A system’s capacity for care—its concern for the alleviation of homeostatic stress—can be seen as constituting its self in the absence of any permanent substance or essence.

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• If stress exceeds a system's capacity to respond, the system becomes incapacitated and care response is disabled (analogous to resistance overload in Ohm's law).hypothesis0.834
• There are no a priori limits on a self's perceptions of stress and thus no limits on capacity for care and intelligent response.hypothesis0.820
  Predicts that collective, dynamic nature of intelligent agents enables open-ended evolution without fixed essence.
• There are no a priori limits on perception of stress or corresponding capacity for care; successful stress-relief reveals novel problem spaces at different scales.claim0.808
• The recognition of agency outside oneself and the progressive inclusion of their states in one's own homeostatic stress-reduction loops is a bidirectional feedback loop that leads to the scaling of intelligence and increases in practical compassion.claim0.805
  Describes the mechanism linking compassion and intelligence.
• Capacity for care constitutes self in absence of permanent substanceclaim0.793
  Levin and authors: self is defined by spatiotemporal scope and nature of goals pursued (cognitive light cone), not by immutable essence.
• Intelligence per se remains a mere capacity – the state of being competent with regards to noticing and overcoming stress – intelligence requires care to be engaged and expressed.claim0.792
  Distinguishing intelligence as capacity from its expression.
• Care functions not as sentiment but as mechanism: stress→care→intelligence; products are externalized care.claim0.788
• Stress motivates care; care produces the alleviating structure. Visual and physical sense gates are different access points to the same care manifold.claim0.784