People of good will can reach substantial agreement about which actions are more structure-preserving or life-bearing.

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

• The issue is not whether the process will produce living structure if done faithfully — it will — but whether the maker has the stamina and will to keep rejecting versions that lack life.claim0.809
  Alexander's claim that the limiting factor in creating living structure is not method but the maker's persistence.
• Any part of the world we build will have life if it is created by structure-preserving transformations, and will not have life if it is not created by structure-preserving transformations.claim0.796
  The central thesis of the chapter.
• Living structure is enormously susceptible to minor changes, and accuracy of detail is necessary for success.claim0.795
  Warning that the recursion of centers requires extreme precision.
• Given two versions of a building, A and B, can we tell empirically which one has more life, in a way which allows people to reach agreement — that is to say, objectively?question0.793
  Opening question of the chapter that the entire methodological argument is designed to answer
• If living structure impacts inner freedom, then the physical world has impact on the most precious attribute of human existence.hypothesis0.791
  Stated early in the chapter as a conditional.
• What is more structure-preserving and what is less so is, in principle, an objective matter.claim0.787
  Assertion that the distinction between structure-preserving and structure-destroying is objective, not merely subjective opinion.
• Almost any social process can have a relatively more living character, or have a relatively less living character.claim0.787
• The rewarding and life-enhancing nature of work comes into focus when the thing made has life, and the makers begin to change dramatically.claim0.787