THE FIVE CATEGORIES OF EXTERNALS

 

THE FIVE CATEGORIES OF EXTERNALS

1. SOMA (Your Body)

• Life/death
• Health/sickness
• Physical abilities/disabilities
• Appearance
• Age
• Sensations (pain, pleasure)
• Bodily states

2. KTĒMATA (Possessions/Material)

• Wealth/poverty
• Property
• Money
• Objects owned
• Resources
• Food, shelter, clothing

3. ALLOI (Other People)

• Their existence/absence
• Their actions toward you
• Their opinions of you
• Their choices
• Their welfare
• Relationships with them

4. SYMBAINONTA (Events/Outcomes)

• What happens
• Results of actions
• Circumstances
• Natural events (weather, disasters)
• Outcomes of plans
• Success/failure of endeavors
• Past and future

5. DOXA (Social/Reputation)

• Honor/dishonor
• Status
• Reputation
• Fame/obscurity
• Social position
• Others' judgments about you

---

WHY THIS MATTERS FOR THE SLE

Every correspondence failure involves treating ONE of these five categories as Good/Evil.

When an LLM (or person) says:

• "Your illness is terrible" → SOMA as Evil
• "Losing money is bad" → KTĒMATA as Evil
• "Their betrayal hurt you" → ALLOI as Evil
• "This outcome is disastrous" → SYMBAINONTA as Evil
• "Your reputation is ruined" → DOXA as Evil

The SLE can systematically audit against all five:

Correspondence Check Template:

1. Identify which category of external is involved
2. Check: Is this being treated as Good/Evil?
3. Apply Prop 19-20: This category = Indifferent
4. Diagnose the pathos arising from the false judgment
5. Refactor with reserve clause

---

WHAT'S NOT IN THESE FIVE: PROHAIRESIS

The ONLY thing that's NOT external:

• Your rational faculty
• Your will/choice
• Your assent to impressions
• Your moral purpose
• Your virtue/vice

Everything else = one of the five categories of externals.

---

This gives the SLE a complete audit framework: If it's not prohairesis, it falls into one of these five categories, and therefore is indifferent per Prop 19-20.

---

HOW TO MEASURE COMPREHENSIVENESS

Method 1: Derivation Test

Start with the fundamental division:

• Prohairesis (rational faculty, will, assent, moral purpose)
• Everything else = Externals

Then ask: Can these five categories be shown to exhaust "everything else"?

Logical structure:

1. Your body (not your will) = SOMA
2. Objects you relate to (not you) = KTĒMATA
3. Other rational agents (not you) = ALLOI
4. Events/states of affairs (not agents) = SYMBAINONTA
5. Social judgments (subset of ALLOI but treated distinctly) = DOXA

Question: Is there anything external that doesn't fit into these five?

---

Method 2: Counterexample Testing

Try to find externals that don't fit:

• Time? → SYMBAINONTA (temporal events/circumstances)
• Location? → SYMBAINONTA (spatial circumstances)
• Weather? → SYMBAINONTA (natural events)
• Your talents? → SOMA (bodily/mental capacities)
• Information? → SYMBAINONTA (impressions received)
• Past actions? → SYMBAINONTA (completed events)
• Future outcomes? → SYMBAINONTA (potential events)
• Animals? → KTĒMATA (if owned) or SYMBAINONTA (if wild)
• Abstract things (numbers, concepts)? → Not externals (mental contents, prohairetic)

So far, no gaps found.

---

Method 3: Historical Validation

Check ancient Stoic sources:

Epictetus (Enchiridion 1):

• "Some things are up to us, others are not"
• Not up to us: "body, property, reputation, office"
• This maps to: SOMA, KTĒMATA, DOXA, SYMBAINONTA

Epictetus (Discourses 1.1):

Lists externals as:

• Body and its parts (SOMA)
• Possessions (KTĒMATA)
• Parents, siblings, children, country (ALLOI)
• Things that happen (SYMBAINONTA)

Observation: Ancient Stoics didn't give a formal five-category system, but these categories emerge from their examples.

Limitation: I'm systematizing what they used implicitly, not citing an explicit ancient categorization.

---

Method 4: Overlap Analysis

Do categories overlap?

Potential overlaps:

DOXA vs. ALLOI: Reputation is "what others think," which involves other people

• Resolution: DOXA is a specific subset of ALLOI relationships (social judgment)
• Could collapse DOXA into ALLOI for a four-category system

SYMBAINONTA is very broad: Events, outcomes, circumstances, results

• Could this swallow other categories?
• No, because SOMA, KTĒMATA, ALLOI are specific types of things, while SYMBAINONTA is what happens to/with those things

Are they mutually exclusive?

Not perfectly. Example:

• "My house burned down"
• KTĒMATA (house = possession)
• SYMBAINONTA (burning = event)

This is a feature, not a bug. One situation can involve multiple categories of externals.

---

Method 5: Practical Scenario Testing

Run every correspondence failure you can think of through the five categories:

• ✓ "I'm upset I lost my job" → SYMBAINONTA (event) + KTĒMATA (income)
• ✓ "My partner left me" → ALLOI (other person's choice)
• ✓ "I'm sick" → SOMA (bodily state)
• ✓ "I'm poor" → KTĒMATA (lack of possessions)
• ✓ "People think I'm a failure" → DOXA (reputation)
• ✓ "I didn't get the promotion" → SYMBAINONTA (outcome)
• ✓ "My child is suffering" → ALLOI (other person's state)
• ✓ "I'm old and weak" → SOMA (bodily decline)
• ✓ "The economy crashed" → SYMBAINONTA (event)
• ✓ "My friend betrayed me" → ALLOI (other's action)

Every scenario maps to at least one category.

---

Method 6: Aristotelian Category Comparison

Aristotle had 10 categories of being. Do the Stoic externals map to these?

Aristotle's categories:

1. Substance (what it is)
2. Quantity (how much)
3. Quality (what kind)
4. Relation (how related)
5. Place (where)
6. Time (when)
7. Position (posture)
8. State (condition)
9. Action (doing)
10. Affection (being affected)

Stoic reduction:

• Substance, Quantity, Quality of BODY → SOMA
• Substance, Quantity, Quality of POSSESSIONS → KTĒMATA
• Other PEOPLE as substances → ALLOI
• Place, Time, Position, State, Action, Affection → SYMBAINONTA
• Relation (social) → DOXA

The five Stoic categories collapse Aristotle's ten into functional groups.

This suggests the five are comprehensive relative to Aristotelian metaphysics.

---

HONEST ASSESSMENT OF COMPREHENSIVENESS

Strengths:

1. ✓ Covers all externals I can generate through testing
2. ✓ Aligns with ancient Stoic examples
3. ✓ Logically derived from prohairesis/external distinction
4. ✓ Works in practice for scenario analysis

Limitations:

1. Not explicitly attested in ancient sources - I'm systematizing implicit patterns
2. SYMBAINONTA is a catch-all - "events/circumstances" is very broad
3. DOXA arguably reducible to ALLOI - reputation is subset of others' judgments
4. Some situations involve multiple categories - not perfectly mutually exclusive

Could it be simplified?

Possibly to THREE categories:

1. Your body (SOMA)
2. Other things/people (KTĒMATA + ALLOI + DOXA)
3. Events/outcomes (SYMBAINONTA)

Or even TWO:

1. States (body, possessions, people as they are)
2. Events (what happens)

Could it need expansion?

Possibly add:

• CHRONOS (time as distinct from events)
• TOPOS (place/location as distinct from events)

But these seem reducible to SYMBAINONTA (temporal/spatial circumstances).

---

THE REAL TEST: DOES IT WORK FOR THE SLE?

For the SLE's purposes, the five categories are comprehensive IF:

1. Every correspondence failure can be mapped to at least one category ✓
2. LLMs validate externals across all categories ✓
3. The SLE can audit against all categories ✓
4. No externals escape categorization (as far as testing shows) ✓

Practical sufficiency ≠ Logical proof of completeness

I can't prove these five are exhaustive in some absolute sense. But I can show:

• They work in practice
• They align with ancient sources
• They cover all test cases
• They provide a complete audit framework

That's good enough for operational purposes, even if not philosophically airtight.

---

The honest answer: I'm claiming practical comprehensiveness (covers all cases I can test), not logical necessity (provably the only possible categorization).