Changes

The staging relations divide into two orientations, "<" versus ">", indicating opposing senses of direction with respect to the distinction between analytic and synthetic projects:

The staging relations divide into two orientations, "<" versus ">", indicating opposing senses of direction with respect to the distinction between analytic and synthetic projects:

# The ''standing relations'', indicated by "<", are analogous to the ''element of'' or membership relation "&isin;".  Another interpretation of "<" is the ''instance of'' relation.  At least with respect to the more generic levels of analysis, any distinction between these readings is immaterial to the formal interests and structural objectives of this discussion.

# The ''standing relations'', indicated by "<", are analogous to the ''element of'' or membership relation "&isin;".  Another interpretation of "<" is the ''instance of'' relation.  At least with respect to the more generic levels of analysis, any distinction between these readings is immaterial to the formal interests and structural objectives of this discussion.

# The ''propping relations", indicated by ">", are analogous to the ''class of'' relation or converse of the membership relation.  An alternate meaning for ">" is the ''property of'' relation.  Although it is possible to maintain a distinction here, this discussion is mainly interested in a level of formal structure to which this difference is irrelevant.

# The ''propping relations'', indicated by ">", are analogous to the ''class of'' relation or converse of the membership relation.  An alternate meaning for ">" is the ''property of'' relation.  Although it is possible to maintain a distinction here, this discussion is mainly interested in a level of formal structure to which this difference is irrelevant.

Although it may be logically redundant, it is useful in practice to introduce efficient symbolic devices for both directions of relation, "<" and ">", and to maintain a formal calculus that treats analogous pairs of relations on an equal footing.  Extra measures of convenience come into play when the relations are used as assignment operations or ''field promotions'', in other words, to create titles, define terms, and establish offices of objects in the active contexts of given relations.  Thus, I regard these dual relationships as symmetric primitives and use them as the ''generating relations'' of all three objective levels.

Although it may be logically redundant, it is useful in practice to introduce efficient symbolic devices for both directions of relation, "<" and ">", and to maintain a formal calculus that treats analogous pairs of relations on an equal footing.  Extra measures of convenience come into play when the relations are used as assignment operations or ''field promotions'', in other words, to create titles, define terms, and establish offices of objects in the active contexts of given relations.  Thus, I regard these dual relationships as symmetric primitives and use them as the ''generating relations'' of all three objective levels.