Last modified: Sat 3/15/97 2300 PST
Everything that can be defined in the Canon must be defined in terms of a Class or an Instance.
An Instance is a single, identifiable object in the perceivable universe, or in the conceptual universe created to make the perceivable universe intelligible. Instances are thought to have a priori counterparts in the perceivable universe itself, but this is only a convenient fiction and is neither provable nor necessary. A Class is a generalization over the population of Canon Instances. Asserting that an Instance is a member of a Class entails that everything that is known about that Class is true for that Instance. It is a fundamental tenet of the Canon Ontology that Classes do not have a priori counterparts in the perceivable universe itself, i.e. that they are purely descriptive constructs that are helpful in understanding and managing the mass of detail involved in the examination and description of Instances.
Every Canon Class can be uniquely identified at all times. The primary identifier is a Conlang TermStem. Any number of secondary identifiers of any kind (in natural-language, mathematical or graphical notation, for example) can be recorded for a Class.
Instances may change over time without losing their identity. If a Class needs to capture the particular kinds of Instance observations that may vary over time, then it must do so by defining States. Each State in a Class is identified uniquely within that Class by a Conlang TermStem. The Class also specifies any known constraints on the potential range of each State.
As seen above, certain kinds of Instance observations may be captured by asserting that an Instance is in a particular State. If a Class needs to capture not only the kinds of State an Instance might be in, but also the kinds of changes an Instance might partipate in, then it must do so by defining Behaviors. Each Behavior in a Class is identified uniquely within that Class by a Conlang TermStem. The Class also specifies any known constraints on each Behavior as to the potential sequences of changes and the involvement of other Instances in the change.
Canon Classes (and Instances) can be related to each other, in several ways. One type of relationship is that of Inheritance, in which a more specific Class is said to inherit from a more general Class. The more general Class is said to be a Superclass of the more specific Class; the more specific Class is a Subclass of the more general Class.
Asserting that an Instance I is a member of Class A entails that everything that is known about the Superclasses of Class A (as well as everything that is known about Class A itself) is true of Instance I.
The States defined for a Class can usually be interpreted as representing parts of the Instances being described, as defining the internal structure of the Instance. This begs the question of why this collection of parts is sometimes an Instance of this Class, and sometimes just a collection of parts. To capture this distinction, a Class must define two special Behaviors: Emerge and Decay. The Behavior of Emergence involves the manifestation of a new Instance where before only the collection of parts were discernible. The Behavior of Decay represents the reverse process, the demise of an Instance leaving only a collection of its former parts.
In the Waldzell Canon, the processes of Emergence and Decay are the only ways in which the birth and death of Instances can be captured. This places certain, perhaps unexpected, constraints on the Canon, because the basic ontological assumption is that something can never be created from nothing, and that destruction always leaves something behind.
The last type of relationship defined by the Canon Ontology does not hold between Classes or between Instances, but between Classes and Instances. The very endeavor of Class definition serves to describe populations of (real, potential or imagined) Instances, i.e. to classify a set of Instances. We say that Classes are defined over Instances in a process of Classification, while Instances are described under Classes in a process of Instantiation.
Every Canon Instance can be uniquely identified at all times. The primary identifier is a Conlang TermStem. Any number of secondary identifiers of any kind (in natural-language, mathematical or graphical notation, for example) can be recorded for a Class.
The Canon Ontology requires that every Canon Instance be classified in at least one Canon Class, even if that has to be a mere pro forma Class for lack of observations or analysis. An Instance can be classified into any number of Classes, but this entails that everything known about each of the Classes is true of the Instance -- the more Classes an Instance belongs to, the harder it is to validate.
Due to the inheritance relationships that hold among Canon Classes, classification of an Instance not only entails what is true of its immediate parent Classes, but transitively entails what is true of all its parents' Superclasses as well.
Classification of an Instance also entails the particular details of internal structure defined by the Instance's parent Classes and transitive Superclasses. If a Class defines certain States as parts from which Instances of that Class emerge, then it is being asserted that the Instance now in question does in fact emerge and decay in this fashion.
All the Behaviors of an Instance's parent Classes and transitive Superclasses are also Behaviors of the Instance. Since we are dealing with a unique Instance which is bounded by Emergence and Decay, we speak of the Trajectory of the Instance as the sum total of all Behaviors of the Instance within those bounds.
All the States of an Instance's parent Classes and transitive Superclasses are also States of the Instance.
The root Class of the Waldzell Canon Class Inventory is the Agent. Every Canon Instance is an Agent, at least transitively. Every Canon Class is a transitive Subclass of Agent.
The effects of this arrangement are twofold: (1) the Inheritance hierarchy of Canon Classes has exactly one root class; and (2) the Agent class is defined as having a Behavior, thus precluding the definition of any Canon Class or Instance lacking Behavior.
In the Canon, the Agent Class has exactly four immediate Subclasses: Physical Agent, Living Agent, Conscious Agent and Multi-Conscious Agent.
Instances of Physical Agent emerge from and decay into each other. Several relatively clear-cut Organization hierarchies have been identified for Physical Agents. One such hierarchy includes the Classes
Another Organization hierarchy includes the Classes
Living Agents emerge from and decay into collections of Physical Agents and other Living Agents. A relatively clear-cut Organization hierarchy has been identified for Living Agents, including the Classes
Conscious Agents emerge from and decay into collections of Physical Agents, Living Agents and other Conscious Agents. No examples of Conscious Agents have been observed, however, that emerged from or decayed into more than one Living Agent. Due to the extreme complexity of Conscious Agents and the participation of all those studying Conscious Agents as Instances of Conscious Agent themselves, no attempt at creating a reasonably valid Organization hierarchy for Conscious Agents has ever been successful. This lack of apparent internal organization indicates a potential merger with Multi-Conscious Agents, but other major differences between the two make that unification inadvisable.
Multi-Conscious Agents emerge from and decay into collections of Physical Agents, Living Agents, Conscious Agents and other Multi-Conscious Agents. There have been numerous attempts at creating canonic Organization hierarchies for Multi-Conscious Agents, extending over millennia and throughout all cultures. Progress needs to be made in the Waldzell Canon towards a clear-cut set of hierarchies. These hierarchies would presumably include Classes such as
(more text goes here)
(more text goes here)
(more text goes here)
(more text goes here)
(more text goes here)
(more text goes here)