Type: Architecture
Editorial status: Stable
Epistemic status: Operational architecture
Evidence scope: Project sources and page-specific references; cross-links do not supply independent corroboration
Last reviewed: 2026-09-16 — AI-assisted editorial check
Human reviewed: Human content-review pending for this revision
Pyragogy is no longer one website or one handbook.
It is a set of research layers with different responsibilities.
Those responsibilities should remain separate.
Question: What are we currently prepared to state publicly in stabilized form?
Role:
Question: What does the current structured map contain?
Role:
Question: How can tacit or interview-derived knowledge become a bounded, reviewable proposal?
Role:
Question: Where does theory meet friction, failure, missing conditions, or counterevidence?
Role:
Question: What interventions appear relevant, under which conditions, according to what evidence?
Role:
Question: What can we learn from people whose experience can challenge the current map?
Role:
Question: What deserves discussion before it deserves stabilization?
Role:
See Synthesis Architecture for the current revision topology and its historical predecessor.
No layer should become the authority over all the others.
The Syllabus is not its own validator.
The AI interviewer is not an editor.
UnPeeragogy is not automatic proof.
Working Patterns does not convert candidates into prescriptions.
The Wiki does not hide unresolved research behind polished prose.
Human review is not ceremonial.
It is the point where responsibility remains attached to the project.
Evidence & Revision · Knowledge System · Handbook map · Home