{ "model": { "rank": 5599, "code": "thing-q383258", "model_id": "vr.tr.orthodoxy", "name": "orthodoxy", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise an orthodoxy, identify whose standards it expresses, assess conformity and contestation, and determine the authority and consequences of applying it.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Society, people and institutions", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "SOC", "domain": "SOC.ORG", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q383258/", "tier": 2, "score": 66, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [], "aliasCount": 0, "merged": 0, "knownIn": 66, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": "vr.tr.orthodoxy", "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q383258", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q383258", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-09T22:44:13Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 16.5, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\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: 01a08856-ea80-7940-8f44-20a9a3126a89\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: orthodoxy\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: SOC.ORG\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 188 things:\n# Batch 006: 1001 regist", "usd": 0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 61.4, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\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: 01a08856-ea7d-7191-9273-dc8d3d46d1c4\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: orthodoxy\nRegistry id: vr.tr.orthodoxy\nPlane / domain: SOC / SOC.ORG\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\n\nCont" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q383258", "registryId": "vr.tr.orthodoxy", "name": "orthodoxy", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "SOC.ORG" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q383258/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.orthodoxy", "name": "orthodoxy", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise an orthodoxy, identify whose standards it expresses, assess conformity and contestation, and determine the authority and consequences of applying it.", "definition": "Orthodoxy is adherence to beliefs or doctrines regarded as correct or authoritative within a particular religious, intellectual, or institutional community.", "scope_statement": "This model owns orthodoxy as a socially authorised standard of correct belief or interpretation within a specified community, domain and period, including its doctrinal boundaries, recognition mechanisms and treatment of disagreement; the registry's intended relationship to capitalised religious uses remains unresolved.", "in_scope": [ "Beliefs and interpretations treated as correct, binding or presumptively authoritative", "Communities and authorities that recognise, articulate or enforce those standards", "Criteria for distinguishing required commitments, permitted variation and rejected positions", "Transmission, application and revision of orthodox standards", "Disputes over who represents orthodoxy and how continuity is established" ], "out_of_scope": [ "A church, denomination or other organisation as a legal and administrative entity", "The independent truth or falsity of every proposition accepted as orthodox", "An individual's complete beliefs, religious identity or psychological disposition", "Ritual and behavioural correctness considered independently of doctrinal commitments", "A tradition's entire cultural history, including elements without normative doctrinal status" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "An orthodoxy identifies positions treated as correct by a reference community; numerical popularity alone does not establish that status.", "Unlike a doctrine considered simply as a body of teachings, an orthodoxy entails recognised standards for accepting or rejecting interpretations.", "Unlike orthopraxy, its primary criterion concerns correct belief or interpretation, although practice may express or test those commitments.", "Unlike an institution, an orthodoxy can span several organisations and need not possess legal personality or a single governing body.", "Claims of orthodoxy require attribution to a community and period because competing groups may each claim continuity with the same authoritative tradition." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Reference community", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Community or communities for which the standard is asserted, with place and period", "why_it_matters": "Prevents a local or partisan standard from being presented as universally binding." }, { "name": "Doctrinal commitment status", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Required; permitted; disputed; rejected; unspecified, attributed to an authority", "why_it_matters": "Separates essential commitments from legitimate variation and contested classifications." }, { "name": "Basis of authority", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Authoritative text; inherited tradition; governing pronouncement; recognised interpreter; disciplinary consensus; combination; unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Shows why a position counts as orthodox and what evidence supports that status." }, { "name": "Authorised interpretation", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Commitment linked to recognised interpreters, interpretive rules and applicable community", "why_it_matters": "A shared text does not by itself establish a shared reading." }, { "name": "Recognition configuration", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Centralised; distributed; customary; competing; unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Determines whether a classification can be settled by one recognised authority." }, { "name": "Conformity assessment", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Conforming; nonconforming; contested; insufficient evidence, relative to a named standard and assessor", "why_it_matters": "Makes conformity a contextual judgement rather than an intrinsic label attached to a person or text." }, { "name": "Application consequence", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Classification linked to documented effects on teaching, membership, office, publication or standing", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes doctrinal disagreement from the institutional actions that may follow it." }, { "name": "Temporal applicability", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Currently recognised; historical; superseded; disputed; unknown, within the reference community", "why_it_matters": "Prevents present standards from being