fpf.tools
Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 1971–1986

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 02:22:15 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 03:38:22 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 04:05:10 UTC

A.1:4.3 - Admitted Holon Kinds

Current accepted holon-kind examples are:

  • U.System, used here for an acting physical or operational holon;
  • U.Episteme, used here only for a non-agentive claim-bearing holon, identified under C.2.1 by exact claim content, EntityOfConcern, and effective ReferenceScheme, with constitution, empirical grounding, and edition kept as distinct direct relations;
  • U.Work, admitted under A.15.1 for a dated 4D occurrence holon;
  • U.Discipline, defined in C.20 as a field-level practice-and-knowledge holon;
  • U.Method, defined in A.3.1, with method-composition patterns such as B.1.5 defining how submethods compose into a whole method across levels.

A project-local holon classification names its concrete C.3 U.Kind, the A.1 criterion, any kind-specific criterion, and the direct patterns for the construction facts it uses. A proposed public U.* holon kind first passes E.24.UK and gains one subject pattern. Neither route may rely on part-whole, architecture, system-role-kind classification or assignment, work, evidence, or source-use claims before the candidate-side criterion is recoverable.

Candidate recognition is decided by the six candidate-side constructive components in A.1:4.2, not by agentivity, wording, evidence availability, or a B.2 whole-reidentification result. Grounding work selects the participating objects from the surrounding practice or world, fixes their boundaries, identifies constituents and exact part relations, recovers the assembly and reidentification rule, and tests the resulting whole-level characteristic and larger-assembly compatibility. Relations may arrange, constrain, assign, qualify, or describe constituents; those relations do not become constituents by that fact.

U.Method and a local system-role kind are not decided by whether they act. U.Episteme already shows that a non-agentive object can be a holon. U.Method is a non-agentive holon kind: submethods can compose into whole methods with whole-level preconditions, effects, invariants, interfaces, constraints, and assurance hooks, and a whole method can participate in a larger method. A step label or step description is not a method part by label: first recover a U.Method submethod rather than a method-description node, order relation, work-plan item, or work occurrence. A local system-role kind is instead an exact local U.Kind whose candidates are U.System values; it is neither a public root U-kind nor a holon kind by kind identity. C.3 recovers it through the candidate domain, operative condition for a stable, assignable, work-facing contribution, intended member/non-member boundary, and continuity rule. A practice or source reference only locates or prompts comparison of the definition; the current KindSignature states the candidate-side condition against direct features of the system. Assignment may be one criterion only when that signature says so; assignment alone does not confer family-wide membership. The assignment occurrence, assignment state, capability, responsibility, permission, commitment, obligation, method participation, and SystemRoleKindRelationStructure remain neighboring objects or relations rather than parts of the kind.