Åke Elden

Concept Graph

How the concepts hold together

The programme is not a list of separate concepts. Each concept is developed against — and through — the others. The lines below mark the load-bearing connections; each is supported by specific publications.

Click a connection to see the works that develop it. Each connection has a shareable link you can copy or bookmark.

How to read this diagram

  • Nodes are the load-bearing concepts of the programme. Hover a node to see its tagline; click through for the full concept page.
  • Edges mark supporting relationships between two concepts. Hover an edge for its one-line note; click it to reveal the works that develop that connection.
  • A selected edge highlights its two endpoints and dims the rest — a way to trace a single relationship in isolation.

Path styles

  • Path 1 — solid line. The first capacity you pick lights up edges cited by its works.
  • Path 2 — dashed line. Add a second capacity to run it alongside Path 1; both advance step by step.
  • Overlap — a soft halo behind the solid and dashed strokes. It marks edges cited by works from both capacities: the places where the two paths meet on the same connection.

Tracing a capacity? Open presupposed, transformed, or concealed in the archive, then return here and follow the edges cited by those works.

Path styles — color & intensity

Adjust the color and intensity used by Path 1, Path 2, and the Overlap halo so the graph stays readable with your display preferences. Changes apply live and persist on this device.

Path 1solid stroke

Color

100%

Path 2dashed stroke

Color

100%

Overlaphalo behind both

Color

40%

Path tracing

Pick one or two capacities. The graph highlights each path one step at a time — and marks the connections where the two overlap.

Inferential License × Judgment Gap — Overreached inference is the mechanism by which the judgment gap opens. (click to see supporting works)Judgment Gap × Second-Order Provenance — Closing the gap requires provenance not of data but of the orderings that make outputs decisive. (click to see supporting works)Second-Order Provenance × Epistemic Infrastructure — Normative orderings are sustained by — and inherited from — epistemic infrastructure. (click to see supporting works)Inferential License × Epistemic Infrastructure — License to infer is granted, revoked, and audited by the surrounding epistemic infrastructure. (click to see supporting works)Partition Thesis × Ethical Disclosure — Standing does not by itself disclose a claim; disclosure is the prior condition of ordering. (click to see supporting works)Ethical Disclosure × Judgment Gap — Where disclosure is foreclosed, no judgment can arise — the gap is total. (click to see supporting works)Partition Thesis × Second-Order Provenance — Ordering disputes are second-order disputes; standing does not settle them. (click to see supporting works)Comparative Entitlement Formation × Post-Mimetic Relationality — Entitlement forms out of comparison once mimetic relations are infrastructurally routed. (click to see supporting works)Post-Mimetic Relationality × Epistemic Infrastructure — Post-mimetic relations are held in place by the same infrastructures that constitute knowledge. (click to see supporting works)Comparative Entitlement Formation × Ethical Disclosure — Platform grievance forecloses the disclosure of the other as an addressable party. (click to see supporting works)Systemic Friction × Judgment Gap — Removing friction removes the temporal room in which judgment could be exercised. (click to see supporting works)Systemic Friction × Epistemic Infrastructure — Friction is a load-bearing feature of epistemic infrastructure, not an inefficiency. (click to see supporting works)Automated Certainty × Epistemic Infrastructure — Algorithmic systems function as epistemic infrastructure that can make representations accessible without producing the competence required to evaluate them. (click to see supporting works)Automated Certainty × Judgment Gap — Automated certainty widens the judgment gap by producing felt resolution at the operating level while the conditions of answerable evaluation are absent. (click to see supporting works)Automated Certainty × Systemic Friction — Removing the friction of perplexity, disagreement, and repetition can accelerate resolution while removing the temporal room in which competence is formed. (click to see supporting works)Inferential License — The normative permission to draw a conclusion from a given design — not merely the capacity to draw it.InferentialLicenseJudgment Gap — The interval between what a system outputs and what a judgment would require to be answerable.Judgment GapSecond-Order Provenance — Traceability not of data, but of the normative orderings under which data are taken to matter.Second-OrderProvenancePartition Thesis — Criteria of moral standing determine who is considerable but do not, by themselves, generate priority among those admitted.PartitionThesisEthical Disclosure — The conditions under which a moral claim comes into view at all.EthicalDisclosureComparative Entitlement Formation — How platforms form entitlements out of comparison, and structure the grievance that follows.ComparativeEntitlementFormationPost-Mimetic Relationality — Relational configurations that arise once mimetic desire is infrastructurally mediated.Post-MimeticRelationalityEpistemic Infrastructure — The background scaffolding of concepts, institutions, and practices that makes knowledge possible.EpistemicInfrastructureSystemic Friction — Friction as a productive institutional condition — and the costs of its removal.SystemicFrictionAutomated Certainty — The technologically mediated production of settled understanding faster than the competence required to evaluate it.AutomatedCertaintyExercisable Answerability — The difference between being formally assigned responsibility and actually being able to answer for what has been done.ExercisableAnswerabilitySupporting relationship
Partition Thesis×Second-Order Provenance

