fpf.tools
Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 25541–25550

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 05:29:54 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 05:30:57 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 07:25:10 UTC

A.12:3 - Forces

ForceTension
Causal clarity vs convenient speechEveryday speech compresses “self-repair” and “automatic update”; engineering use needs the acting side and changed object.
Internal regulation vs object collapseA larger holon may contain both regulator and regulated parts; that does not make the regulator and regulated position identical for the current claim.
Automation vs accountabilityAutomated work still needs a system in role, method or work claim, and evidence relation when those claims matter.
Episteme use vs episteme agencyA carrier update, another episteme edition and a changed publication relation need different identity tests (§4.3). A Work performer or U.SystemRoleAssignment holder must be an admitted U.System.
Boundary crossing vs parthoodWhen an exact boundary-crossing relation independently satisfies the predicate, applicability, and identity rules that define it, it does not thereby make the acting system a part of the changed holon or the larger whole containing it. Without those rules, keep the crossing claim open rather than inferring either crossing or parthood.