Distortion vs inference
Interpretive governance must distinguish inference from distortion. Inference is sometimes necessary; distortion is a governed deviation that changes the canon, the scope, the hierarchy, or the authority of what was originally declared.
Inference
Inference is acceptable only when it remains bounded by the canonical perimeter, makes its conditions explicit, and does not turn uncertainty into a false certainty.
Distortion
Distortion occurs when the system deletes a condition, enlarges a scope, upgrades a weak signal into a strong claim, or silently substitutes a secondary source for the canon. At that point, the issue is no longer interpretation assistance but canon drift.
Why the distinction matters
- because not every completion is illegitimate;
- because not every plausible sentence is faithful;
- because remediation differs depending on whether the system inferred inside the perimeter or distorted the perimeter itself.
Minimum rule
Bounded inference may remain inside the response regime. Distortion must be qualified, measured, and reduced; if it cannot be reduced, the answer should narrow or abstain.