While both longings express themselves well in isolation, their combined presence is problematic. In essence, each longing predisposes a system toward the undesirable pole of its counterpart dichotomy:

  • Functionality Longing predispose Imperdurability.

    • Symbolic representation: C≡L → (I≡ ^ I≢) = I≡.
    • When a mixed system is working in a functional manner, you can’t expect this state to be permanent. You’ll have constant adversities, both internal and external, that will challenge its functionality. And if you don’t take proper precautions, you will lose this optimal condition.

  • Perdurability Longing predispose Dysfunctionality.

    • Symbolic representation: I≢L → (C≡ ^ C≢) = C≢.
    • When a mixed system tries to consolidate a specific arrangement without leaving room for adaptability, it will cause a dysfunctional state. You must allow proper changes to any systemic arrangement that will foster functionality, or you will assure perdurable dysfunctionality.

This gives rise to what may be the most contentious idea in Conciliatorics: the incompatibility axiom.

  • Incompatibility Axiom: Functionality and Perdurability are not compatible in a mixed physiology system.

This may seem innocuous enough in theory, but Humanity builds itself under the expectation that a system can be functional in perpetuity. Not only do we expect systems to remain functional forever—we demand that the world itself conform to that vision:

  • We create nations and empires that proclaim their eternal inevitability.
  • Citizens vote for political parties that must remain in office for the good of the people.
  • Familiar lineages pressure their members into traditional obedience.
  • Our religions promise eternal life in heavenly bliss.

Despite all of this, empires fall, politics corrupts, families break, and Heaven is but a promise.

So, we understand if the reader disagrees with the incompatibility axiom, either for philosophical motives or for an attachment to compatibility expectations. We don’t want to force our ideas on anyone—at the same time, we feel compelled to share what we believe to be the correct conclusions within the Conciliatorics framework. The reader is allowed to handle this potential disagreement as they see fit.

For the rest of us, we are going to continue as if the incompatibility axiom is true. This dynamic creates a sequential conflict for each longing:

  • Functionality’s tendency toward Imperdurability disrupts Perdurability.

    • Symbolic representation: C≡ → I≢ = (C≡ ^ I≡).
    • If we start with a perdurable system (I≢) and we want to make it functional (C≡), we will transform that system into an imperdurable state (C≡ ^ I≡).

  • Perdurability’s tendency toward Dysfunctionality disrupts Functionality.

    • Symbolic representation: I≢ → C≡ = (C≢ ^ I≢).
    • If we start with a functional system (C≡) and we want to make it perdurable (I≢), we will transform that system into a dysfunctional state (C≢ ^ I≢).

This tension defines the physiological status of every interstitial system. Let’s conclude Interstitial Physiology with a brief exploration on how these processes decay and fall.