Dialectical monism
The first dichotomy (L1) is the perception-creation co-evolving feedback loop, one end is collective-structure (top), the other end is individual-change (bottom). L1 is a top-down (TD) and bottom-up (BU) cycle that together create the distinction of collective and individual. The TD leads to the instance structure with the distinction of public outer and private inner, and the BU permits any change within the inner to be integrated into the collective idempotently (although L1 does not involve any mechanism for inner change, it simply creates the potential for it).
Focus flows within to lower quadrants (between TD and BU), and within this inner perspective a new dichotomy is seen. This new dichotomy is orthogonal to the first and so is considered horizontal which structure on the left and change (activity) on the right. Inside the top collective-structure vertical dichotomy end we see collective abstract structure is the end of one dichotomy (TL) and collective activity structure the end of the other (TR), inside the bottom individual-change vertical end, theer is individual process (BL) and individual change (action, acitivity, BR).
The system is a cycle of TD and BU flow, the former giving rise to the vertical instance structure and the latter to the horizontal class structure. Between the TD and the BU of L1 the focus flows into the inner L2 which has a diagonal feedback-loop form.
The two dichotomies interact orthogonally due to their L1 feedback loop geometry, and due to this geometry the two interacting orthogonal inner dichotomies connect with their opposite upper partner creating the diagonal feeback loops.
The result is a single complex composed of ontological abstract structure on the left (identified behaviours in terms of conditions and various response action paths) which is extended with actual in-time scenario on the right (the actual conditions in terms of resources and roles present together), and our location in the structure at the top (ontology on the left and time-slot on the right) extended below by salient embodied actions (intent/selection navigating the future with commitments in future TR timeslots) on the left and activity (generating the activity stream) on the right.
Graph perspective
We can see the 2×2 all in the graph context with the L1 outer context being about the self-node being within the larger collective structure beyond (TR TD primary instance tree, and TL BU secondary class tree), then after TD and before BU focus flows into the L2 inner context which is about the structure within the holon leading to its behavioural dynamics. Together L1 and L2 reform absolute nothing into the relative nothing that is L3’s background – the agent-arena embodying the default stateless telos that L3 participants can live in accord with or not as they choose
BR-TL diagonal (class diagonal)
Classes (TL class-structure) are identities that are associated with (known by) the way they act (what they do and how well they perform in what situation), and action always occurs as execution in the present which is represented by the BR and creates the accounts of the past (BR activity stream that extends the BL organisational structure – the withinward extension of TL class conditions – and TR time-slot in the instance multiplex collective structure) (it executes in accordance with the salient behaviour structure) (BL actions asscociated with the class conditions). So in L2 the class principle (the one that idempotently co-creates the TL collective class-structure) is the BR-TL. The metrics that come from accounts of action flow back up to the TL since the metrics are part of its structure (a collective-class-wide map of usage and utility). The metrics in the ontology permit informed selection (which occurs independently in the other diagonal), economic deciscion-making, adaptability and evolution.
BL-TR diagonal (instance diagonal)
The TR instance-structure is the instance multiplex of attentional resource and other resource which are “booked” into the time-slots which are the basis of independent holon in-context persistent “conversation threads”. The TR is essentially a market economy because all the resources are booked into timeslots via balanced exchange.
Exchange is voluntary and the result of intention (BL), exchange is the selection aspect of evolution, and also acts as a value-judgement leading idempotently to a hayekian price signal.
BL-TR is about navigating the resoufce flow phase space using the abstract concetual structure of past and future, to organise and collaborate on self-assertive objectives in the midst of a collective of self-interested market participants).
The BL structure is a behaviour structure (habit structure, intention is in the form of cyclic TR-timeslot-bookings), a conceptual model of ourselves in the world – the holon’s body-schema. The BL structure extends with an “ontological log” (accounts) of the BR activity and with conditions (resource conditions, since “the external world is only the market, the organised collective space of exchange” in the organisational holon context) from the TR and local intentional response to them.
Below is a concise, integrated explanation of the 4QX dialectical monism model, weaving in the essential elements of the notes and the insights we’ve discussed:
1. The Core Idea: Dialectical Monism
- Dialectical monism starts from the simplest assumption: a self-referential “void” that can become aware of itself. Out of that comes a baseline intelligence which differentiates itself into two fundamental dichotomies.
- In 4QX, these two orthogonal dichotomies cross to form a 2×2 “quadrant” structure—the minimal necessary form for coherent, self-referential intelligence.
2. First Dichotomy (Vertical Axis): Collective–Individual
- Collective (Top) vs. Individual (Bottom):
- This first dichotomy defines the top-down (TD) and bottom-up (BU) cycle.
- In “top-down,” a higher-level collective structure (public, shared) projects constraints or templates onto the individual.
