Bewaard in:
| Hoofdauteur: | |
|---|---|
| Formaat: | Recurso digital |
| Taal: | Engels |
| Gepubliceerd in: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Onderwerpen: | |
| Online toegang: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19057792 |
| Tags: |
Voeg label toe
Geen labels, Wees de eerste die dit record labelt!
|
Inhoudsopgave:
- <p>This paper applies the Dynamic Harmony structural stress-test framework to social and institutional systems, evaluating whether large-scale transformations in governance, economic organization, and collective coordination satisfy the requirements of the five-phase emergence grammar.</p> <p>The analysis examines major institutional transitions, including shifts in political-economic regimes, governance structures, and large-scale coordination systems. These transitions are treated as candidate instances of ontological emergence rather than incremental reform within stable institutional architectures.</p> <p>Two formal instruments are deployed. The Phase-Skip Test evaluates whether the five-phase sequence is instantiated in the correct structural order. The State Space Redefinition Test (SSRT) evaluates whether the transition constitutes a redefinition of the system’s admissible state space, rather than reconfiguration within an existing institutional regime.</p> <p>Social and institutional systems are analyzed as constraint-bound structures in which rules, norms, and enforcement mechanisms define the permissible configuration space of agents and interactions. Destabilization is characterized as a breakdown or erosion of institutional constraints, while Binding is evaluated in terms of the formation of new coordination closures across agents, norms, and enforcement structures.</p> <p>The analysis shows that many large-scale social changes represent configurational adaptation within existing institutional architectures rather than genuine emergence. However, certain historical transitions exhibit structural reorganization consistent with Type 2 emergence, involving the creation of new constraint systems and expanded domains of coordinated action.</p> <p>The paper contributes to political economy, sociology, and complexity theory by providing a formal structural discriminant between reform and true institutional emergence, clarifying the conditions under which social systems undergo genuine phase transitions.</p>