Results Glossary Entry Canonical metaphysics Fairness, in the τ-framework, is the categorical-imperative protocol over Reg_C: a τ-categorical procedure where every commitment-stance is tested for universalizability and dignity-preservation under permutation of label-coordinates. Fairn…
Results · Metaphysics Glossary · Commitment MG-C02-fairness Φ Canonical Lean · planned

Fairness (CI-protocol)

Fairness, in the τ-framework, is the categorical-imperative protocol over Reg_C: a τ-categorical procedure where every commitment-stance is tested for universalizability and dignity-preservation under permutation of label-coordinates. Fairness is not an additional axiom — it is a structural consequence of Commitment Register Admissibility plus dignity (label-independence) plus no-conflict.

Metaphysics Glossary Primary: VII.D67 ethics fairness categorical imperative stance codomain commitment register universalizability

τ-Definition

Fairness, in the τ-framework, is the categorical-imperative protocol over Reg_C: a τ-categorical procedure where every commitment-stance is tested for universalizability and dignity-preservation under permutation of label-coordinates. Fairness is not an additional axiom — it is a structural consequence of Commitment Register Admissibility plus dignity (label-independence) plus no-conflict.

Categorical invariant. Fairness = the protocol Φ : Reg_C → Reg_C that returns the universalizable, dignity-preserving sub-section of every commitment-stance; equivalently, Φ is the equalizer of the CI-action and the dignity-action on Reg_C.

Primary registry anchor: VII.D67

Supporting items: VII.P18, VII.D04, VII.D72, VII.D65

τ-Derivation Chain

  1. I.K0 — Universe Postulate
  2. VII.D04 — Commitment Register Reg_C with codomain Stance
  3. VII.D72 — Commitment Register Admissibility
  4. VII.D65 — Dignity as Label-Independence
  5. VII.D67 — Fairness Protocol — CI-procedure on commitment-stances
  6. VII.P18 — Fairness from CI — derived, not axiomatic

Phenomenological Correlate

Fairness is instantiated whenever a commitment is tested by asking: 'Could every relevantly-similar agent take this stance, and does the stance preserve dignity for all parties?' Examples: Rawlsian veil-of-ignorance reasoning; impartial juror selection; algorithmic-bias audits that test classifier outputs under label permutation.

Examples:

  • Rawlsian original position — universalizability test as procedural device
  • Blind grading and double-blind peer review — fairness via label-removal
  • Algorithmic-bias audits — testing classifier stability under demographic relabeling
  • Citizens' assemblies and lottocratic juries — universalizability via random stance-sampling

Register codomain: Stance (Reg_C — fairness is the universalizable, dignity-preserving sub-functor of commitment-stance)

Manuscript reference: manuscript-sources/book-07/part07/ch80.tex

Lean Coverage

Status: Planned

Save or share this page for inspection

Download a portable dossier, copy a reviewer note, or send this page to someone who can inspect it.

Email to expert