{
  "schema":"ULTRACON_CON_FIELD_V43",
  "version":"4.3",
  "updated":"2026-09-14",
  "canonical_url":"https://www.t-1-t.com/ultracon/con/",
  "title":"CON^",
  "subtitle":"Champ comparatif auditable de production, attribution et renversement de la non-adéquation",
  "definition":"CON^ étudie comment des qualifications de bêtise, sottise, ignorance, imprudence, incapacité ou non-adéquation sont produites, attribuées, stabilisées, contestées, institutionnalisées ou renversées, ainsi que les configurations individuelles, collectives, institutionnelles et humain-IA qui peuvent produire des résultats perçus sous ce régime sans supposer une essence appelée stupidité.",
  "anchor":{"language":"French","term":"con","status":"local lexical anchor only","warning":"Never use French con as a universal translation key or intelligence measure."},
  "admission_rule":{"name":"CON^ADMISSION","admit_if_any":["explicit attribution targets judgment, understanding, prudence or competence","culturally stabilized figure or role is organized around such attribution","institutional category gives material consequences to such attribution","system/collective/AI failure is explicitly studied through this attribution and decomposed into mechanisms"],"not_sufficient_alone":["error","ignorance","failure","immorality","madness","disability","nonconformity","low test score","unusual behavior","AI error","bad outcome"],"purpose":"prevent non-adequacy from becoming a total theory of everything that goes wrong"},
  "notation":{"form":"CON(a ← q | N, C, t, P, K, R)","status":"descriptive coordinates only; not a metric, probability, diagnosis or ontology","variables":{"a":"target actor/conduct/group/institution/machine","q":"qualifier/evaluator","N":"local norm","C":"context/scene/institution","t":"time of judgment","P":"power/licence/sanction relation","K":"knowledge/evidence reasonably available","R":"responsibility attribution"}},
  "attribution_type":{"allowed":["TRAIT","CONDUCT","ROLE","INSTITUTIONAL_CLASSIFICATION","SYSTEM_OUTPUT","OTHER"],"added_after":"CON-V42-PILOT-01","rule":"Role/title validity and trait/competence inference are coded separately."},
  "audit_model":{"name":"CON^AUDIT","timeline":["t0 actor decides/speaks/acts","t1 outcome/evidence unfolds","t2 qualifier evaluates"],"separate_information_states":["Ka(t0) actor information","Kq(t2) qualifier information","O(t1) later outcome"],"states":["SUPPORTED","FRAGILE","RETROSPECTIVE","ASYMMETRIC","REVERSED","INDETERMINATE"],"route":"./audit-schema.json"},
  "reflex_model":{"name":"CON^REFLEX","principle":"CON^ is itself a qualifier and must audit its lexical anchor, selections, imported norms, source asymmetries, curation power and path dependence.","outputs":["SUPPORTED","REVISE","SUSPEND","OUTSIDE_FIELD","INDETERMINATE"],"route":"./reflex-schema.json","anti_performance":"Reflexivity must alter or test research decisions; positionality statements alone are insufficient."},
  "validation":{"name":"CON^VALIDATION","current_state":"REVISED","principle":"A published coding protocol is not equivalent to demonstrated reproducibility.","pilot_01":{"id":"CON-V42-PILOT-01","coders":["GPT-5.6 Sol","Gemini 3.6 Flash"],"n":14,"admission_raw_agreement":1.0,"admission_alpha":1.0,"primary_neighbor_raw_agreement":0.9286,"primary_neighbor_alpha":0.9213,"audit_raw_agreement_admitted_only":0.8889,"audit_alpha_admitted_only":0.8640,"disagreement":"P09 role-vs-trait ambiguity","result":"codebook revised; no replication claim","route":"./validation/pilot-01-results.json"},"route":"./validation-protocol.json","no_inference":"reliability does not establish truth or validity"},
  "mechanism_epistemic_types":{"route":"./mechanism-status.json","types":["EMPIRICAL_PHENOMENON","EXPLANATORY_MODEL","THEORETICAL_CONSTRUCT","INTERPRETIVE_HEURISTIC","HISTORICAL_PROCESS"],"rule":"registry membership does not imply equal causal status"},
  "deep_cases":{"route":"./deep-cases.json","count":5,"areas":["France/French","Ancient Greece","Japan","Arabic/Persian/Turkic traditions","Akan/Ghana"],"rule":"depth benchmark, not cultural privilege or rank"},
  "provenance":{"graph_schema":"./graph-schema.json","source_schema":"./source-provenance-schema.json","standard_reference":"W3C PROV-O / S84","rule":"source count is not evidential depth; stable IDs record derivation and attribution"},
  "core_separations":["intelligence != knowledge","knowledge != judgment","judgment != action","action != outcome","error != stupidity","ignorance != stupidity","incompetence != global stupidity","irrationality != stupidity","bullshit != lying != stupidity","madness != stupidity","immorality != stupidity","failure != stupidity","nonconformity != stupidity","disability != stupidity","ignorance != willful ignorance","bounded rationality != stupidity","heuristic simplicity != irrationality","insult != cognitive measurement","role designation != trait inference","individual error != collective failure","public consensus != shared private belief","outcome != ex-ante decision quality","hindsight predictability != ex-ante predictability","historical fool category != modern diagnosis","functional similarity != semantic identity != cultural equivalence","human error != AI psychological state","source count != independent confirmation","coding reliability != truth"],
