AIM Framework glossary
Legibility Gradient
Canonical definition
The Legibility Gradient is the ordering of the three motivational channels by how much of itself each leaves available to notice once Common-Currency Integration has stripped its source-tag. The Body Manager's signal is anchored to a physiologically specifiable Referent and arrives with bodily phenomenology (stomach contraction, dry mouth, shivering) that persists into conscious awareness. The Thinker's signal is anchored to what the process it is running requires and arrives as work directed at a particular Object for a stated purpose, which likewise persists, accompanied by Curiosity and Boredom as the signatures of the ground-resolution function's recruitment and its exhaustion. The Observer's signal arrives as bare directional valence with no anchoring phenomenology whatever: nothing accompanies mimetic approach and nothing survives into awareness. Because Confabulation must complete a narrative over whatever the signal leaves behind, the Gradient fixes how far each channel constrains the narratives available, A narrowing them to deficit-relevant accounts, I to accounts the work can be checked against, and M not constraining them at all. Source Opacity strips all three tags equally; it is the absence of anchoring phenomenology in the Mimetic channel that makes the stripping operationally decisive there and only there. The Gradient is accordingly the first of the three conditions on which Axiom 3's account of Mimetic inaccessibility rests, the other two being that the traceless signal is a Salience reading rather than a deficit, and that integration destroys the tag that would mark it as one.
Explanation
All three of your motivational channels lose their labels when your brain adds them together, but they do not all lose the same amount. Hunger leaves something behind you can still feel: a stomach that is contracting, a dry mouth. Working on something leaves something too, since you know what the work is for and can hold it up against the job in front of you, and you can also tell whether you are still interested or have become bored. Wanting something because others want it leaves nothing behind at all. There is no particular feeling that goes with it and nothing that lingers for you to examine. So when your mind sets about explaining why you want the thing, the first two cases hand it material that keeps the story honest, and the third hands it nothing, which means the story can be anything at all. This is why the mimetic channel is the one that hides most completely, and why telling it apart requires looking at what you do rather than at what you feel.
Epistemic status
Framework-Specific Construct. Canonical development at Chapter 8, Section 8.2.5. Falsification criterion: were M-signals shown to carry distinctive anchoring phenomenology equivalent to A's bodily sensation or to the I-channel's work directed at a named Object for a stated purpose, the Gradient would be falsified, and with it Axiom 3's account of why the Mimetic case is the severe one.
Derivation
Related terms
- Source Opacity (Axiom 3)
- Salience-Deficit Conflation Principle
- Salience-Deficit Asymmetry
- Confabulation (Axiom 4)
- Triple Camouflage
- Camouflage Architecture
- Object Parasitism
- Two-Question Diagnostic
- I-Override
- Signed Valuation Principle
- Body Manager
- Thinker
- Observer
- Decision Hub
- Preconscious Transmission (Axiom 7)