Physis: A Theory of Power: Preliminary Glossary

Öztürk, Evren

doi:10.2139/ssrn.6738281

This version belongs to the previous cycle of Physis: A Theory of Power. A revised version will be published some time after the book is released. It will replace this text at the same address, and this version will remain available in the version history.

Abstract

This document is the preliminary terminology reference for Physis: A Theory of Power (Öztürk, 2026), a forthcoming monograph providing a structural analysis of power dynamics. The glossary contains formal definitions for 84 concepts — both original and redefined — that constitute the conceptual architecture of the framework. Concepts developed in the later chapters of the book — the structural mechanics of freedom, equality, justice, and fraternity; the details of hegemonic breakdown processes; the derivations of the resolution layer — are intentionally outside the scope of this glossary. Mechanism explanations, derivation chains, falsifiability conditions, and internal operational anatomies have also been deliberately removed from the included concepts. This glossary serves as an entry point and citation source; the full conceptual architecture, mechanism derivations, the 93 falsifiable hypotheses, and historical evidence layers are developed in the main work. After the book is published, a comprehensive version will be released as a separate reference. The Physis framework redefines core concepts of social and political theory — Physis (default state of survival), Nomos (capacity born within Physis), hegemony, the corporate entity (as a hybrid species), and others — proposing a structural-asymmetric account of power conflict and its mechanisms. This glossary serves as the foundational reference for citation and conceptual orientation within the framework.

Keywords: power dynamics, hegemony, corporate entity, structural asymmetry, Physis, Nomos, political theory, social ontology, conceptual framework, will conflict, singularity tendency, fragility asymmetry, scale paradox, legitimacy test, preliminary glossary

Companion to: Physis: A Theory of Power — 93 Falsifiable Hypotheses (SSRN: 6595318)

1. Introduction

Physis theory has produced two types of terminology in its analysis of the structural mechanics of power dynamics:

Original — Concepts with no equivalent in existing literature, defined for the first time within this framework.

Redefined — Concepts that exist in philosophical, sociological, or biological literature but acquire a different meaning, scope, or function within the Physis framework.

In each glossary entry below, the marker (Orig.) indicates an original concept and (Redef.) indicates a redefined concept.

All concepts have been formulated or redefined by Evren Öztürk within Physis: A Theory of Power (2026). This document is intended as a citation reference and conceptual orientation tool for researchers engaging with the framework.

2. Scope and Limitations

This is a preliminary glossary. The following are intentionally outside its scope:

Concepts from later chapters of the book — specifically the structural mechanics of freedom, equality, justice, and fraternity; the detailed processes of hegemonic breakdown; and the derivations constituting the resolution layer.
Mechanism explanations — the internal operational dynamics of how concepts function are described in the main work, not here.
Derivation chains — the logical connections between concepts, while implied through the structure of definitions, are formally derived in the main work.
Falsifiability conditions — these are documented separately in the companion paper Physis: A Theory of Power — 93 Falsifiable Hypotheses (Öztürk, 2026, SSRN: 6595318).
Historical evidence layers — case studies, empirical illustrations, and historical applications are reserved for the main work.

This deliberate scoping ensures that the glossary functions as a precise terminological reference without serving as a substitute for the full theoretical work.

3. Glossary

I. Ontological Concepts

Physis (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) In ancient Greek philosophy, it means "nature" and is defined as the counterpart of Nomos (law/rule). Physis theory radically redefines this concept: Physis is the default state — the embodiment of the universal necessity of survival. The universal dynamic that dictates the distinction between the powerful and the powerless, governing power conflict. Not a condition humanity created, but one humanity inhabits. The critical difference from ancient Greece: there, Nomos is the counterpart of Physis; in this framework, Nomos is born from within Physis, remains within it, cannot escape it. Nomos is the name of the struggle waged against Physis.

Nomos (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) In ancient Greece, "law" or "custom" — the counterpart of Physis. The Sophists saw them as opposing poles; Plato and Aristotle attributed to Nomos the function of "elevating humanity"; Nietzsche coded Nomos as "weakness." Physis theory rejects all these functional attributions. Nomos is the capacity born from within Physis — it can be constructive or destructive. It is morally neutral. Nomos cannot be destroyed — it will continue to exist as long as humanity does — but it can never achieve permanent victory either. Physis is the default; Nomos is the exception, requiring constant struggle.

Structural Friction Differential (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The theory's central thesis. Humanity's balancing tendencies operate in close proximity: in face-to-face relationships, within familiar groups. When scale increases, these tendencies cease to function. Destructive tendencies, however, continue to operate independently of scale. Power conflict, leadership, and hierarchy function with equal efficiency at every scale. This difference — the balancing tendencies entering friction, the destructive tendencies not — is the foundational asymmetry that bears the entire structure of the theory.

Fragility Asymmetry (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The structural asymmetry of Physis is carried into Nomos with amplification. This asymmetry is the foundation of the "constant and handicapped struggle" argument.

Legitimacy Test (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The continuous process of testing power. The test is bidirectional: the leader seeks legitimacy, the lower class evaluates legitimacy. Power without legitimacy can exist but cannot endure.

Three Capacities of Nomos (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Three capacities generated by linear time-consciousness. Choice — the ability to act contrary to what Physis dictates. Scale — the ability to build systems that transcend the individual lifespan. Temporal symbolic selfhood — the ability to position the "self" in time. These capacities can also operate destructively.

Three Conditions for Nomos Capacity (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Three structural conditions an entity must meet to carry Nomos capacity. Humans fulfill all three; corporate entities do not.

The Dark Side of Nomos (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The moral neutrality of the capacity for choice. The capacity for conscious choice also means the capacity for conscious destruction. The direction of Nomos is not guaranteed.

Nomos Simulacrum (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) A mechanism that behaves like Physis, closes off questioning, and is disguised as Nomos. Corporate entities can simulate Nomos ideals but this simulation is not normative, it is instrumental. Their existence and survival dictate different strategies. They provide benefits to humanity — technological progress, medical discoveries — but these benefits are byproducts, not purposes.

Scale Paradox (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The scaling of Physis as Nomos expands. While Nomos expands, the corporate entities that are its manifestation also scale up Physis. The struggle at the core does not change — scale grows, the dynamic remains the same.

Existential Consciousness (Physis model) (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) A concept explored in existentialist philosophy by Heidegger, Kierkegaard, and Sartre. In Physis theory, it is redefined as a three-layered model: death-awareness, search for meaning, symbolic selfhood.

Being / Remaining (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The two fundamental claims of existence. Being — to exist now. Remaining — to continue.

Death-Awareness (Physis model) (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) Unlike Heidegger's "Sein-zum-Tode" and Terror Management Theory, it serves a central function as the trigger of Nomos capacity. It makes time linear. It is unique to humans.

Death-Source Differential (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The fundamental distinction that determines the survival formulas of humans and corporate entities. The human source of death is entropy; the corporate entity's source of death is others.

Birth-Death Solitude (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The reality that humans are absolutely alone at birth and at death. No one can be born in one's place, no one can die in one's place.

II. Power Dynamics

Power Conflict (Physis definition) (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) The struggle of two wills against each other — the aim is to control the other's will. Its difference from competition: in competition the target is the resource ("who wins?"), in power conflict the target is the will ("who controls?").

Will (Physis definition) (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) Capacity for choice-based orientation — the orientation of "I want this." The juxtaposition of two wills creates conflict potential — the prerequisite for power conflict.

Power (Physis definition) (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) The capacity to realize one's will. If will is "I want," power is "I can."

Singularity Tendency (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The ultimate point toward which power conflict gravitates — the dominance of a single will. Singularity is not a separate drive or inclination. It has no biological basis. It is the structural outcome of power conflict — a mathematical result.

Singularity Paradox (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Full singularity collapses the system's survival formula. When power reaches its ultimate objective, it destroys itself. Singularity is both the point power conflict gravitates toward and the system's point of fragility. Most powerful = most fragile.

Endgame Principle (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Power conflict continues until a single will remains. From the moment two wills exist, the potential exists — and is eliminated only when a single will remains.

Singularization Principle (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The tendency of power to concentrate in a single will. From tribes to states, from states to empires, from companies to monopolies — at every level, power tends toward centralization.

Continuity Principle (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Power conflict continues in every interaction, condition, and scale. The dynamic operating between two individuals operates between two companies, between two states. What changes is scale, instrument, and time — the mechanism is the same. Foucault says "power is everywhere"; Physis says "power is everywhere because Physis is default."

The Will to Become (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The drive that draws one into power conflict. Biologically grounded.

The Will to Remain (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The drive that establishes hegemony. The motivation to preserve the current power position.

Crossing the Nomos Threshold (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) If a candidate bypasses Nomos — crosses the threshold — Nomos no longer operates. From that point on, for every subsequent leader and every candidate, Physis is the only rule of the game.

Structural Advantage of Individual Prioritization (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Individual prioritization provides a structural advantage in power conflict.

Will Transfer (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The process by which an individual cedes a share of their will to the group. This transfer is mandatory — even two people coming together imposes will-sharing.

Power Weighing (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Power assessment occurring without becoming conflict — "how powerful are they, how powerful am I?"

Zero-Sum Principle (Physis model) (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) In power conflict, one side's gain is the other's loss. Its difference from zero-sum games in game theory: in game theory, the resource is fixed; here, will is fixed.

Gravitational Pull (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The powerful drawing the weak into their orbit through existential weight (gravitas).

Consent-Coercion Transition Asymmetry (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Hardening (transition from consent to coercion) occurs effortlessly; softening (transition from coercion to consent) takes generations.

Flare Effect (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The first leadership claim triggering a chain reaction within the group.

Capacity Test (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The three-layered test of leadership candidacy.

Phase Shift (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) A shift in motivation and position. Even if class status changes, the dynamic does not.

III. Class Concepts

Four Governing Classes (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Structural categories reproduced in every system: upper class, middle class, lower class, bureaucracy. Its fundamental difference from Marxist class theory: defined not by ownership of the means of production but by position in power conflict.

Upper-Middle Class Structural Identity (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The distinction between the upper class and the middle class is not structural but positional.

Lower Class Paradox (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The lower class carries, transmits, and normalizes Physis criteria; at the same time, it is the only class that can use Nomos capacity non-instrumentally.

Organization Paradox (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) An organized lower class is no longer the lower class. The Physis formulation of Michels's "iron law of oligarchy."

Class Differentiation of Existential Forms (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The meaning of existence differentiates by class.

Fusion (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The integration of the upper class and bureaucracy.

Class Hegemony Motivations (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The structural motivations that determine the behavior of each class in power conflict.

Will Faucet (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The will submission the lower class provides to the system — consent, legitimacy, obedience. When the labor function is substituted, the faucet closes. A concept that becomes especially critical in the age of AI.

Functional Consciousness (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The state in which all classes are aware of both their own and other classes' functions within the system.

Functional Deviation (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) Deliberately distinct from Merton's "dysfunction" concept: it contains no moral judgment, it is not individual failure but a structural process.

Guardianship of Lived Reality (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The natural limit that the lower class's everyday survival necessity draws against hegemonic manipulation.

Political Soldier (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The individual who becomes an unwitting propagator of hegemony.

IV. Corporate Entity Concepts

Corporate Entity Paradox (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Humans survive with others; corporate entities survive through others' absence.

Hybrid Species (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The ontological status of the corporate entity. Neither fully living nor fully non-living — a symbiosis of human and idea. Legally considered a "person" but exempt from human limitations.

Opposite Survival Formulas (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The human formula requires cooperation and solidarity; the corporate entity's formula requires the elimination of competitors — including humans.

Structural Parasitism Tendency (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Symbiosis carries a structural tendency toward parasitism. The indicator of corruption is the direction of benefit.

Symbiosis to Parasitism Transition (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The structural transformation process of hegemony.

Corporate Physis Hegemony / Advanced-Physis (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Even though the corporate entity was created by Nomos, it has been captured by Physis.

V1/V2 Corporate Entity Versions (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) V1: Human-managed corporate entity. V2: Corporately managed corporate entity. The Physis formulation of Berle and Means's observed ownership-management separation.

Temporal Subjectivity (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The incompatibility between corporate entities' long-term decision processes and the individual's limited attention span and lifespan.

Morphosis (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The corporate entity's misidentification of its source and misdistribution of benefit to the wrong class. Not a categorical transformation but a drift.

Capital-Centered Entity (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Companies, banks, holdings — corporate entities focused on profit maximization and capital accumulation. Market competition is power conflict.

Will-Centered Entity (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) States, political parties — corporate entities focused on power, authority, and social legitimacy.

Partial Paradigm Shift (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) One paradigm's overthrowing another within a specific geography, duration, or scale. Its difference from a global shift is the cross-section effect.

Attention Mismatch (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The structural gap between corporate entities' slow decision processes and the individual's need for rapid sense-making.

Paradigm (Physis definition) (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) Defined not epistemologically but ontologically and politically, unlike Kuhn. It answers not the question "How do we produce knowledge?" but "How is power distributed?"

V. Hegemony Concepts

Hegemony (Physis definition) (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) The answer to the question "Why should I govern you?" It differs from Gramsci on three points: it sees no essential difference between domination and hegemony; it is not specific to a particular class; it operates at every scale.

Six Types of Hegemony (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Coercive, resource, knowledge, bond, institutional, ideological. Ideological hegemony operates above the other five.

Full Hegemonic Breakdown (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) A structural process requiring the accumulation of five conditions. One of the book's greatest original contributions.

Layers of Submission (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The nine-layered structural process of submission. Contains no judgment.

Resource Hegemony (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The only hegemony capacity possessed by the lower class. "If I don't exist, you don't exist" — the hegemony of reality born from ontological necessity.

Resource Hegemony Shift (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) When fusion occurs, the source position shifts to the upper class.

Hegemony of Reality (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Tested and proven hegemony. It is formed "when the sword comes down."

Fragility Paradox (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Full hegemonic breakdown is both the most monopolized and most fragile form of hegemony.

Consent Loss vs Fusion Capacity Balance (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) As the upper class reaches for singularity, Nomos ideals are damaged, but the loss is compensated by the capacity that fusion brings.

Deceptiveness of Subjective Perception (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Under manipulative hegemony, an individual can experience another's will as their own.

Target Displacement of Legitimacy Test (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The legitimacy test always operates — but its target can shift.

Legitimacy Simulation (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The dysfunctionalized form of genuine legitimacy testing. Common in shadow power structures.

Manipulative Consent (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) Derived from Gramsci's concept of "consent" but taken to a different place: hegemony's consent production works most on its own base.

Ideology Synchronization (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Some ideology combinations reinforce each other.

Shadow Power (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) The real decision mechanism behind visible authority. In Physis theory, it is defined as the structure that bypasses the legitimacy test.

Systemic Opposition Presence (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The structural constant presence of oppositions within the system. Power does not directly generate its opposite; oppositions already exist.

Structural Accumulation Tendency of Power (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Power accumulation forms a self-reinforcing cycle. It is a structural tendency, not an individual preference.

Liberalism and Atomization (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Liberalism is a negative ideology: it does not produce collective identity, it atomizes.

Capitalism: Invisible Ideology (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) Capitalism is the only ideology that claims not to be an ideology. It is presented as the economic translation of Physis.

Authoritarianization Tendency (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The asymmetry in hegemony distribution makes the system's tendency toward authoritarianism structural. Not a design flaw or moral failure, but the inevitable consequence of power dynamics.

VI. Paradigm Concepts

Capital-Will Convergence (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) The convergence of the two paradigms. Capital-centered structures taking over the state or the state becoming corporatized.

Capital-Centered Takeover (Öztürk, 2026) (Orig.) When a capital-centered corporate entity takes control of a will-centered structure, it assumes social governance but its source remains the upper class.

Social Contract (Physis perspective) (Öztürk, 2026) (Redef.) Not a static agreement but a dynamic formula. It is not made and ratified once — it is questioned at every moment.

4. References

Öztürk, E. (2026). Physis: A Theory of Power — 93 Falsifiable Hypotheses. SSRN Working Paper No. 6595318.

Öztürk, E. (2026). Physis: A Theory of Power. Manuscript registered with Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Culture and Tourism, General Directorate of Copyright. Registration No: 2026/17534 (March 5, 2026). Forthcoming.

Author Note

Evren Öztürk is an independent researcher and theorist working on power dynamics and structural-historical analysis. Physis: A Theory of Power (2026) is a 432-page framework presenting 93 falsifiable hypotheses across nine chapters. The framework rests on fourteen years of independent research (2012–2026), combining chronological power-recording methodology (Almanak), historical synthesis (Babil project), and applied analytical work (Triade Motor). Outside formal academic affiliation; based in Türkiye.

For an introductory essay on the methodology and the role of AI in independent theoretical production, see: physisproject.com

Companion paper: Physis: A Theory of Power — 93 Falsifiable Hypotheses (SSRN: 6595318)
Hub site: physisproject.com
Medium series (Turkish + English): Nomos Paradigm Series — Articles 1, 2a, and forthcoming articles

Registration, Copyright, and Attribution

All terminology in this document has been formulated or redefined by Evren Öztürk within the scope of Physis: A Theory of Power (2026). The concepts, definitions, and theoretical framework belong to the author.

Registered Works:

Physis: A Theory of Power — Registration No: 2026/17534 (March 5, 2026)
Triade Motor — Registration No: 2026/18239 (April 17, 2026)
Almanak: Structured Power Chronology Recording Method — Registration No: 2026/18228 (April 17, 2026)

Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Culture and Tourism, General Directorate of Copyright

Suggested citation:

Öztürk, E. (2026). Physis: A Theory of Power — Preliminary Glossary. SSRN Working Paper.

#Physis #TheoryOfPower #Terminology #PoliticalPhilosophy #Hegemony #CorporateEntity #PreliminaryGlossary #OriginalConcepts #PowerDynamics #StructuralAsymmetry

Related book

Physis: A Theory of Power

How to cite

Öztürk, E. (2026). Physis: A Theory of Power: Preliminary Glossary. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6738281

BibTeX

@misc{ozturk2026glossary,
  author = {Öztürk, Evren},
  title = {Physis: A Theory of Power: Preliminary Glossary},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {SSRN},
  doi = {10.2139/ssrn.6738281},
  url = {https://physisproject.com/publications/physis-preliminary-glossary/}
}