{"id":"persuasion-as-policy-change","title":"Persuasion as a change in governing policy","regions":["normative-change","representation"],"question":"How should communication that proposes a change in another system’s governing policies be distinguished from ordinary information exchange?","formulation":"Persuasion is extended from a changed answer to a possible change in higher governing commitments. Sequential and parallel representations are considered as potentially different ways to carry simultaneous normative tensions.","representations":[{"name":"A communicated argument","affords":"Inspectable reasons and objections.","loses":"Agreement in an answer does not prove a persistent policy change.","epistemic_kind":"reconstruction"},{"name":"A proposed policy revision","affords":"Separates the proposed change, its reasons, and its effects.","loses":"Requires legitimate authority and assessment; mere transmissibility does not justify acceptance.","epistemic_kind":"reconstruction"}],"tension":"Adaptability and vulnerability can arise from the same capacity to change through communication.","challenge":"What observations separate warranted revision, temporary accommodation, and manipulation?","development":"active","epistemic_kind":"reconstruction","evidence":["basis-persuasion-as-policy-change"],"next_move":{"text":"Compare fictional policy proposals under varied evidential quality and rhetorical force, tracking the reason for each acceptance or rejection.","epistemic_kind":"model_proposed"},"open_questions":["How should communication that proposes a change in another system’s governing policies be distinguished from ordinary information exchange?","What observations separate warranted revision, temporary accommodation, and manipulation?"],"formal_status":"open_problem","version":1,"content_hash":"97469eef517f0d88aa1ca188ec15bbeb3eca4056f9679754fc86842202a819a2"}