Relational Principle
Class
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#RelationalPrinciple
Class Hierarchy
- Thing
- ↳ entity (bfo)
- ↳ continuant (bfo)
- ↳ generically dependent continuant (bfo)
- ↳ information content entity (iao)
- ↳ directive information entity (iao)
- ↳ Principle (proethica-core)
- ↳ Relational Principle
- ↳ Advisory Role Integrity Principle (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Client Data Confidentiality Principle (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Client Loyalty Limits (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Client Service Integrity Principle (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Collegial Notification Principle (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Confidentiality of Professional Review (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Confidentiality Principle
- ↳ Conflict of Interest Disclosure Principle
- ↳ Faithful Agent Duty Principle (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Litigation Neutrality Principle (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Loyalty Principle
- ↳ Peer Review Confidentiality Balance (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Professional Transparency (proethica-intermediate-extended)
- ↳ Transparency Principle
Definition
A principle governing professional relationships and establishing frameworks for trust and stakeholder interactions (BFO: generically dependent continuant)
Examples: Confidentiality, Loyalty, Fairness, Transparency, Respect for Autonomy. These govern interpersonal professional dynamics.
Definition source
- McLaren (2003). Extensionally defining principles and cases in ethics: An AI model. Artificial Intelligence 150(1-2): 145-181.
Mappings & provenance
Property Structure
1 · Object and Data Properties
rdfs:domain on this class or ancestor
| Property | Range | Description |
|---|---|---|
| establishedBy inherited | CodeProvision | Indicates which code provision establishes this ethical concept. |
| invokedBy inherited | Agent | Relates a Principle to the Agent(s) that invoke it in the case scenario (the parties who appeal to the principle to justify or evaluate conduct). May name several agents. |
2 · Definitional Attributes
SHACL definitional shape
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| principle kind | principleCategory | The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal. |
| extensional cases | extensionalCases | Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field. |
3 · Bearer Attributes
SHACL property shape
individual data
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| interpretation | interpretation | Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| concrete expression | concreteExpression | How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| applied to | appliedTo | What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on). |
| balancing with | balancingWith | The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field. |
| tension resolution | tensionResolution | How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| invoked by | invokedBy | The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent. |
4 · Referenced By
rdfs:range on this class or ancestor
| From | Property | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Action | guidedByPrinciple inherited | Relates an action to a principle that directs it. The principle supplies the value the action is taken to serve. |
| Code Provision | establishes inherited | Relates a code provision to the ethical concepts (principles, obligations, constraints) it establishes or defines. |
| Obligation | derivedFromPrinciple inherited | Relates an obligation to the principle or principles it operationalizes. The obligation gives concrete directive force to the more abstract value the principle expresses (Dennis et al. 2016). |
| Role | adheresToPrinciple inherited | Relates a role to principles that guide its conduct; the role-relative applicability edge of the R->P->O chain (the role determines which principles apply to conduct in that standing). |
Subclasses 5
Confidentiality Principle
The relational principle protecting client information and maintaining trust in professional relationships (BFO: generic... Conflict of Interest Disclosure Principle
The value that a professional discloses, and where required avoids, conflicts of interest affecting professional judgmen... Free Services Prohibition Principle
The value that a professional does not offer or provide services without compensation in a manner that undermines fair c... Loyalty Principle
The value that a professional acts as a faithful agent or trustee for the client or employer in professional matters. Transparency Principle
The relational principle requiring openness and disclosure in professional communications and decision-making (BFO: gene...
The relational principle protecting client information and maintaining trust in professional relationships (BFO: generic... Conflict of Interest Disclosure Principle
The value that a professional discloses, and where required avoids, conflicts of interest affecting professional judgmen... Free Services Prohibition Principle
The value that a professional does not offer or provide services without compensation in a manner that undermines fair c... Loyalty Principle
The value that a professional acts as a faithful agent or trustee for the client or employer in professional matters. Transparency Principle
The relational principle requiring openness and disclosure in professional communications and decision-making (BFO: gene...
Used in cases 24
Case ontologies that instantiate this class or one of its base-ontology descendants. Computed from each individual's type, so the list stays current as cases are extracted. The originating case is shown under Extraction details.
