All systems eventually face moments of collapse. But collapse is not an endpoint—it is a coordination event. The question is not whether a system falls, but whether it retains the capacity to revise itself afterward.
This is where revisability meets responsibility.
1. Collapse as a structural event
Collapse is often imagined as failure: chaos, catastrophe, or moral catastrophe.
From a revisability perspective:
-
Collapse is a reconfiguration of constraints,
-
a realignment of relationships,
-
a moment where new possibilities may emerge—if the system has not already frozen itself.
The ethical question is: does the system emerge capable of learning, or does it ossify?
2. Responsibility without control
Traditional ethics ties responsibility to control or intent. Revisability reframes this:
-
We are responsible to the field, not to outcomes.
-
Responsibility is exercised by preserving the system’s capacity to revise,
-
even when we cannot determine how it will evolve.
In fragile or collapsing systems, this is the only ethical locus available.
3. The temporal dimension
Revisability demands temporal patience:
-
Immediate correctness is impossible,
-
Rapid moralisation is corrosive,
-
Actions must account for cumulative effect on future negotiability.
Ethical actors act not to fix now, but to keep later revision possible.
4. Subversion and repair
Subversion, as discussed previously, is the active restoration of revisability.
During collapse:
-
Subversion becomes maintenance of intelligibility,
-
Restoration of feedback loops,
-
Reopening of suppressed deviations.
Collapse is not an excuse for heroics or moral certainties, but a call to relational precision.
5. Ethics as a capacity, not a verdict
When revisability is central:
-
Ethics is not about being right, winning, or punishing,
-
It is about keeping the system capable of learning,
-
About enabling intelligibility under constraints,
-
About ensuring future negotiability.
All other ethical forms—righteousness, moralising, loyalty tests—collapse under these conditions.
6. One-line compression
True ethical action preserves the system’s capacity to revise itself, even amidst collapse.
7. Closing reflection
Revisability reframes everything:
-
Freedom, democracy, pluralism, resilience → only meaningful if revisable
-
Moral language → often accelerates unrevisability
-
Power → asymmetric control over revisability
-
Subversion → the restoration of revisability
Collapse is not defeat, but a lens on the system’s structural health. Ethics is not a verdict, but a stewardship of the system’s future negotiability.
This mini-series closes, then, not with certainty, but with a clear orientation:
To act ethically is to act for revisability—always for the possibility of reconfiguration, reflection, and intelligibility yet to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment