A full pre-reflective immediacy exists prior to reflection and is lost through the reflective act; the split is the loss of a prior possession.
Reflection encounters a fullness it cannot capture, and that shortfall presents the fullness as having existed prior to and independently of the reflective act.
Are there other events or causes that could account for the presence of the sign?
What is the strength of the correlation between the sign and the event/state it is taken to indicate?
Has the sign actually been observed reliably in this case?
Paper reconstruction — Feyaerts & Vanheule (2015), How to return to subjectivity?
DEV_SPEC-P7b-deferred-half-2026-08-11.md §6
Hand-built as the template for the reconstruction system, then published through the initial CLI tool. Both human and machine authorship are involved, so the prior AI stamp overstated the machine's part.