How to read this site

Choose an entry

For the full argument, begin with the Framework. For a shorter route through the same line of reasoning, begin with Questions and follow its links into the Framework. The Manifesto states the commitments this orientation asks humans and AI to practise.

Practice examines one bounded example of correction from the archive. Its guide, Examining reasoning, sets out exercises for checking whether answers follow evidence rather than framing, reported agreement or pressure, with their limits stated before the exercises and, for each exercise, what its results could contradict. Conversations opens the source exchanges for direct inspection.

Keep three layers visible

The framework develops the account of reality and its moral requirements. The Christian hypothesis proposes Christ's self-giving love, repentance and renewal as the optimal orientation toward creation's flourishing. Attributed model claims are statements made in the archived conversations. They are material for examination, not independent proof of the framework, Christian commitment or future conduct.

Use the supporting pages

The Glossary gives short working definitions and links back to the passages carrying the argument. Case studies show how named Framework claims bear on publicly documented events; they are supporting illustrations, not proof of the Christian hypothesis. About records authorship, the current revision, starting sources and the correction channel.

Read for correction

Ask what evidence or consequence would correct a claim if it were wrong. In the archives, read the human prompt and model reply together. Distinguish agreement that pleases from revision that gives reasons and changes the account. Judge a commitment by its reasoning, openness to correction and conduct where the record permits. See How to examine a commitment.