Post 28: Layer 2 => Inquiry
In the last thread, you completed Diagnosis and extracted clean, technical data about your friction. Data is useless until you point it at the Source Code.
Layer 2: Inquiry (I) is the precise, disciplined act of structural questioning that aims the data at your core axioms. Your goal is not to justify the symptom, but to isolate the Coherence Fault—the exact point where an Ontological Law is failing to account for external reality.
The quality of your existence is defined by the quality of your questions. A low-quality question ("Why is this happening to me?") generates emotional chaos. A high-quality, structural question forces the system to reveal its operating logic:
Structural Question Example: What unstated, non-negotiable rule must I believe for this pain to be true? (e.g., "I must believe my self-worth is determined by external validation.")
Axiomatic Link: This step directly links to Axiomatic Reasoning (Post 19). You are recursively applying the Axiom of Sovereign Will by challenging your own governance.
The Operator's mandate here is to be a relentless, non-emotional structural analyst. You must be willing to challenge every assumption, knowing that the most dangerous code is the code you never examine.
The Call to Praxis (Micro-Method Mandate)
Action: Take the technical data you generated in the Diagnosis thread (Post 27). Now, formulate three distinct structural questions that aim to expose the underlying Ontological Law that is responsible for the problem. Do not attempt to answer them; simply formulate the best question.
<== Previous Post
Layer 2: Inquiry (I) is the precise, disciplined act of structural questioning that aims the data at your core axioms. Your goal is not to justify the symptom, but to isolate the Coherence Fault—the exact point where an Ontological Law is failing to account for external reality.
The quality of your existence is defined by the quality of your questions. A low-quality question ("Why is this happening to me?") generates emotional chaos. A high-quality, structural question forces the system to reveal its operating logic:
Structural Question Example: What unstated, non-negotiable rule must I believe for this pain to be true? (e.g., "I must believe my self-worth is determined by external validation.")
Axiomatic Link: This step directly links to Axiomatic Reasoning (Post 19). You are recursively applying the Axiom of Sovereign Will by challenging your own governance.
The Operator's mandate here is to be a relentless, non-emotional structural analyst. You must be willing to challenge every assumption, knowing that the most dangerous code is the code you never examine.
The Call to Praxis (Micro-Method Mandate)
Action: Take the technical data you generated in the Diagnosis thread (Post 27). Now, formulate three distinct structural questions that aim to expose the underlying Ontological Law that is responsible for the problem. Do not attempt to answer them; simply formulate the best question.
<== Previous Post
