Falsity

**Falsity** was an abstract legal and philosophical concept concerning property and ethical exchanges, which originated in the 1st millennium from Pharnean Ganit. Falsity originated in bolist philosophy, which insisted informed consent to altering an individual's own form as principles, positioned against what it saw as the tyranny of the sequencer state, where iatromantes modified bhuja subjects unaware of the exact nature of the changes.

Bolist philosophers took this as the epitome of a 'False' exchange. They proposed 'True', legitimate property and exchange as an alternative, which was at first based on the subject's awareness, knowledge, and consent. This later expanded to include components of reproducibility and mastery, defining property as what a subject could fully grasp and control, and all True exchanges as dealing with this space.

### False trade

 **False Trade** was a set of legal conventions governing exchanges in accordance with the concept of falsity. It also concerned the transfer of genetic information and intellectual property more broadly. Under False Trade laws, exchanges were only "True" or ethical when the recipient of a good or service also received information which would allow them to reproduce the good or service.

The Principate already saw the rise of laws intending to make as many exchanges as possible True, but they were limited by realistic constraints on commerce. Most regulations only extended to methods of prohairesis, restricting the formation of closed sects by mandating techniques be publicized, so as to ensure the politics of lection could scientifically find the most efficacious ways of self-improvement. But under the Tio Empire these laws became seen as tyrannical by the Thesis-Sects which began to guard initiatory secrets. After the Wars of Dissension, the Thesis-Sects framed their view of falsity more strongly in terms of personal freedom and control, arguing that responsibility concomitant with knowledge justified surrendering certain kinds of access to more capable elites.

In the wake of the Metastatic War, however, a new revolutionary model of society and law was able to extend itself into most commercial operations. New falsity laws spearheaded by the Kars and other Bolist conquerors in the Great Roving conceptualized and anathematized 'intellectual property', demanding that every technique being used in society be released into the commons. Ironically, the idea of public and common good in turn drew from the collectivist reasoning the earlier Thesis-Sects had proposed. In Ganit, this development coincided with the Thesis-Sects becoming popular broad-based cults, rather than closed elite organizations, under the Toncar. The high social mobility of the post-Metastatic period is sometimes attributed to these new laws, but also probably contributed to by overall population decline at the time.

This trend evolved towards an attempt to release *all* means of production. Some states took the principle of falsity as a very broad precedent and enacted laws to eliminate false trade in the sphere of quotidian commercial exchange. However, these policies usually only did so symbolically, and became more of a way to indicate the good faith of the participants. The exact way trade in each type of good was made True was very different, and for manufactured goods, the submission of blueprints to the intellectual commons was considered sufficient to eliminate most need for these regulations.

During the Cetocracy, new interpretations of falsity gave rise to a kind of logic in business, where industrial organizations decided to organize themselves vertically and expand their operations, so as to minimize the number of inevitably 'False' exchanges made involving manufactured goods. Some especially complex or novel products could simply not be exchanged at all, and had to be leased or otherwise contracted to the user. The links of this thinking to the rise of nexilism is hotly debated, but many such expansive estates did provide convenient frameworks for the imposition of nexile social relations.

Some historical examples:

* Bread could only be sold if the baker also gave the buyer a small packet of fertile grains.
* Blacksmiths were required to publish and maintain guides for metalworking.
* Many prohairetic actions were strictly limited to a classroom setting.