METHOD — How ochema2 Works

METHOD — How ochema2 Works

1. The status system

• ery claim in every ochema2 document carries one of six statuses.
• ey are mutually exclusive and must be assigned honestly.

• Code | Meaning | Example |
• --|---|---|
• T | Textual — explicitly stated in the source | "TĀ 1.54: the Light of consciousness shines at all times" |
• R | Reconstructed — the strongest argument recoverable from the source | "Utpaladeva's regress argument, reconstructed from APS" |
• E | Empirical — experimentally supported | "Levin: bioelectric states store morphogenetic targets (B-grade science)" |
• C | Correspondence — two systems address the same structural problem | "Proclus's participation and the Śaiva reflection model address the same plurality problem" |
• H | Hypothesis — possible but unproved | "Quality corresponds to geometry of state space" |
• X | Rejected — contradicted, invalid, or no longer required | "Gödel as proof of consciousness" |

• The inheritance rule (binding):** No tradition may inherit another
• adition's conclusion merely because they share a structure. A C is
• ways a C — it never upgrades to E or T by accumulation.

2. The three honesty labels

• top of the status system, every document section gets one of three
• bels. This replaces the A–E grading system, which conflated
• fferent things and inflated speculative material:

• Label | Applies to |
• --|---|
• Established | Peer-reviewed science; verified text with location; completed argument (R) that survives its strongest objection |
• Interpretive | Mappings, correspondences, comparisons, readings — the programme's own work |
• Speculative | Metaphysical extensions, the density project's ontological claims, channeled material, untested hypotheses |

• speculative claim is not a defect. It is a label. It says so in the
• rst sentence: "SPECULATIVE — the Śaiva identification of
• nsciousness with camatkāra, considered as a hypothesis..."

3. The claim file (the unit of work)

• ery claim studied in ochema2 gets a file:

• `

CLAIM: <the claim, in the source's words>

• ATUS: T / R / E / C / H / X
• BEL: established / interpretive / speculative

• URCE:
• xt: <name>
• cation: <volume/chapter/verse/line>
• anslation: <who, and any caveats>

• AT IT SAYS:
• lain-language statement, checked against scholarship>

• PPING:
• id cell: <one of the nine operations, or "no mapping found">
• ientific terms: <existing theory's terms, cited>
• ignment: <accommodated by existing theory / contradicted by it /
• ience silent>

• OM FOR RESEARCH:
• es/no> — <what question this opens that science hasn't settled>
• `

4. The mapping grid (the standardised vocabulary)

• e nine operations from ĪPK 1.3.7, with scientific counterparts used
• r MAPPING ONLY (never as identity claims):

• # | Operation | Sanskrit | Function | Science (mapping only) |
• --|---|---|---|---|
• 1 | Manifestation | jñāna/prakāśa | appearing | perception, state estimation |
• 2 | Retention | smṛti | past remains available | memory, attractors |
• 3 | Determination | apohana | this rather than that | selection, exclusion |
• 4 | Stream integration | anusandhāna | temporal/personal connection | integration, ΦID |
• 5 | Counterfactual generation | vikalpa | novel forms | generative models |
• 6 | Value weighting | rāga | what matters | semantic information, homeostasis |
• 7 | Finite possibility space | kañcukas | what is possible | embodiment, constraints |
• 8 | Cross-stream boundary | deha-bheda | where synthesis stops | bioelectric closure |
• 9 | Inter-stream influence | pratibimba | other fields affect mine | social coupling |

• ree extra grid cells for claims that don't fit the nine:

• A | Ground | what precedes/underlies manifestation | — |
• B | Transformation | change across scales (the density project's home) | — |
• C | Practice | what the tradition says must be done | — |

5. The honesty rule

**No shared vocabulary counts as convergence without a shared

constraint or prediction.**

• plied mechanically:
• "Both use exclusion" → C (correspondence), nothing more.
• "X in the text resembles Y in the theory" → C, nothing more.
• "The tradition's claim imposes a condition the theory did not
• sume" → now it earns attention.
• "The theory predicts a result the tradition's interpretation
• scriminates" → now it earns attention.

6. The comparison protocol (for Line 2)

• en comparing traditions:

• State each tradition's claim IN ITS OWN WORDS first (T), with
• cation.
• Map each onto the grid separately.
• Only then compare grid positions. Same cell = C. Different cells =
• correspondence, say so.
• Never merge the traditions' vocabularies into one. The grid is the
• ly common language, and it is a mapping tool, not a metaphysics.

7. The alignment protocol (for Line 3)

• en checking a mapped claim against science:

• Cite the scientific result (published, peer-reviewed).
• State what it establishes, in its own terms.
• State the correspondence, if any (C).
• State the divergence, if any.
• Verdict: accommodated / contradicted / science silent.
• If "accommodated" — the mapping is a legitimate translation.
• "contradicted" — the claim is X or H, say which.
• "silent" — this is where the frontier files live.

8. The frontier file (for Line 4)

• `

FRONTIER: <name of the open question>

• AT IS ESTABLISHED:
• hat we know, with statuses>

• AT IS INTERPRETIVE:
• he mappings and readings, labelled>

• AT IS SPECULATIVE:
• he hypotheses, labelled in the first sentence>

• AT RESEARCH WOULD MOVE IT:
• pecific, doable, falsifiable where possible>
• ntervention → measurement → predicted result>
• ival model predicting something different>
• `

9. Versioning and correction

• Every document is dated and versioned.
• Corrections are made in place, with the correction noted, and the
• rsion bumped.
• An error found is a successful use of the method. It is logged, not
• dden.
• The append-only log of the project's history lives in
• heckpoints/` — each checkpoint is a compact, source-grounded
• cord of conclusions that survived scrutiny.

10. What we never do

• Never claim a mapping is an identity.
• Never claim a correspondence is a convergence without a shared
• nstraint or prediction.
• Never present a speculative claim as established.
• Never invent terminology. The nine operations are the vocabulary.
• Never let the programme's claims exceed the text's claims or the
• ience's claims.
• Never discard the old work — it is reclassified, not deleted.