Ordering disputes are second-order disputes; standing does not settle them.

Supporting publications

  • Standing Is Not an Ordering

    Under review · 2026 — Develops the partition thesis: criteria of moral standing determine who is considerable but do not by themselves generate priority among those admitted.

  • Second-Order Provenance

    Working paper · 2026 — Introduces second-order provenance: the traceability not of data but of the normative orderings under which data are taken to matter.

All connections

Each entry links directly to that pair — copy the URL to share a specific connection.

  1. Inferential License×Judgment Gap

    Overreached inference is the mechanism by which the judgment gap opens.

    3 supporting works

  2. Judgment Gap×Second-Order Provenance

    Closing the gap requires provenance not of data but of the orderings that make outputs decisive.

    3 supporting works

  3. Second-Order Provenance×Epistemic Infrastructure

    Normative orderings are sustained by — and inherited from — epistemic infrastructure.

    2 supporting works

  4. Inferential License×Epistemic Infrastructure

    License to infer is granted, revoked, and audited by the surrounding epistemic infrastructure.

    3 supporting works

  5. Partition Thesis×Ethical Disclosure

    Standing does not by itself disclose a claim; disclosure is the prior condition of ordering.

    2 supporting works

  6. Ethical Disclosure×Judgment Gap

    Where disclosure is foreclosed, no judgment can arise — the gap is total.

    2 supporting works

  7. Partition Thesis×Second-Order Provenance

    Ordering disputes are second-order disputes; standing does not settle them.

    2 supporting works

  8. Comparative Entitlement Formation×Post-Mimetic Relationality

    Entitlement forms out of comparison once mimetic relations are infrastructurally routed.

    2 supporting works

  9. Post-Mimetic Relationality×Epistemic Infrastructure

    Post-mimetic relations are held in place by the same infrastructures that constitute knowledge.

    2 supporting works

  10. Comparative Entitlement Formation×Ethical Disclosure

    Platform grievance forecloses the disclosure of the other as an addressable party.

    2 supporting works

  11. Systemic Friction×Judgment Gap

    Removing friction removes the temporal room in which judgment could be exercised.

    2 supporting works

  12. Systemic Friction×Epistemic Infrastructure

    Friction is a load-bearing feature of epistemic infrastructure, not an inefficiency.

    2 supporting works

  13. Automated Certainty×Epistemic Infrastructure

    Algorithmic systems function as epistemic infrastructure that can make representations accessible without producing the competence required to evaluate them.

    1 supporting work

  14. Automated Certainty×Judgment Gap

    Automated certainty widens the judgment gap by producing felt resolution at the operating level while the conditions of answerable evaluation are absent.

    1 supporting work

  15. Automated Certainty×Systemic Friction

    Removing the friction of perplexity, disagreement, and repetition can accelerate resolution while removing the temporal room in which competence is formed.

    1 supporting work