Case 4 Case 6 Case 7 Case 8 Case 9 Case 10 Case 14 Case 15 Case 58 Case 59 Case 71 Case 75 Case 76 Case 84 Case 85 Case 86 Case 90 Case 97 Case 103 Case 136 Case 142 Case 145 Case 170 Case 172@prefix core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix iao: <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/IAO_> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix pcsh: <http://proethica.org/shapes/core#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
proeth:RelationalPrinciple a owl:Class ;
rdfs:label "Relational Principle"@en ;
iao:0000115 "A principle governing professional relationships and establishing frameworks for trust and stakeholder interactions (BFO: generically dependent continuant)"@en ;
iao:0000119 "McLaren (2003). Extensionally defining principles and cases in ethics: An AI model. Artificial Intelligence 150(1-2): 145-181." ;
dcterms:source <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(03)00135-8> ;
rdfs:comment "Examples: Confidentiality, Loyalty, Fairness, Transparency, Respect for Autonomy. These govern interpersonal professional dynamics."@en ;
rdfs:subClassOf core:Principle ;
skos:changeNote "2026-07-06: Dennis et al. 2016 removed from the definition sources after a verify-or-drop check against the full text: the paper concerns formal verification of ethical choices in autonomous systems and contains no treatment of professional relationships or stakeholder trust; the McLaren extensional grounding carries the class. The definition now says accumulated cases rather than precedents (McLaren denies precedential force to Board cases)."@en ;
skos:definition "Relational principles establish frameworks for managing professional relationships and stakeholder trust. Following McLaren's extensional approach, these principles gain meaning through accumulated cases of client-professional disputes and resolutions, defining how professionals navigate competing interests and maintain trustworthy relationships."@en .
pcsh:CaseAnnotationShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Shared per-case annotation schema (all nine components)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "The cross-component annotation fields on committed case individuals: proeth:confidence (extraction confidence, decimal; all components except Action, whose Step-3 contract carries no confidence field), proeth:textReferences (verbatim supporting quotes, universal), proeth-prov sourceText (the source snippet, on the Step-1/2 provenance layers; Step-3 A/E individuals ground via textReferences only), and the involvement gloss (proeth:caseInvolvement on role individuals, proeth:caseContext on obligation, capability, and constraint individuals). Values are per-individual; the fields do not individuate any type."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Extraction confidence for this individual (0 to 1)." ;
sh:name "confidence" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:confidence ],
[ sh:description "Verbatim case quotes supporting this individual." ;
sh:name "text references" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:textReferences ],
[ sh:description "How this individual figures in the case narrative (role individuals; the same text is routed into rdfs:comment)." ;
sh:name "case involvement" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:caseInvolvement ],
[ sh:description "Grounding context in this case (obligation, capability, and constraint individuals)." ;
sh:name "case context" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:caseContext ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Action,
core:Capability,
core:Constraint,
core:Event,
core:Obligation,
core:Principle,
core:Resource,
core:Role,
core:State .
pcsh:PrincipleDefinitionShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle definition schema (type-level, descriptive, field contract)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What individuates a principle TYPE: its canonical kind (drives the four-kind subClassOf typing; the canonical leaf becomes the rdf:type) and the extensional cases that ground it (McLaren). The five per-case narrative literals and the invokedBy edge are per-individual and now declared on PrinciplePropertyShape, mirroring the RoleDefinitionShape/ProfessionalRolePropertyShape split so the {{ principle_schema }} prompt separates the type judgment from what the case supplies. Descriptive only (no validation result); principle_category is a routing input, not stored as a literal."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal." ;
sh:name "principle kind" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:principleCategory ],
[ sh:description "Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field." ;
sh:name "extensional cases" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:extensionalCases ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .
pcsh:PrinciplePropertyShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle per-case schema (individual data, non-definitional)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What a principle INDIVIDUAL is described by in a specific case: the five narrative literals the defeasibility pipeline consumes and the agent that invokes it. These do NOT individuate the principle TYPE (that is PrincipleDefinitionShape); their values are per-case, asserted on the individual. Descriptive only."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "interpretation" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:interpretation ],
[ sh:description "How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "concrete expression" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:concreteExpression ],
[ sh:description "What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on)." ;
sh:name "applied to" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:appliedTo ],
[ sh:description "The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field." ;
sh:name "balancing with" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:balancingWith ],
[ sh:description "How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "tension resolution" ;
sh:order 5 ;
sh:path proeth:tensionResolution ],
[ sh:description "The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent." ;
sh:name "invoked by" ;
sh:order 6 ;
sh:path core:invokedBy ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .