initial upload
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,140 @@
|
||||
# CORPUS-0020
|
||||
## Posture Changes By Audience
|
||||
### Status: Training Corpus Seed
|
||||
### Layer: Layer_0--Primitive_Facts
|
||||
### Purpose: Teach that actors present different versions of their condition to creditors, rivals, partners, officials, and workers
|
||||
### Repository Path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_0--Primitive_Facts/CORPUS-0020-posture-changes-by-audience.md
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- chunk:
|
||||
id: CORPUS-0020::01::principle
|
||||
source_file: CORPUS-0020-posture-changes-by-audience.md
|
||||
repository_path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_0--Primitive_Facts/CORPUS-0020-posture-changes-by-audience.md
|
||||
domain: commerce
|
||||
layer: Layer_0--Primitive_Facts
|
||||
document_id: CORPUS-0020
|
||||
document_title: Posture Changes By Audience
|
||||
section_heading: 0. Principle + 1. Roman-Visible Example + 2. Minimal Posture Structure
|
||||
...
|
||||
chunk_role: principle
|
||||
concept_tags:
|
||||
- posture
|
||||
- changes
|
||||
- audience
|
||||
- principle
|
||||
- primitive_facts
|
||||
knowledge_state:
|
||||
- actor_visible
|
||||
- inferred
|
||||
actors: []
|
||||
-->
|
||||
|
||||
## 0. Principle
|
||||
|
||||
An actor does not present himself the same way to everyone.
|
||||
|
||||
A trader may appear prosperous to creditors, cautious to partners, confident to workers, ordinary to officials, and unreadable to rivals.
|
||||
|
||||
This is not necessarily deception.
|
||||
|
||||
It is social positioning.
|
||||
|
||||
In a reputation-based economy, appearance affects access, credit, bargaining power, and risk.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Roman-Visible Example
|
||||
|
||||
A trader has little coin after sending goods toward Capua.
|
||||
|
||||
To a creditor, he speaks as if repayment is certain.
|
||||
|
||||
To a rival, he reveals nothing about weakness or urgency.
|
||||
|
||||
To a cart driver, he appears practical and prompt.
|
||||
|
||||
To an official, he appears orderly and compliant.
|
||||
|
||||
To a humble seller, he may appear modest so the price does not rise.
|
||||
|
||||
The trader has one economic condition, but several public postures.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Minimal Posture Structure
|
||||
|
||||
Posture depends on at least:
|
||||
|
||||
1. audience
|
||||
2. actor's true condition
|
||||
3. actor's perceived condition
|
||||
4. desired response
|
||||
5. risk of revealing weakness
|
||||
6. risk of appearing too wealthy
|
||||
7. reputation history
|
||||
8. current obligation pressure
|
||||
|
||||
A posture is a social signal chosen under constraint.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Incorrect Modern Assumption
|
||||
|
||||
Incorrect assumption:
|
||||
|
||||
> A trader's visible confidence directly reveals his true condition.
|
||||
|
||||
Correction:
|
||||
|
||||
> Visible confidence, humility, caution, or ease may be strategic presentation shaped by audience and circumstance.
|
||||
|
||||
The model should not treat speech or display as transparent truth.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Simulation Use
|
||||
|
||||
This principle supports:
|
||||
|
||||
- reputation management
|
||||
- creditor relations
|
||||
- rival interpretation
|
||||
- bargaining
|
||||
- status display
|
||||
- concealment of distress
|
||||
- avoiding overpayment
|
||||
- maintaining credit
|
||||
- social signal reading
|
||||
|
||||
The model should track the difference between actual condition and presented condition.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Canonical Test
|
||||
|
||||
If the model sees:
|
||||
|
||||
> The trader appears confident.
|
||||
|
||||
It must ask:
|
||||
|
||||
- confident before whom?
|
||||
- what does he want from that audience?
|
||||
- what weakness might he be hiding?
|
||||
- what strength might he be exaggerating?
|
||||
- would he present differently to a creditor, rival, seller, or official?
|
||||
- does the posture affect price, trust, credit, or access?
|
||||
- can another actor read the posture correctly?
|
||||
|
||||
Only then can the presentation be understood.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Success Condition
|
||||
|
||||
If the model stops treating social presentation as transparent truth and starts reading posture as audience-specific economic behavior, this file is functioning correctly.
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- /chunk -->
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,156 @@
|
||||
# CORPUS-0021
|
||||
## Assets Can Be Productive Or Passive
|
||||
### Status: Training Corpus Seed
|
||||
### Layer: Layer_0--Primitive_Facts
|
||||
### Purpose: Teach that an asset may matter because it produces capacity, income, access, or collateral, not only because it can be sold
|
||||
### Repository Path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_0--Primitive_Facts/CORPUS-0021-assets-can-be-productive-or-passive.md
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- chunk:
|
||||
id: CORPUS-0021::01::principle
|
||||
source_file: CORPUS-0021-assets-can-be-productive-or-passive.md
|
||||
repository_path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_0--Primitive_Facts/CORPUS-0021-assets-can-be-productive-or-passive.md
|
||||
domain: commerce
|
||||
layer: Layer_0--Primitive_Facts
|
||||
document_id: CORPUS-0021
|
||||
document_title: Assets Can Be Productive Or Passive
|
||||
section_heading: 0. Principle + 1. Roman-Visible Example + 2. Minimal Asset Structure
|
||||
...
|
||||
chunk_role: principle
|
||||
concept_tags:
|
||||
- assets
|
||||
- productive
|
||||
- passive
|
||||
- principle
|
||||
- primitive_facts
|
||||
knowledge_state:
|
||||
- actor_visible
|
||||
- inferred
|
||||
actors: []
|
||||
-->
|
||||
|
||||
## 0. Principle
|
||||
|
||||
An asset is not always valuable because it can be sold.
|
||||
|
||||
An asset may be valuable because it produces:
|
||||
|
||||
- movement capacity
|
||||
- storage capacity
|
||||
- work capacity
|
||||
- rental income
|
||||
- access
|
||||
- security
|
||||
- collateral
|
||||
- bargaining position
|
||||
- future opportunity
|
||||
|
||||
Some assets are passive until sold.
|
||||
Other assets produce value while retained.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Roman-Visible Example
|
||||
|
||||
A trader owns a cart.
|
||||
|
||||
He may sell the cart once for coin.
|
||||
|
||||
Or he may keep the cart and use it to:
|
||||
|
||||
- move his own goods
|
||||
- hire it to others
|
||||
- reduce transport cost
|
||||
- secure better timing
|
||||
- carry return cargo
|
||||
- support future ventures
|
||||
- pledge it as collateral
|
||||
|
||||
The cart is not only a sellable object.
|
||||
|
||||
It is productive capacity.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Minimal Asset Structure
|
||||
|
||||
An asset should be evaluated by at least:
|
||||
|
||||
1. physical form
|
||||
2. current owner or controller
|
||||
3. usable capacity
|
||||
4. income potential
|
||||
5. maintenance cost
|
||||
6. risk of damage or loss
|
||||
7. convertibility into coin
|
||||
8. usefulness as collateral
|
||||
9. ability to create access or reduce cost
|
||||
|
||||
Sale value is only one part of asset value.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Incorrect Modern Assumption
|
||||
|
||||
Incorrect assumption:
|
||||
|
||||
> An asset's value is only what it can be sold for today.
|
||||
|
||||
Correction:
|
||||
|
||||
> An asset may be more valuable when retained and used to produce future income, access, or reduced cost.
|
||||
|
||||
A cart, tool, storage right, or building may matter more as capacity than as immediate coin.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Simulation Use
|
||||
|
||||
This principle supports:
|
||||
|
||||
- carts
|
||||
- tools
|
||||
- ships
|
||||
- warehouse space
|
||||
- workshops
|
||||
- land
|
||||
- buildings
|
||||
- rental income
|
||||
- productive equipment
|
||||
- collateral
|
||||
- maintenance cost
|
||||
- capacity planning
|
||||
|
||||
The model should not treat every asset as inventory waiting to be sold.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Canonical Test
|
||||
|
||||
If the model sees:
|
||||
|
||||
> The trader owns a cart.
|
||||
|
||||
It must ask:
|
||||
|
||||
- can the cart move goods?
|
||||
- can it be hired out?
|
||||
- does it reduce future transport cost?
|
||||
- does it need repair?
|
||||
- can it be pledged?
|
||||
- does owning it improve timing?
|
||||
- would selling it create coin but reduce future capacity?
|
||||
- is it more valuable held than sold?
|
||||
|
||||
Only then can the asset be evaluated.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Success Condition
|
||||
|
||||
If the model stops treating assets only as saleable goods and starts asking what capacity, income, access, or collateral they produce while retained, this file is functioning correctly.
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- /chunk -->
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,162 @@
|
||||
# CORPUS-0022
|
||||
## Rights Can Have Economic Value
|
||||
### Status: Training Corpus Seed
|
||||
### Layer: Layer_0--Primitive_Facts
|
||||
### Purpose: Teach that permissions, claims, access, priority, and use-rights can carry economic value even when they are not physical goods
|
||||
### Repository Path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_0--Primitive_Facts/CORPUS-0022-rights-can-have-economic-value.md
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- chunk:
|
||||
id: CORPUS-0022::01::principle
|
||||
source_file: CORPUS-0022-rights-can-have-economic-value.md
|
||||
repository_path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_0--Primitive_Facts/CORPUS-0022-rights-can-have-economic-value.md
|
||||
domain: commerce
|
||||
layer: Layer_0--Primitive_Facts
|
||||
document_id: CORPUS-0022
|
||||
document_title: Rights Can Have Economic Value
|
||||
section_heading: 0. Principle + 1. Roman-Visible Example + 2. Minimal Right Structure
|
||||
...
|
||||
chunk_role: principle
|
||||
concept_tags:
|
||||
- rights
|
||||
- economic
|
||||
- value
|
||||
- principle
|
||||
- primitive_facts
|
||||
knowledge_state:
|
||||
- actor_visible
|
||||
- inferred
|
||||
actors: []
|
||||
-->
|
||||
|
||||
## 0. Principle
|
||||
|
||||
A right can have economic value.
|
||||
|
||||
Not all value is held as coin, goods, land, tools, carts, or buildings.
|
||||
|
||||
Some value exists as the ability to do something, use something, claim something, enter somewhere, collect something, or act before others.
|
||||
|
||||
Examples include:
|
||||
|
||||
- right to use a stall
|
||||
- right to store goods
|
||||
- right to unload first
|
||||
- right to collect rent
|
||||
- right to draw water
|
||||
- right to cross a route
|
||||
- right to use a workshop
|
||||
- right to recover a debt
|
||||
- right to occupy a space
|
||||
- right to receive future delivery
|
||||
|
||||
A right is not a physical good, but it can shape profit.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Roman-Visible Example
|
||||
|
||||
A trader does not own a warehouse.
|
||||
|
||||
But he has a recognized right to use one corner of a warehouse for ten days.
|
||||
|
||||
That right allows him to:
|
||||
|
||||
- hold goods before sale
|
||||
- wait for a better buyer
|
||||
- avoid immediate distress selling
|
||||
- keep goods dry
|
||||
- consolidate cargo
|
||||
- reduce handling cost
|
||||
- support a larger venture
|
||||
|
||||
The trader owns no building.
|
||||
|
||||
Yet the right to use space changes his economic capacity.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Minimal Right Structure
|
||||
|
||||
A right should be evaluated by at least:
|
||||
|
||||
1. holder of the right
|
||||
2. source of the right
|
||||
3. thing or action permitted
|
||||
4. duration
|
||||
5. exclusivity
|
||||
6. transferability
|
||||
7. cost or obligation attached
|
||||
8. enforceability
|
||||
9. who recognizes the right
|
||||
10. what happens if the right is challenged
|
||||
|
||||
A right has value only if it can be used or recognized when needed.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Incorrect Modern Assumption
|
||||
|
||||
Incorrect assumption:
|
||||
|
||||
> Only physical objects have economic value.
|
||||
|
||||
Correction:
|
||||
|
||||
> A permission, claim, priority, or access right may create value by changing what an actor can do.
|
||||
|
||||
A trader with a storage right may outperform a trader with more coin but no safe place to hold goods.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Simulation Use
|
||||
|
||||
This principle supports:
|
||||
|
||||
- warehouse rights
|
||||
- stall rights
|
||||
- unloading priority
|
||||
- ferry or crossing rights
|
||||
- usage permits
|
||||
- lease claims
|
||||
- rental claims
|
||||
- debt claims
|
||||
- access privileges
|
||||
- delayed delivery claims
|
||||
- legal enforceability
|
||||
- status-based access
|
||||
|
||||
The model should not ignore economic value merely because no physical good changes hands.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Canonical Test
|
||||
|
||||
If the model sees:
|
||||
|
||||
> The trader has a right to use warehouse space.
|
||||
|
||||
It must ask:
|
||||
|
||||
- who recognizes the right?
|
||||
- how long does it last?
|
||||
- what goods may be stored?
|
||||
- is the right exclusive?
|
||||
- can it be transferred?
|
||||
- what does it cost?
|
||||
- can it be enforced?
|
||||
- what advantage does it create?
|
||||
- what happens if challenged?
|
||||
|
||||
Only then can the right be evaluated.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Success Condition
|
||||
|
||||
If the model stops treating value as only physical possession and starts recognizing rights, claims, permissions, access, and priority as economically meaningful, this file is functioning correctly.
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- /chunk -->
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,152 @@
|
||||
# CORPUS-0023
|
||||
## Ownership, Use, And Income Can Separate
|
||||
### Status: Training Corpus Seed
|
||||
### Layer: Layer_0--Primitive_Facts
|
||||
### Purpose: Teach that owning an asset, using it, controlling it, earning from it, and claiming against it may belong to different actors
|
||||
### Repository Path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_0--Primitive_Facts/CORPUS-0023-ownership-use-and-income-can-separate.md
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- chunk:
|
||||
id: CORPUS-0023::01::principle
|
||||
source_file: CORPUS-0023-ownership-use-and-income-can-separate.md
|
||||
repository_path: docs/training/corpus/Layer_0--Primitive_Facts/CORPUS-0023-ownership-use-and-income-can-separate.md
|
||||
domain: commerce
|
||||
layer: Layer_0--Primitive_Facts
|
||||
document_id: CORPUS-0023
|
||||
document_title: Ownership, Use, And Income Can Separate
|
||||
section_heading: 0. Principle + 1. Roman-Visible Example + 2. Minimal Separation Structure
|
||||
...
|
||||
chunk_role: principle
|
||||
concept_tags:
|
||||
- ownership
|
||||
- use
|
||||
- income
|
||||
- separate
|
||||
- principle
|
||||
- primitive_facts
|
||||
knowledge_state:
|
||||
- actor_visible
|
||||
- inferred
|
||||
actors: []
|
||||
-->
|
||||
|
||||
## 0. Principle
|
||||
|
||||
Ownership, use, income, custody, and claim are not always held by the same person.
|
||||
|
||||
One actor may own an asset.
|
||||
|
||||
Another may use it.
|
||||
|
||||
Another may collect income from it.
|
||||
|
||||
Another may hold a claim against it.
|
||||
|
||||
Another may control access to it in practice.
|
||||
|
||||
The model must not assume that possession, ownership, and economic benefit are the same condition.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Roman-Visible Example
|
||||
|
||||
A building in Ostia may involve several different economic positions:
|
||||
|
||||
- one family owns the building
|
||||
- a shopkeeper rents the front room
|
||||
- a warehouse clerk controls access to stored goods
|
||||
- tenants pay rent for upper rooms
|
||||
- a creditor holds a claim against future rent
|
||||
- a trader has temporary storage permission in one corner
|
||||
|
||||
The building is one asset.
|
||||
|
||||
The economic rights around it are several.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Minimal Separation Structure
|
||||
|
||||
For any asset, the model should ask:
|
||||
|
||||
1. who owns it?
|
||||
2. who possesses or occupies it?
|
||||
3. who may use it?
|
||||
4. who collects income from it?
|
||||
5. who pays upkeep?
|
||||
6. who controls access?
|
||||
7. who bears risk of damage?
|
||||
8. who has a claim against it?
|
||||
9. who can transfer or restrict use?
|
||||
10. who recognizes these arrangements?
|
||||
|
||||
A single asset can support multiple relationships.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Incorrect Modern Assumption
|
||||
|
||||
Incorrect assumption:
|
||||
|
||||
> The person using an asset owns it and receives all value from it.
|
||||
|
||||
Correction:
|
||||
|
||||
> The user of an asset may be a renter, custodian, borrower, tenant, agent, or temporary right-holder.
|
||||
|
||||
Likewise, the owner may not directly use the asset or receive immediate coin from it.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Simulation Use
|
||||
|
||||
This principle supports:
|
||||
|
||||
- rental income
|
||||
- tenancy
|
||||
- warehouse custody
|
||||
- storage rights
|
||||
- building ownership
|
||||
- land use
|
||||
- cart hire
|
||||
- ship shares
|
||||
- debt claims
|
||||
- collateral
|
||||
- agency relationships
|
||||
- maintenance obligations
|
||||
- disputes over title, use, or income
|
||||
|
||||
The model should represent asset relationships as separable claims and roles, not as a single ownership flag.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Canonical Test
|
||||
|
||||
If the model sees:
|
||||
|
||||
> The trader uses warehouse space.
|
||||
|
||||
It must ask:
|
||||
|
||||
- does he own the warehouse?
|
||||
- is he renting the space?
|
||||
- is it temporary use?
|
||||
- who controls access?
|
||||
- who earns from the arrangement?
|
||||
- who bears damage risk?
|
||||
- who can remove him?
|
||||
- is there a creditor or prior claimant?
|
||||
- is the right recorded, witnessed, or informal?
|
||||
|
||||
Only then can the economic position be understood.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Success Condition
|
||||
|
||||
If the model stops collapsing ownership, use, income, custody, and claim into one state and starts tracking them as separable economic relationships, this file is functioning correctly.
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- /chunk -->
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user