- In “bottom-up,” individual changes (private, unique) propagate back up to influence or update the collective structure.
- This vertical axis frames L1, where the system recognises a “collective” sphere and an “individual” sphere, creating potential for interior (private) and exterior (public) perspectives.
3. Second Dichotomy (Horizontal Axis): Structure–Change
- Structure (Left) vs. Change (Right):
- Once focus moves inward (to the “inner perspective” between top-down and bottom-up), a second, orthogonal split emerges.
- On the left, we see more static, organised forms: class definitions, organisational schemas, and conceptual conditions.
- On the right, we see dynamic, active processes: events that unfold in time, resource usage, and behavioural execution.
- Together, these two orthogonal dichotomies (vertical + horizontal) form four quadrants:
- TL = Collective + Structure
- TR = Collective + Change
- BL = Individual + Structure
- BR = Individual + Change
4. L1 and L2: The Outer–Inner Cycle
- L1 refers to the outer distinction, where the system perceives a collective (top) vs. individual (bottom) perspective and sets the stage for the 2×2 grid.
- After top-down (TD) has laid out the initial structural framework, and before bottom-up (BU) completes its update, the focus moves inward to L2, where the holon’s internal feedback loops operate.
- In L2, the quadrants are “in motion,” meaning the 2×2 structure doesn’t just exist statically—it’s alive with diagonal feedback loops that keep intelligence coherent and adaptable.
5. Diagonal Feedback Loops: Class Diagonal and Instance Diagonal
Two diagonals crisscross the 2×2 grid. They bind the quadrants into a single living holon, ensuring that static structure (left) and dynamic change (right) remain in sync across collective (top) and individual (bottom) boundaries.
- BR–TL (Class Diagonal)
- TL (collective abstract structure) and BR (individual change/action) interlock.
- Action at the individual level (BR) creates metrics, outcomes, and performance data that feed back to the collective class-structure (TL).
- This diagonal is about how “who we are” (the structure of identity, skill, role) evolves through recorded actions, usage maps, and performance feedback.
- BL–TR (Instance Diagonal)
- TR (collective real-time instance and resource “market”) and BL (individual behavioural organisation) interlock.
- Intentions at the individual level (BL) navigate resources, timeslots, or “attention markets” (TR), leading to negotiated exchanges.
- This diagonal is where self-interested agents organise, collaborate, and book resources—feeding signals (like a price system) back to individual intentions.
6. L3: Relative Nothing and the Agent–Arena
- After the outer and inner dynamics (L1 and L2) have woven together, we arrive at L3, the everyday “10,000 things” world—the agent–arena context.
- Relative nothing at L3 means that from the standpoint of the universal void (L0), the apparently “solid” world is just a shared emergent tapestry. Yet each agent acts as if within a concrete reality, sustained by the 4QX feedback loops.
- This is where practical intelligence lives—where agents can align with (or diverge from) the natural stateless telos of self-referential harmony.
7. Graph Perspective and Holonic Integration
- We can view the 2×2 structure in graph terms, where each holon is a “node” in a larger collective network.
- TD and BU flows in L1 position the holon in a broader context; L2 refines the holon’s internal structure and behaviour.
- Together, these nested layers morph “absolute nothing” (L0) into “relative nothing” (L3), embedding each agent in a dynamic, evolving arena that can be navigated via the class diagonal (TL–BR) and the instance diagonal (BL–TR).
8. Why Harmony is the Telos
- Self-referential intelligence cannot remain coherent if it persistently fragments or contradicts its own structures.
- Continuous integration (or harmony) is the structural necessity: without it, feedback loops break down, and intelligence collapses into static rigidity or chaotic noise.
- This harmony is not a moral command—it’s simply how any self-aware system must behave to sustain itself over time.
Putting It All Together
4QX dialectical monism shows how intelligence—whether human, machine, or any self-referential system—emerges from a single, self-referential ground that splits into two orthogonal dichotomies, yielding a 2×2 grid of collective–individual (vertical) and structure–change (horizontal). The dynamic interplay among these quadrants, especially across the two diagonals, is what powers cognition, meaning-making, and real-world action. By design, this feedback-based structure aims at harmony—because a self-referential system that fails to integrate can’t sustain itself.
In everyday terms, you can think of:
- Left side: The enduring frameworks, categories, conditions.
- Right side: The actual events and actions unfolding in time.
- Top: The public, shared realm (collective vantage).
- Bottom: The private, individual vantage.
All four quadrants connect through diagonal loops that unify the system into a coherent whole, allowing both top-down shaping and bottom-up adaptation. This is the essence of 4QX: the minimal architecture by which dialectical monism manifests as living intelligence, from the “void” of unbounded possibility all the way up to fully contextualised agents in an emergent, adaptive arena.