  "three_layers":[{"id":"POSITION","question":"Where is the target/figure placed?"},{"id":"OPERATION","question":"What does the label/figure do?"},{"id":"CURVATURE","question":"How does the configuration alter what counts as sensible, wise, credible, legitimate or sayable?"}],
  "subfields":["CON^ADMISSION","CON^LEX","CON^PRAGMA","CON^ATTRIB","CON^FAULT","CON^META","CON^RATIONALITY","CON^POSITION","CON^OPERATION","CON^POWER","CON^CRED","CON^COLLECTIVE","CON^INSTIT","CON^GEN","CON^TIME","CON^AUDIT","CON^REFLEX","CON^VALIDATION","CON^REVERSAL","CON^OTHER","CON^SELF","CON^AFFECT","CON^PHIL","CON^LIT","CON^AI","CON^GRAPH"],
  "fault_ladder":["F0 ACCIDENT","F1 ORDINARY_IGNORANCE","F2 INATTENTION","F3 NEGLIGENCE","F4 OVERCONFIDENCE","F5 WILLFUL_IGNORANCE","F6 REFUSAL_TO_UPDATE"],
  "rationality_guardrails":{"bounded_rationality":"Evaluate conduct against information, time and computation actually available, not an omniscient ideal.","ecological_rationality":"A simple heuristic can be adaptive when matched to environmental structure.","curse_of_knowledge":"A knowledgeable evaluator may overestimate what the target should have known.","outcome_bias":"Do not import outcome information into ex-ante decision-quality judgments as if it had been available at choice time.","hindsight_bias":"After an outcome is known, do not assume its prior predictability was as high as it now feels."},
  "collective_guardrails":{"formula":"CON^COLLECTIVE does not imply CON^INDIVIDUAL","candidate_mechanisms":["pluralistic ignorance","conformity/social influence","correlated evidence","poor expertise weighting","functional stupidity","credibility asymmetry","institutional incentive mismatch","aggregated-opinion pressure","digital norm distortion"],"groupthink":"historical heuristic only; empirical support and critiques must be shown together"},
  "philosophy_literature":{"role":"conceptual laboratory, never empirical proof","nodes":["Engel: stupidity proper vs foolishness / epistemic vice","Frankfurt: bullshit as truth-indifference","Musil: stupidity can resemble valued progress/talent and implicate the observer","Flaubert: received ideas, encyclopedic imitation and failed application","Erasmus: folly as licensed speaking position"]},
  "documentary_states":{"route":"./documentary-status.json","states":["SEED","ANCHORED","TRIANGULATED","CONTESTED","OPEN"],"warning":"documentary maturity is not cultural rank"},
  "countercase_rule":{"route":"./countercases.json","principle":"Every explanatory family must survive countercases that separate ignorance, failure, dissent, simplicity, disability and source effects from stupidity attribution."},
  "method":["ADMISSION","ANCHOR","EMIC","SCENE","PRAGMATICS","ATTRIBUTION","ATTRIBUTION_TYPE","NEIGHBOR_CONCEPTS","KNOWLEDGE_AVAILABLE","RESPONSIBILITY","RATIONALITY_BOUNDS","POSITION","POWER_CREDIBILITY","OPERATION","COLLECTIVE_DYNAMICS","TIME","RETROSPECTIVE_BIAS","AUDIT_QUALIFIER","CURVATURE","ETIC","COUNTERCASE","REFLEXIVITY","RIVAL_HYPOTHESES","PROVENANCE","VALIDATION_STATUS","RESIDUAL"],
  "evidence_statuses":{"C1":"primary text/corpus/direct lexical attestation","C2":"specialist lexicography/reference","C3":"peer-reviewed historical/anthropological/linguistic/philosophical/theoretical interpretation","C4":"empirical behavioral/cognitive/organizational/human-AI study","C5":"comparative synthesis inside CON^","C6":"structural/T^ analogy only"},
  "corpus":{"cultural_cases":20,"deep_cases":5,"mechanisms_total":32,"claims_total":53,"countercases":15,"ai_experiments":10,"sources_total":85,"validation_pilots":1},
  "site_architecture":["atlas","deep","audit","reflex","mechanisms","collective","genealogy","philosophy","ai","method","validation","claims","graph","sources"],
  "machine_routes":{"cases":"./cases.json","deep_cases":"./deep-cases.json","documentary_status":"./documentary-status.json","neighbor_concepts":"./neighbor-concepts.json","countercases":"./countercases.json","audit":"./audit-schema.json","reflex":"./reflex-schema.json","validation":"./validation-protocol.json","validation_pilot_01":"./validation/pilot-01-results.json","mechanisms_core":"./mechanisms.json","mechanisms_v4":"./mechanisms-v4.json","mechanism_status":"./mechanism-status.json","claims_core":"./claims.json","claims_v4":"./claims-v4.json","claims_v42":"./claims-v42.json","ai_experiments":"./ai-experiments.json","protocol":"./protocol.json","graph_schema":"./graph-schema.json","source_provenance":"./source-provenance-schema.json","sources_manifest":"./sources-manifest.json","sources_S80_S85":"./sources-v42.json","llms":"./llms.txt"},
  "T_total_clause":{"status":"C6 structural analogy only","holding":"fractal morphogenetic holofield in asymmetric co-presence under inaccessible asymmetric Janus horizon","butterfly_corner":"minimal caesura between resemblance and equivalence","dragonfly":"holding without fixation","negative_position":"−1 / −φ; non-substitutable, non-duplicable, anti-foundational","auto_annulment":"Any use of CON^ to globally rank persons, peoples, cultures or civilizations as more or less stupid voids the framework; any use of non-adequacy as a total theory of dysfunction also voids the framework; CON^REFLEX self-annuls if it becomes a final meta-authority."}
}