projected onto earlier disputes." } ], "affordances": [ "Map required beliefs, permitted interpretations and rejected positions for a specified community and period.", "Compare a statement with documented doctrinal criteria while retaining ambiguity and assessor attribution.", "Trace a claim of orthodoxy to its authoritative sources and recognised interpretations.", "Identify competing claims to doctrinal authority without selecting a winner by default.", "Determine which body may review a disputed teaching and which procedural limits apply.", "Track changes in doctrinal recognition while distinguishing clarification, revision and contested continuity." ] }, "sources": [], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "reference-and-boundaries", "name": "Reference and boundaries", "description": "Establishes what orthodoxy denotes in this entry and the community within which correctness is asserted.", "rationale": "Orthodoxy cannot be recognised reliably without distinguishing a normative standard from a named religious tradition or organisation.", "layers": [ { "id": "sense-and-referent", "name": "Sense and referent", "description": "Separates the general phenomenon from proper-name and institution-specific uses.", "findings": [ { "id": "intended-sense", "name": "Intended sense", "description": "Record whether the entry denotes accepted doctrine generally, a particular doctrinal tradition or a capitalised religious referent.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the registry's source identify general doctrinal orthodoxy or a particular religious tradition?", "kind": "definition", "id": "intended-sense-q01" }, { "text": "Which institutional or denominational referents must be linked separately rather than treated as this thing?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "intended-sense-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "community-and-period", "name": "Community and period", "description": "Locates the standard within its claimed social and historical reach.", "findings": [ { "id": "bounded-recognition", "name": "Bounded recognition", "description": "Record who recognises the standard, when it applies and whether that recognition is disputed.", "questions": [ { "text": "For which community, doctrinal domain and period is this position claimed to be orthodox?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "bounded-recognition-q01" }, { "text": "Whose evidence establishes recognition, and does it represent adherents, governing authorities or outside observers?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "bounded-recognition-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "doctrinal-content-and-latitude", "name": "Doctrinal content and latitude", "description": "Identifies the commitments that define correctness and the variation those commitments permit.", "rationale": "An agent must distinguish rejection of a defining commitment from disagreement that remains within orthodox bounds.", "layers": [ { "id": "required-commitments", "name": "Required commitments", "description": "Captures propositions and interpretive commitments treated as necessary.", "findings": [ { "id": "commitment-threshold", "name": "Commitment threshold", "description": "Record what must be affirmed and whether assent, public profession or qualified acceptance is required.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which propositions or interpretive commitments are explicitly required for recognition as orthodox?", "kind": "definition", "id": "commitment-threshold-q01" }, { "text": "What authoritative wording establishes the required form of acceptance and any qualifications?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "commitment-threshold-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "permitted-and-rejected-readings", "name": "Permitted and rejected readings", "description": "Distinguishes legitimate plurality from positions classified as incompatible.", "findings": [ { "id": "interpretive-latitude", "name": "Interpretive latitude", "description": "Record permissible readings, unresolved issues and explicit exclusions without treating silence as prohibition.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which differences are permitted interpretations, unsettled questions or expressly rejected positions?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "interpretive-latitude-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes a binding exclusion from an influential interpreter's preference?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "interpretive-latitude-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "authority-and-interpretation", "name": "Authority and interpretation", "description": "Maps the sources and interpretive relationships through which doctrinal correctness is recognised.", "rationale": "Identical formulations may receive different orthodox interpretations where authorities or interpretive rules differ.", "layers": [ { "id": "authoritative-basis", "name": "Authoritative basis", "description": "Identifies recognised texts, traditions, decisions or forms of consensus.", "findings": [ { "id": "source-standing", "name": "Source standing", "description": "Record why a source is authoritative and how conflicts between sources are addressed.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which texts, traditions, pronouncements or consensus claims supply the standard's authority?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "source-standing-q01" }, { "text": "How does this community determine precedence when recognised sources appear to conflict?", "kind": "definition", "id": "source-standing-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "interpretive-standing", "name": "Interpretive standing", "description": "Identifies who may explain or settle the meaning of authoritative material.", "findings": [ { "id": "recognised-interpreters", "name": "Recognised interpreters", "description": "Record interpretive roles, limits of competence and competing claims to recognition.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who is recognised as competent to interpret the standard, and by whom?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "recognised-interpreters-q01" }, { "text": "Where competing interpreters disagree, what review or resolution process is recognised?", "kind": "action", "id": "recognised-interpreters-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "conformity-and-consequences", "name": "Conformity and consequences", "description": "Connects doctrinal assessments to evidence, procedural authority and practical effects.", "rationale": "Calling a position unorthodox does not establish either the person's complete beliefs or permission to impose consequences.", "layers": [ { "id": "assessment-of-conformity", "name": "Assessment of conformity", "description": "Determines how particular statements or teachings are evaluated against the standard.