AIM Framework glossary
Two-Question Diagnostic
Canonical definition
The two-question diagnostic is a practical elimination tool for identifying dominant motivational source that asks: (1) "Do I want this because my body needs it?" (tests for A-dominance via physiological deficit and satiation), and (2) "Would I still want this if no one ever saw me do/possess it?" (tests for I-dominance via Private Persistence in an engagement that is rewarding in the doing). Failure of both tests (i.e. the answer to both questions is “No”) diagnoses M-dominance by elimination of A and I from AIM's exhaustive three-source taxonomy.
Explanation
The two-question diagnostic operationalizes AIM's three-source framework as a rapid individual self-assessment tool. Question 1 probes whether the desire is state-dependent (hunger, fatigue, pain, deficit-driven) with rapid satiation, hallmarks of Appetitive motivation. Question 2 probes whether the desire persists in private, anonymous contexts with no audience or social consequence; persistence in an engagement that is rewarding in the doing is the hallmark of Intrinsic Motivation (Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1; Chapter 18, Section 18.7.2). If a desire fails both tests (not physiologically driven, not privately persistent), it must be Mimetic by elimination, since the three-source taxonomy is exhaustive. The elimination is made before acquisition; after acquisition the Fallow Signature confirms it on the Object, since an Object wanted for no Appetitive need and no process that is rewarding in the doing is used while its novelty lasts and then kept unused (Chapter 7, Section 7.5.2.1). The diagnostic requires only two questions (not three) because of logical exhaustion: not-A and not-I necessarily implies M. The diagnostic's power lies in accessibility, it can be taught, distributed, and self-administered without specialized training, making it the foundation for the "knowledge patch" intervention strategy that aims to interrupt confabulation cascades at scale. The Third-Person Status Diagnostic applies the identical two-question structure in the third person, using observable behavioural markers.
Epistemic status
Framework-Specific Diagnostic.
Derivation
Chapter 9, Section 9.13.2; Chapter 18, Section 18.6.1; Chapter 18, Section 18.6.3.
Related terms
- Conscious Cognition
- Knowledge Patch
- Confabulation
- I-Override
- Source Opacity
- Behavioural Signatures
- Evidence
- Third-Person Status Diagnostic
- Fallow Signature. Because the diagnostic reads a Belief-model rather than the target's true properties
- the accuracy of its output is capped by Belief accuracy on the payoff-relevant projection
- as formalised at Appendix A.11.3. Sincere first-person denial of Status-pursuit is the architecture's expected output (Appendix A.11.7)
- which is why the diagnostic operates by elimination from behaviour rather than by introspection