{ "model": { "rank": 6056, "code": "thing-q192121", "model_id": "vr.tr.teleology", "name": "teleology", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to identify, assess and use explanations that make an end, purpose or function relevant to why something exists, occurs or is organised.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Information and virtual systems", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "INF", "domain": "INF.KNW", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q192121/", "tier": 2, "score": 63, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "teleology in biology" ], "aliasCount": 1, "merged": 1, "knownIn": 63, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q192121", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q192121", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-07T11:14:50Z", "providers": [ "Codex", "Grok" ], "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "usd": 0.00548216, "turns": 1, "seconds": 21, "error": null }, "codex": { "seconds": 72.4, "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: 01a07b92-e184-7420-af92-f9405b61c51d\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: teleology\nRegistry id: vr.tr.teleology\nPlane / domain: INF / INF.KNW\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\nA Ver" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q192121", "registryId": "vr.tr.teleology", "name": "teleology", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "INF.KNW" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q192121/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.teleology", "name": "teleology", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to identify, assess and use explanations that make an end, purpose or function relevant to why something exists, occurs or is organised.", "definition": "Teleology is the study of purpose, ends, or goal-directedness in nature, artifacts, and explanation, treating outcomes as that for the sake of which a process, organ, or action occurs.", "scope_statement": "This model owns the structure, interpretation, warrant and limits of a teleological account, including what it explains, the end it invokes and the relationship asserted between them.", "in_scope": [ "The phenomenon explained and the end, purpose or function invoked", "The explanatory role attributed to an end", "Whether purpose is intended, attributed, intrinsic or otherwise interpreted", "Evidence and alternatives relevant to a teleological account", "Conditions under which an account supports interpretation, prediction or intervention" ], "out_of_scope": [ "An agent's goals, preferences and commitments as independently managed objects", "Plans, tasks and workflows for achieving an objective", "Complete causal models of the mechanisms producing an outcome", "Ethical theories establishing which ends ought to be pursued", "Biological traits and evolutionary histories independent of their use in a functional explanation", "Historical schools and texts except as sources for a particular teleological account" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "An account is teleological when an end helps explain the phenomenon; merely reporting that an outcome followed it is insufficient.", "An intended purpose requires support for intention or design; beneficial consequences alone do not establish that purpose.", "A goal describes a sought state, while a teleological account connects an end to why something exists, acts or has its organisation.", "A functional explanation must distinguish the role used to explain a feature from other effects that feature happens to produce.", "Explaining conduct through an end does not by itself establish that the end is morally justified or should guide an agent's actions." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Explanatory target", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Account → action, process, trait, artefact, institution or other specified phenomenon", "why_it_matters": "Identifies what the appeal to purpose is supposed to explain." }, { "name": "Invoked end", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Account → specified outcome, activity, condition or continuing mode of operation", "why_it_matters": "Makes the proposed purpose explicit enough to distinguish it from observed consequences." }, { "name": "Interpretation of purpose", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Proposed labels: intentional, design-based, selection-based, organisational, intrinsic, heuristic, mixed, unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Different interpretations require different evidence and should not silently substitute for one another." }, { "name": "Role of the end", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Proposed labels: explains origin, persistence, organisation, behaviour, interpretation; multiple roles may apply", "why_it_matters": "An account that explains current operation may leave historical origin unexplained." }, { "name": "End attainment", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Achieved, partially achieved, not achieved, ongoing, indeterminate, not applicable; assessed against an explicit criterion", "why_it_matters": "Separates whether an end is realised from whether it is a warranted explanatory attribution." }, { "name": "Attribution warrant", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Unassessed, supported within stated bounds, contested, undermined, unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Controls how confidently an agent may rely on the account without treating interpretive agreement as proof." }, { "name": "Competing ends", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Account → alternative or concurrent ends, with bearer and context specified", "why_it_matters": "Prevents a single purpose from concealing conflicts between actors, organisational levels or historical periods." } ], "affordances": [ "Extract the phenomenon, proposed end and explanatory connection from a statement.", "Compare intentional, functional and other readings of the same purpose claim.", "Audit whether evidence supports the attributed end and its claimed explanatory role.", "Identify observations or counterfactuals that distinguish a purpose attribution from a retrospective story.", "Revise, narrow or suspend an attribution when its evidence or context changes.", "Assess what predictions or interventions an account supports while keeping action authorization separate." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "sep-teleological-notions", "title": "Teleological Notions in Biology", "url": "https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleology-biology/", "what_it_supports": "Core definition, biological kinds, distinction from teleonomy, and neighbour concepts.", "url_status": "live" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "end-and-explanandum", "name": "End and explanandum", "description": "Specify what is being explained and how an end enters that explanation.", "rationale": "A model must distinguish an actual purpose-based explanation from a goal statement or a description of consequences.", "layers": [ { "id": "phenomenon-to-explain", "name": "Phenomenon to explain", "description": "Locate the feature of the subject for which an explanation is offered.", "findings": [ { "id": "explanatory-target-and-contrast", "name": "Explanatory target and contrast", "description": "Record whether the account explains existence, persistence, organisation or behaviour, and what alternative it addresses.", "questions": [ { "text": "What precisely is being explained by reference to an end?", "kind": "definition", "id": "explanatory-target-and-contrast-q01" }, { "text": "Why this phenomenon rather than which specified alternative?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "explanatory-target-and-contrast-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "end-specification", "name": "End specification", "description": "Make the proposed end and its realisation criteria explicit.", "findings": [ { "id": "purpose-versus-consequence", "name": "Purpose versus consequence", "description": "Distinguish the outcome or activity invoked as explanatory from incidental effects.", "questions": [ { "text": "What outcome, activity or continuing condition constitutes the proposed end?", "kind": "definition", "id": "purpose-versus-consequence-q01" }, { "text": "What would count as realising that end, and which observed consequences would not count?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "purpose-versus-consequence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "purpose-attribution", "name": "Purpose attribution", "description": "Identify whose purpose is asserted and what interpretation gives that attribution meaning.", "rationale": "Teleological language can conceal shifts between intention, function and an interpreter's chosen perspective.", "layers": [ { "id": "bearer-and-attributor", "name": "Bearer and attributor", "description": "Separate the subject to which purpose is attributed from whoever makes the attribution.", "findings": [ { "id": "attribution-position", "name": "Attribution position", "description": "Record the claimed purpose bearer, the person or account attributing it and any identified beneficiary.", "questions": [ { "text": "To what entity is this purpose attributed, and who makes the attribution?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attribution-position-q01" }, { "text": "Is the beneficiary also the purpose bearer, or has benefit to one entity been treated as another entity's purpose?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "attribution-position-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "interpretation-of-purpose", "name": "Interpretation of purpose", "description": "State what the account means by purpose without presuming conscious intention.", "findings": [ { "id": "basis-of-purposiveness", "name": "Basis of purposiveness", "description": "Record whether the attribution appeals to intention, design, selection, organisation, intrinsic ends or an interpretive heuristic.", "questions": [ { "text": "What interpretation of purpose does this account explicitly require?", "kind": "definition", "id": "basis-of-purposiveness-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence supports that interpretation rather than merely supporting the presence of a useful effect?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "basis-of-purposiveness-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "explanatory-connection", "name": "Explanatory connection", "description": "Expose how the invoked end is supposed to explain the phenomenon.", "rationale": "Naming an end is insufficient unless the account states what connects that end to the subject's history, organisation or activity.", "layers": [ { "id": "link-and-temporality", "name": "Link and temporality", "description": "Record the proposed explanatory link and the temporal role of the end.", "findings": [ { "id": "how-the-end-explains", "name": "How the end explains", "description": "Distinguish an anticipated end, a historically consequential effect, an ongoing contribution and any stronger claim about final causation.", "questions": [ { "text": "Through what stated relationship does the end explain the phenomenon?", "kind": "definition", "id": "how-the-end-explains-q01" }, { "text": "Does the explanation require a represented future outcome, past effects, present organisation or another explicitly defended temporal relationship?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "how-the-end-explains-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "mechanism-and-alternatives", "name": "Mechanism and alternatives", "description": "Relate the teleological account to causal descriptions and competing explanations.", "findings": [ { "id": "explanatory-contribution", "name": "Explanatory contribution", "description": "Specify what the end-based account contributes and whether its causal commitments are supported.", "questions": [ { "text": "What does reference to the end explain beyond the accompanying description of mechanisms or regularities?", "kind": "definition", "id": "explanatory-contribution-q01" }, { "text": "Which competing explanation could account for the same observations without this purpose attribution?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "explanatory-contribution-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "warrant-failure-and-revision", "name": "Warrant, failure and revision", "description": "Assess support for the account and interpret failures without protecting the attribution from scrutiny.", "rationale": "Teleological accounts need criteria for distinguishing supported purpose claims from explanations fitted retrospectively to outcomes.", "layers": [ { "id": "discriminating-evidence", "name": "Discriminating evidence", "description": "Identify evidence that supports or challenges the particular explanatory attribution.", "findings": [ { "id": "support-and-defeaters", "name": "Support and defeaters", "description": "Record the evidence actually available and the observations that would require narrowing or abandoning the account.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which observations, records or arguments support this end as explanatory rather than merely compatible with events?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "support-and-defeaters-q01" }, { "text": "What finding would undermine the attribution or favour a competing end?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "support-and-defeaters-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "nonattainment-and-malfunction", "name": "Nonattainment and malfunction", "description": "Separate failure to realise an end from failure of the explanation itself.", "findings": [ { "id": "failure-interpretation", "name": "Failure interpretation", "description": "Record whether an unsuccessful outcome indicates obstruction, malfunction, changed circumstances or a mistaken purpose attribution.", "questions": [ { "text": "Against what independently stated criterion does this case count as failure or malfunction?