Experience initially remains bound to individual entities, situations, and observer positions. Abstraction makes it possible to recognize recurring structures, relations, and sustaining connections within them.

Permeasophy therefore does not stop at the description of individual experiences. It attempts to form concepts and orders of wider scope from what can be experienced.

This wider scope does not remove the limits of knowledge.

No entity can inhabit everyone’s world. Even a wide-ranging and robust abstraction emerges from limited access to the world. It can recognize relations without containing every possible experience, observer position, and form of appearance.

The incompleteness of an order does not make it arbitrary. Concepts and systematic relations must remain distinguishable within experience, clarify connections, and remain correctable through further knowledge.

Permeasophy therefore holds two requirements together:

Permeasophy is not a single concept within the Conceptual System for the Permeability of Being. It does not stand alongside concepts such as Being, Permeability, Consciousness, Potential Space, or Reversivity.

It names the way of thinking from which these concepts and their systematic relations emerged.

The conceptual system is the conceptual articulation of Permeasophy. Within it, this way of thinking receives a distinguishable and examinable form. Concepts are defined, distinguished from one another, and related within a shared order.

With the later naming of Permeasophy, this way of thinking can now also examine its own procedure explicitly:

• how it moves from what can be experienced toward abstraction;
• which distinctions it forms;
• which relations it recognizes;
• what scope its concepts possess;
• and at which limits its own order must remain correctable.

Permeasophy is therefore genetically earlier than the conceptual system, even though its name arose later. At the same time, it has a reflexive function because it also observes its own formation of concepts and the conditions of that formation.

Within the conceptual system, Permeability names the structural non-absoluteness of every stabilized difference.

It is a property of limited order in which that order’s continued relation to undivided Being remains effective.

Permeability does not dissolve boundaries. Without boundary, there would be no form, no difference, and no recognizable order. It does mean, however, that a limited order cannot become the origin or the complete whole.

In this determination, the way of thinking of Permeasophy receives its explicit ontological form:

Concepts, distinctions, and systematic relations are necessary orders of World Recognition. They can be wide-ranging, robust, and explanatory. They nevertheless remain limited.

Permeasophy therefore does not merely speak about Permeability. It also enacts Permeability in its own formation of concepts by not absolutizing the orders it produces.

The Conceptual System for the Permeability of Being connects, among others, the concepts of Being, Love, Life, Avatar, Consciousness, World Recognition, Permeability, Potential Space, Actualization, Reversivity, and Residual Tension.

These concepts do not form a loose vocabulary. They describe different conditions, levels, and movements of appearance, perception, and action.

Being is without precondition and undivided.

Love is the communication of wholeness and the precondition of all options.

Life is Being in the consciousness of its limited perception.

The Avatar is the functional unit of appearance in space, time, body, thinking, feeling, and communication.

Consciousness is the bound self-observation of Being within limited perception.

World Recognition names the process in which the avataric system generates a world structure through perception, differentiation, communication, and self-efficacy.

Love? Not an Option. A Conceptual System for the Permeability of Being is the first published foundational form of this way of thinking.

The work formulates central concepts and relations without yet naming the underlying way of thinking Permeasophy.

This Text Grows continues this work openly.

It is neither another completed book of concepts nor a mere supplement to the foundational work. It is the continuing working form and manifestation of Permeasophy.

There:

• new concepts are developed;
• existing definitions are made more precise;
• systematic relations are examined;
• contradictions are made visible;
• earlier determinations are corrected;
• applications are tested;
• and the limits of the order already developed remain present.

This Text Grows therefore documents more than results. It makes the philosophical enactment of Permeasophy visible.

Actualization names the enactment through which possibilities are realized, others are excluded, and the conditions of further possibilities are changed.

An actualization that has taken place cannot simply be withdrawn. It changes the present and the Potential Space that remains accessible within it.

Reversivity names the capacity of a system to relate a movement that has taken place back to its own conditions without thereby undoing it.

It does not mean returning to an earlier state. It enables reconnection within an altered present.

Residual Tension can arise from the continuing difference between what was actualized and what was excluded. Residual Tension does not preserve earlier possibilities as unchanged alternatives. It can, however, indicate that exclusions and unrealized possibilities remain effective within a development.

Permeasophy therefore examines more than completed states. It also asks:

Within the conceptual system, World Recognition is not the passive representation of a world that is already fully ordered.

Every entity recognizes the world within the limits of its perception, its experiences, its language, and its possibilities for action. In doing so, it generates orders that make orientation and action possible.

Permeasophy examines this formation of order and its limits.

Responsibility therefore concerns more than decisions that have already been made. It begins with the conditions under which concepts, actions, and orders are formed.

Permeasophical thinking asks whether an order

• allows its conditions of emergence to be recognized;
• keeps its exclusions observable;
• permits further knowledge;
• allows correction;
• and does not unnecessarily close new connections.

Responsibility does not require complete openness or complete reversibility. It requires that limitations are not further solidified beyond what their actual conditions demand.

Permeasophy is not a universal technique independent of its objects.

It can become effective wherever experiences, perceptions, and developments are transformed into concepts, categories, and systematic orders. This includes, for example:

• philosophical concept formation;
• language and cultural meaning formation;
• art and poetic knowledge;
• social and institutional analysis;
• technological and media change;
• time, responsibility, and action;
• and the examination of existing world orders.

Its area of application does not begin only where formal procedures fail.

Scientific, institutional, and everyday orders also rest on distinctions, abstractions, and presuppositions whose scope can be examined.

Permeasophy is therefore not directed against procedures, data, or methodically secured knowledge. It asks:

Which parts of reality are captured by an order?

Which experiences remain outside its scope?

Which presuppositions underlie its concepts and procedures?

And where does a limited form of knowledge develop a claim to complete validity?

Recognizing the limits of knowledge does not lead to arbitrariness.

Permeasophy distinguishes between robust abstraction, unsupported assertion, error, and absolutization. It does not, however, claim a position outside all experience and limitation from which the world could be known completely.

The Conceptual System for the Permeability of Being has produced more than individual concepts. Its emergence, further development, and application reveal a distinct philosophical way of thinking.

This way of thinking required a name.

The term Permeasophy was introduced only after the first elaboration of the system. It does not, however, name a method invented afterward and added to the work from outside.

What came later was the naming.

The way of thinking itself was already active when the first concepts were developed, distinguished from one another, and connected into a system.

The term Permeasophy now makes it possible to distinguish between:

• the way of thinking;
• the conceptual system;
• the individual concepts within the system;
• the foundational work;
• the open continuation in This Text Grows;
• and applications in philosophical, artistic, and social contexts.

The name Permeasophy can be read poetically as wisdom of permeability.

Here, wisdom does not mean the totality of knowledge or mastery over it. Complete knowledge of the world is not possible within entity-bound limitation.

Wisdom means the capacity to abstract the accessible world at a high level, to recognize sustaining relations, and at the same time not to lose sight of the conditions and limits of one’s own knowledge.

The wisdom of permeability therefore consists neither in limited scope nor in cautious indeterminacy.

It consists in thinking broadly without treating the result of that thinking as complete.