondents", "unit": "percent" }, { "quantity": "scope of legally tolerated dissent (number of registered denominations, banned organisations)", "typical_range": "from 1 official confession to hundreds of recognised groups", "unit": "count of recognised groups" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of toleration this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Repressive tolerance: forbearance used as a public-relations cover while informal or administrative sanctions continue.", "Paradox of toleration: extending forbearance to intolerant movements that, if successful, abolish the practice.", "Collapse into indifference or relativism, so that harms that should be prohibited are mislabelled as 'to be tolerated'.", "Majority backlash when toleration is read as endorsement, producing new restrictions.", "Unequal application: some groups receive legal sufferance, others do not, generating second-class civic status.", "Chilling of legitimate criticism when 'intolerance' is used as a speech-stopper rather than a description of coercive interference." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of toleration this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "English-language political theory often distinguishes 'toleration' (the practice of forbearance) from 'tolerance' (the attitude); many other languages (French tolérance, German Toleranz, Spanish tolerancia) use one word for both.", "Ottoman millet and some contemporary personal-status systems tolerate communal legal pluralism; French laïcité frames the same problem as state neutrality and public-space restriction.", "Blasphemy, apostasy, and conversion remain criminal in parts of the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia; they are largely decriminalised in most of Europe and the Americas.", "U.S. First Amendment doctrine is comparatively speech-protective; many European jurisdictions couple religious/political toleration with hate-speech and militant-democracy limits." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of toleration this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "name": "indifference", "difference": "Indifference lacks the objection component: the agent does not disapprove. Toleration requires continued negative judgement plus withheld interference." }, { "name": "recognition / respect", "difference": "Recognition treats the other as entitled to equal standing or as valuable; toleration can remain hierarchical and grudging while still withholding coercion." }, { "name": "endorsement / affirmation", "difference": "Endorsement converts the once-disapproved practice into something the authority recommends or celebrates; toleration stops short of that conversion." }, { "name": "permission / licence", "difference": "A legal permission may be a vehicle of toleration, but a permission can also rest on approval or on indifference; the test is whether the grantor still objects." }, { "name": "engineering tolerance (dimensional allowance)", "difference": "A manufacturing or design tolerance is a permitted deviation from a nominal measure (e.g. ±0.1 mm); it is not a social or political practice of forbearance. Different lemma in careful English." }, { "name": "immunological / pharmacological tolerance", "difference": "Biological tolerance is reduced responsiveness after repeated exposure (e.g. drug tachyphylaxis, oral immune tolerance); mechanism is physiological, not a withheld use of power." }, { "name": "Kubernetes toleration", "difference": "A pod spec field matching a node taint so the scheduler may place the pod; a cluster API object, not a civic practice. Identifier: Kubernetes core/v1 Toleration." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of toleration this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does this registry entry cover individual acts, enduring dispositions and institutional policies equally, or should one be its primary unit?", "Is practical capacity to interfere necessary for toleration, or can a disposition to refrain qualify when no intervention is currently possible?", "When noninterference is legally required, under what conditions should an actor's continuing objection and restraint still count as toleration?", "How should collective objection and restraint be attributed when an institution's members disagree or its enforcement practices diverge from policy?", "Where should this model draw the boundary between toleration, respect, accommodation and endurance under pressure?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 18, "questions": 28 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "abstract concept", "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 toleration, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an agent to recognise toleration, assess whether objection and deliberate restraint coexist, and determine which responses remain available within the tolerator's authority and stated limits.", "characteristics": { "substance": "activity", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "observed and measured" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Names folded into this entry, which a task may need to split apart again: tolerance in islam, religious toleration, pain tolerance, superhuman pain tolerance.", "4 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 90 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 toleration, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "something that happens over time", "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": [ "observe it, measure it, record its state" ], "howItIsRecognised": [ "Nothing to see. What is recognised is an instance of it, and which instances count is exactly what is argued about." ], "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": [ "tolerance in islam", "religious toleration", "pain tolerance", "superhuman pain tolerance" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 90 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 4 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 toleration from another, and a toleration 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 toleration, 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 toleration, 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 toleration 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 toleration, 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 toleration, 