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "failure-interpretation-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence would justify retaining, revising or withdrawing the purpose attribution after this failure?", "kind": "action", "id": "failure-interpretation-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "plurality-and-practical-use", "name": "Plurality and practical use", "description": "Bound the account across competing purposes and determine its legitimate practical implications.", "rationale": "An agent must avoid treating a local explanatory end as the sole purpose of a system or as permission to pursue that end.", "layers": [ { "id": "ends-across-levels", "name": "Ends across levels", "description": "Track multiple ends and changes in attribution across actors, system levels and periods.", "findings": [ { "id": "purpose-conflicts-and-drift", "name": "Purpose conflicts and drift", "description": "Record where original purpose, current use and wider system contributions coincide or diverge.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which ends differ between the part, the whole, its designers, its users or other relevant actors?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "purpose-conflicts-and-drift-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence shows that the attributed purpose persisted, changed or was repurposed over time?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "purpose-conflicts-and-drift-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "inference-and-intervention", "name": "Inference and intervention", "description": "Specify which uses of the explanation are warranted and which require additional premises.", "findings": [ { "id": "from-explanation-to-action", "name": "From explanation to action", "description": "Record supported predictions and intervention implications separately from preferences, obligations and authorization.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which prediction or intervention follows from this account, and what additional assumptions does it require?", "kind": "action", "id": "from-explanation-to-action-q01" }, { "text": "What independent objective and authority would justify an agent acting to preserve, alter or frustrate the attributed end?", "kind": "action", "id": "from-explanation-to-action-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": [ "Aristotelian intrinsic teleology", "external/artifact teleology", "natural-selection teleonomy", "Kantian regulative teleology", "theological teleology", "cybernetic/control-theoretic teleology", "intentional/action teleology" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of teleology 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": "Q131827", "note": "item 'teleology'" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of teleology 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": [ "Used as an explanatory stance in biology when describing organ function (e.g. 'the heart is for circulating blood').", "Used in philosophy of action to analyze means-end structure of intentional behavior.", "Used in design and systems engineering when specifying purpose of a component relative to a larger system." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of teleology 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": [ "Illicit projection of designer-intent onto unplanned natural processes.", "Confusing selected effect with original cause (adaptationist overreach).", "Using purpose-talk as if it were a causal mechanism rather than an explanatory pattern." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of teleology 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": [ "In German-language philosophy, Zweckmäßigkeit and Teleologie remain more tightly linked to Kant than in Anglophone analytic philosophy.", "Soviet and some Marxist traditions treated teleology as ideologically suspect relative to causal-material explanation." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of teleology 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": "teleonomy", "difference": "Teleonomy is apparent goal-directedness produced by selection or program, without commitment to intrinsic purpose; teleology may assert real ends." }, { "name": "etiology", "difference": "Etiology explains by origin or cause; teleology explains by end or function." }, { "name": "function (Cummins-style)", "difference": "Causal-role function is what a part contributes to a capacity; teleological function is selected or purpose-relative." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of teleology this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Should the registry entry encompass teleology as a philosophical position as well as individual teleological explanations, or should those uses be represented through distinct profiles within this model?", "How should teleonomy, selected-effect function and organisational function be related to teleology without assuming agreement between competing theoretical traditions?", "What evidence standards should apply to intrinsic or metaphysical ends when observation does not clearly distinguish them from rival accounts?", "Which criteria distinguish an explanatory function from an incidental benefit in biological, technical and institutional cases?", "When should persistent nonattainment overturn a purpose attribution, and when can historical origin or documented intention continue to support it?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 16, "questions": 26 } }, "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 teleology, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an AI agent to identify, assess and use explanations that make an end, purpose or function relevant to why something exists, occurs or is organised.", "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: teleology in biology.", "1 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 63 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 teleology, 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": [ "teleology in biology" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 63 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 1 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 teleology from another, and a teleology 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 teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology 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 teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology 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 teleology between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a teleology 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 teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology 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 teleology contains and in what form it is held.", "questions": [ { "id": "content-and-format-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the content of a teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology and the period it survives.", "questions": [ { "id": "access-rules-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes access to a teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology 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 teleology 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 teleology 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 teleology 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 teleology 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 teleology is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a teleology, 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 teleology, 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 teleology 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 } } } }