Lines of inquiry — A named line of the record’s own argument, so that a line can be set aside as a whole and what depends on it can be found. Retracting a line is a status change on its members, never a deletion (ADR-032).

Organizational affect — affective states as properties of organized systems, read through Frijda — the line the will paper grew out of.

2 of 100 TERM documents. Back to the full index.

#TitleSummaryStatus
TERM-076 v2goal-conduciveness valence, organizational: a regime in which the negotiation among a system’s perspectives has, approximately, a potential, an ordering of the system’s own states by their bearing on its maintenance along which the moves that win its conflicts are improvements, persisting and restored after interruption; signed by whether the system runs ahead of or behind a reference course along that potential, and as intense as the negotiation’s decisions follow it rather than any rival orderingThe owner’s reframing of 2026-10-23: appraisal as the negotiation among competing perspectives, “common currency” as the negotiation admitting an (at least instantaneous) ordering, read in the ordinal sense (TERM-077), and hedonic valence as “a circumstance in which a particular kind of ordering dominates the dynamics”. Potential is read through Frijda’s three marks of control precedence (THEORY-055); the kind of ordering is one over the system’s own states by their bearing on its maintenance. Functional: it says nothing about whether the regime is felt.Proposed
TERM-078 v3persistent potential: an ordinal potential of a negotiation that is the same, up to its class, across successive windows of time, that decides the conflicts it bears on (priority), and towards which the dynamics climb again after a perturbation (resumption); exact when no move outside a perturbation descends it, and then a Lyapunov function of the one-move-at-a-time dynamics, and approximate when some do, and then no Lyapunov function, short of a drift condition that needs a cardinal potential and further assumptionsThe second level of the hierarchy the review of PR #327 proposed, which the review called “dynamical ascendancy”. Named for the potential rather than reviving “ascendancy”, which the record retired the same day (TERM-076). It reads Frijda’s three marks of control precedence (THEORY-055) as properties of an ordinal potential over time.Active