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 toleration 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 toleration 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 toleration, 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 toleration, 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 toleration 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 toleration from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a toleration, 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 toleration, 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 toleration 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 toleration 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 toleration between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a toleration, 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 toleration, 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 toleration 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 toleration, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a toleration 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 toleration, 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 toleration, 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 toleration is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "process-and-outcome", "name": "Process, inputs and outcome", "description": "How a toleration proceeds, what it needs and what it leaves behind.", "rationale": "An activity is known by its steps and its results, and both have to be recordable while it is still running.", "layers": [ { "id": "steps-and-sequence", "name": "Steps and sequence", "description": "The steps of a toleration, their order and what may run in parallel.", "findings": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions", "name": "Steps, preconditions and completion", "description": "What has to be true before each step of a toleration and what marks it done.", "questions": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a step of a toleration, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a step of a toleration, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a step of a toleration is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-results", "name": "Inputs, resources and results", "description": "What a toleration consumes and what it produces.", "findings": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs", "name": "Inputs, outputs and side effects", "description": "The resources a toleration takes and the results it leaves, wanted or not.", "questions": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the inputs and results of a toleration, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the inputs and results of a toleration, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the inputs and results of a toleration is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "definitions-in-contest", "name": "Definitions and who holds them", "description": "What toleration is taken to mean, and by whom.", "rationale": "When a field disagrees about a concept, the disagreement is the content. A model that picks one definition silently destroys the information.", "layers": [ { "id": "competing-definitions", "name": "Competing definitions", "description": "The main readings and the traditions behind them.", "findings": [ { "id": "definition-map", "name": "Definitions and their holders", "description": "Each definition with the school or body that holds it.", "questions": [ { "id": "definition-map-q01", "text": "Which definitions of toleration are in use, and which tradition or body holds each?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "definition-map-q02", "text": "What turns on the difference between them in practice?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "operationalisation", "name": "Operationalisation", "description": "How it is measured or applied when it has to be.", "findings": [ { "id": "operational-record", "name": "Measures and proxies", "description": "Instruments and indicators used to stand in for it.", "questions": [ { "id": "operational-record-q01", "text": "How is toleration operationalised or measured in practice, and by what instrument?", "kind": "measurement" }, { "id": "operational-record-q02", "text": "What does that operationalisation leave out, and when does that matter?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "instances-and-use", "name": "Instances, use and consequence", "description": "What counts as an instance of toleration and what follows from calling something that.", "rationale": "Applying a concept is an act with consequences, so a model must say what the label licenses and what it does not.", "layers": [ { "id": "instances", "name": "What counts as an instance", "description": "Clear cases, borderline cases and non-cases.", "findings": [ { "id": "instance-tests", "name": "Tests for an instance", "description": "What would settle whether something falls under it.", "questions": [ { "id": "instance-tests-q01", "text": "What would settle whether something is an instance of toleration?", "kind": "boundary" }, { "id": "instance-tests-q02", "text": "Which borderline cases are argued about, and on what grounds?", "kind": "definition" } ] } ] }, { "id": "consequence", "name": "Consequence of application", "description": "Rights, duties or decisions that follow from the label.", "findings": [ { "id": "consequence-record", "name": "What the label licenses", "description": "What an agent may do once something is classified this way.", "questions": [ { "id": "consequence-record-q01", "text": "What follows practically once something is treated as toleration?", "kind": "action" }, { "id": "consequence-record-q02", "text": "What must an agent not infer from the label alone?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a toleration 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 toleration and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a toleration, 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 toleration, 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 toleration 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 toleration is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a toleration, 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 toleration, 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 toleration 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 } } } }