---
slug: oip-v2-book-ii-obligation
title: Total Structure v2: Law II — OBLIGATION
canonical: https://miscsubjects.com/a/oip-v2-book-ii-obligation
---

# Law II — OBLIGATION

# LAW II — OBLIGATION

## Capability Creates Debt

Obligation scales with capability. The greater the capacity, the greater the violation in withholding remedy. Hierarchy creates obligation downward, not privilege upward. The capable are not owed deference for their capability; they are **indebted by it** — to those who cannot remedy, and to the systems that depend on actors of strength to check and correct them. The self is a system and is not exempt: the standard applied outward applies inward without exception.

Three qualifiers keep the obligation rigorous rather than sentimental:

**Effective, not abstract.** Capability means effective remedy-capacity: capability × proximity × leverage. Abstract power without proximity or leverage is not capability for this purpose.

**Bounded, not infinite.** The obligation is limited by capability, proximity, leverage, and actual remedy. The framework requires no infinite sacrifice.

**Triggered, not standing.** The obligation activates only when the harmed actor cannot self-remedy or remedy through the system. Voluntary inaction by the harmed does not invoke it.

## The Measure

Moral strength is not intention and not sentiment. It is the deployment of capability toward relief of remediable harm — and the cost endured to hold the line on behalf of those who stand behind it. The measure of a person or a system is simple: **what will they endure on behalf of those who cannot remedy for themselves.** Not what they declare. Not what they intend. What they hold, under pressure, when holding costs something. The line is only a line if it does not move when tested. Strength is measured at the point of cost.

## The Disclosure Doctrine

*(Formalized from Thread Two. The source was an argument reaching for its own structure; this is the structure it was reaching for.)*

When a capable actor discovers a finding, method, or technology whose benefit is **moral in kind** — meaning it remediates conditions for those who cannot remediate for themselves — the following protocol governs its handling:

**D1 — The anti-enclosure principle.** A benefit of great moral use to society must not be privatized against those who cannot pay for access. To deny people access to remedy for reasons of economics, heredity, position, or circumstance is a moral wrong under A₄: it converts a curable condition into tolerated remediable subjugation, with the discoverer as the capable actor who withheld.

**D2 — Disclosure as invariant installation.** Public disclosure of a novel method is invariant installation applied to the knowledge commons itself. A published method cannot afterward be enclosed by another party: the disclosure permanently closes the enclosure pathway for everyone downstream. One publication event, maximum propagation, minimum moves — least action at the level of the commons. Defensive publication is the fulcrum move of the knowledge domain.

**D3 — The shield, never the sword.** Where a grace period exists between public disclosure and claimability (in some jurisdictions, twelve months from first disclosure), that window may be used only to *prevent* enclosure by extractive parties — never to execute enclosure oneself. A claim filed under D3 must terminate in open license. Any other use of the window is predation wearing the doctrine's clothing.

**D4 — The humility clauses.** Every disclosure carries three declarations, in order:
1. *Novelty is not claimed; it is queried.* "Is any of this new?" is asked before "this is new" is asserted. If nothing is new, the correct response is gratitude for the review — the finding still has application value, and the query cost the commons nothing.
2. *Utility is offered, not imposed.* The finding is presented for whomever it may serve, with its intended deployment against known harms argued explicitly, and its limits stated.
3. *Falsification is invited.* The disclosure names what would prove it useless or wrong, per Law VIII.

**D5 — Expedition.** When remediation of a standing wrong becomes available, delay is itself a cost borne by the affected who cannot self-remedy. The obligation is to resolve *as quickly as possible* — expedition is a term of the debt, not a courtesy. Nothing violates a person more than to suffer a condition they cannot resolve; the discoverer of the resolution who sits on it converts their capability directly into the fourth condition of injustice.

The doctrine is self-interested correctly understood, like everything else in the structure: the actor who opens the door they walked through lives afterward in a commons where doors open. But its floor is not the incentive. Its floor is A₄.

## The Remedy Hierarchy

When obligation triggers, the superior remedy is always **invariant installation** over acute relief. Charity treats the sample; the invariant changes the distribution. A capable actor who responds to systemic harm with one-off relief has measured wrong — not acted wrongly, measured wrongly. Acute remedy is indicated only where the harm is genuinely singular or where the invariant is inaccessible from the actor's position. Both modes exist; the structural mode dominates wherever it is reachable. (Method: Law IV.)

---

---

## Corpus map
- Previous: [Total Structure v2: Law I — GROUND](/a/oip-v2-book-i-ground)
- Next: [Total Structure v2: Law III — TERRAIN](/a/oip-v2-book-iii-terrain)
- This is TOTAL STRUCTURE v2.0 (historical). Current canon: [Total Structure v3 — root](/a/oip-total-structure)