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-assessment", "name": "Attributed assessment", "description": "Record the assessed material, applicable criterion, assessor and unresolved interpretive uncertainty.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which exact statement or teaching is assessed against which doctrinal commitment?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "attributed-assessment-q01" }, { "text": "What contextual evidence and interpretive qualifications support or weaken the assessment?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attributed-assessment-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "standing-and-review", "name": "Standing and review", "description": "Examines consequences for participation, office or teaching and the procedures governing them.", "findings": [ { "id": "authorised-consequences", "name": "Authorised consequences", "description": "Record whether a doctrinal classification has practical consequences, who may apply them and how they can be challenged.", "questions": [ { "text": "What documented effects can this classification have on membership, teaching authority or institutional standing?", "kind": "action", "id": "authorised-consequences-q01" }, { "text": "Who may apply those effects, and what response, appeal or reconsideration procedures exist?", "kind": "action", "id": "authorised-consequences-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "transmission-and-continuity", "name": "Transmission and continuity", "description": "Tracks how orthodoxy is taught, reproduced and interpreted across changes and disputes.", "rationale": "An agent must distinguish an inherited standard from later formulations and competing accounts of its continuity.", "layers": [ { "id": "doctrinal-transmission", "name": "Doctrinal transmission", "description": "Identifies the media and practices through which recognised commitments are communicated.", "findings": [ { "id": "teaching-and-profession", "name": "Teaching and profession", "description": "Record how instruction, authoritative summaries and professions of belief communicate orthodox commitments.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which teaching materials or professions of belief communicate the recognised standard?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "teaching-and-profession-q01" }, { "text": "Which elements are binding formulations, and which are explanatory or instructional aids?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "teaching-and-profession-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "change-and-contestation", "name": "Change and contestation", "description": "Preserves the history of doctrinal recognition and disputed claims to continuity.", "findings": [ { "id": "continuity-claims", "name": "Continuity claims", "description": "Record changes in recognised formulations and attribute claims that they preserve, clarify or depart from earlier commitments.", "questions": [ { "text": "What dated evidence shows a change in the formulation, interpretation or recognition of a commitment?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "continuity-claims-q01" }, { "text": "Who describes that change as clarification, legitimate development or departure, and on what grounds?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "continuity-claims-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": [ "No sense is recorded: verify whether the entry means the general concept or a particular religious tradition.", "The SOC.ORG classification does not establish that this thing is an organization; the general concept has no single legal identity, governing body, or registry identifier.", "This description is based on recall, without source consultation." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of orthodoxy 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": [ "Religious orthodoxy", "Political orthodoxy", "Economic orthodoxy" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of orthodoxy 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": [ "Defining accepted doctrine within a religious community", "Setting doctrinal expectations for membership, teaching, or leadership", "Characterizing dominant assumptions within political or intellectual traditions", "Distinguishing authorized interpretations from dissenting positions" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of orthodoxy 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": [ "Treating acceptance by an authority or majority as sufficient evidence of truth", "Suppressing criticism or excluding dissenters", "Misrepresenting internal disagreements as doctrinal uniformity", "Applying the label without specifying the community, authority, or historical period" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of orthodoxy this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "What counts as orthodox depends on the community and its history; a position accepted in one tradition may be rejected in another.", "Capitalized Orthodox can designate particular religious traditions, including Eastern Orthodox Christianity, Oriental Orthodox Christianity, and Orthodox Judaism; these are distinct usages." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of orthodoxy 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": "Orthopraxy", "difference": "Orthopraxy emphasizes correct practice or conduct; orthodoxy emphasizes correct belief or doctrine." }, { "name": "Heterodoxy", "difference": "Heterodoxy departs from the beliefs accepted as orthodox by the relevant community." }, { "name": "Heresy", "difference": "Heresy is a doctrinal departure judged unacceptable within a religious tradition; not every unconventional belief receives that judgment." }, { "name": "Dogma", "difference": "Dogma is an authoritative doctrine or set of doctrines; orthodoxy concerns conformity to accepted doctrine." }, { "name": "Eastern Orthodox Church", "difference": "The Eastern Orthodox Church is a particular communion of churches; orthodoxy in its general sense is a relationship to accepted beliefs." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of orthodoxy this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does vr.tr.orthodoxy denote orthodoxy generally, Eastern Orthodoxy, another religious referent or a source-specific concept?", "Does an existing Vercy world model already cover the intended sense, requiring a link rather than a separate publication?", "Which reference communities and primary sources should establish the first researched instance of this model?", "Should the intended scope include secular disciplinary orthodoxies, and which authority mechanisms would require different treatment?", "Where does the intended referent place the boundary between doctrinal assent, public profession and correct practice?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 16, "questions": 26 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "organisation or institution", "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 orthodoxy, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an agent to recognise an orthodoxy, identify whose standards it expresses, assess conformity and contestation, and determine the authority and consequences of applying it.", "characteristics": { "substance": "social", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "collective" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "observed and measured" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Described in 66 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 orthodoxy, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "a social arrangement between people", "physicalCharacter": [ "Acts through people, and only through them.", "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. Recognised by name, register entry and the people acting in its name, and those change while it stays the same body." ], "relatedModels": [], "standing": "Described in 66 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is.", "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "identity-and-classification", "name": "Identity, naming and classification", "description": "How an agent tells one orthodoxy from another, and a orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "people-and-responsibility", "name": "People, roles and responsibility", "description": "Who stands in what relation to a orthodoxy.", "rationale": "Social things are defined by the relations people hold to them, and those relations change without the thing changing.", "layers": [ { "id": "roles-and-parties", "name": "Roles and parties", "description": "The roles that exist around a orthodoxy and who fills them.", "findings": [ { "id": "role-assignments", "name": "Role assignments and their validity", "description": "Who holds which role over a orthodoxy, from when, and on whose authority.", "questions": [ { "id": "role-assignments-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a role over a orthodoxy, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "role-assignments-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a role over a orthodoxy, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "role-assignments-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a role over a orthodoxy is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "ownership-and-accountability", "name": "Ownership and accountability", "description": "Who answers for a orthodoxy and who may decide about it.", "findings": [ { "id": "accountability", "name": "Accountability and decision rights", "description": "Where responsibility for a orthodoxy sits when something goes wrong.", "questions": [ { "id": "accountability-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes responsibility for a orthodoxy, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "accountability-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about responsibility for a orthodoxy, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "accountability-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once responsibility for a orthodoxy is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "legal-identity", "name": "Legal identity and mandate", "description": "What orthodoxy is in law and what it exists to do.", "rationale": "Legal identity survives changes of name, address, staff and premises, which is exactly why it must be recorded separately from all of them.", "layers": [ { "id": "registration", "name": "Legal form and registration", "description": "Form, register, identifiers and jurisdiction.", "findings": [ { "id": "registration-record", "name": "Registration and identifiers", "description": "What names this body unambiguously in law.", "questions": [ { "id": "registration-record-q01", "text": "What legal form does orthodoxy take, in which register, under which identifier?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "registration-record-q02", "text": "What survives a rename, a merger or a move of premises, and what does not?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "mandate", "name": "Mandate and governing instrument", "description": "The purpose it is bound to and the document that binds it.", "findings": [ { "id": "mandate-record", "name": "Mandate and its source", "description": "What it may do, and the instrument that says so.", "questions": [ { "id": "mandate-record-q01", "text": "What is the mandate of orthodoxy, and which founding or governing instrument grants it?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "mandate-record-q02", "text": "What lies outside the mandate, and what should an agent do when asked for it?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "governance-and-membership", "name": "Governance, membership and decision rights", "description": "Who decides in orthodoxy and who belongs to it.", "rationale": "Authority inside an organisation is held by roles, not people, and an agent needs to know which role can commit it.", "layers": [ { "id": "decision-rights", "name": "Decision rights", "description": "Bodies, offices and what each may bind.", "findings": [ { "id": "authority-map", "name": "Who may bind the organisation", "description": "The offices that can commit it and their limits.", "questions": [ { "id": "authority-map-q01", "text": "Which bodies or offices of orthodoxy may take which decisions, and up to what limit?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "authority-map-q02", "text": "What evidence shows that a given person currently holds that office?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] }, { "id": "membership", "name": "Membership and affiliation", "description": "Who counts as part of it and on what terms.", "findings": [ { "id": "membership-rules", "name": "Membership and its evidence", "description": "Classes of member, how membership starts and ends.", "questions": [ { "id": "membership-rules-q01", "text": "What kinds of membership or affiliation does orthodoxy have, and how does each begin and end?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "membership-rules-q02", "text": "What may a member do in its name, and what may they not?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy 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 orthodoxy is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy, 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 orthodoxy 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 } } } }