Anchor: Information Primacy (I)

Working stance: I (information) is the base component we standardize first, and everything else is translated into it (or shown to be a different concept).

This avoids the “no matter what you pick, someone complains” trap by making the debate typed:

  • disagreements become objections or alternative definitions, not silent equivocations.

Canonical touchpoints (Theophysics)

  • Definition: 02_Definitions/D-002 Information.md
  • Axiom(s): 01_Ontological_Primitives/AX-003 Information Primacy.md (and any related Tier-0 notes)

External alignments (quarantine)

  • Hoffman: perception tracks fitness information (interface), not necessarily ontic truth.
  • IIT: “information/specificity” is an axiom of experience, not a physics claim by itself.
  • Bohm/Hiley: active information (quantum potential as form-guidance).
  • CTMU: reality as SCSPL (syntax/semantics as informational structure).
  • Hartman: value uses concept definitions (systemic information) as the basis of evaluation.

Non-negotiable next step

Before any identifications like Φ=χ or “active information = grace”, we must lock an internal information taxonomy:

  • Shannon/information-as-uncertainty
  • Semantic/information-as-meaning
  • Causal/information-as-cause–effect power
  • Ontic/information-as-primitive distinction

If two frameworks use different senses, we flag it and move on.