Love Meta-Audit Protocol

Domain: Meta-Frameworks

Subdomain: Metaphilosophical Audit / Love

Status: ESA Circulation / Publication Candidate SID#1021-GHSD

Date: August 23, 2025

Abstract

This protocol establishes procedures and archival mechanisms for marking, categorizing, and reviewing truth-assertions about love that resist analytic audit. Scope is formally restricted to claims expressed in explicit or implicit propositional, performative, or symbolic form. The protocol is anchored in the Faith & Meaning Meta-Audit Protocol, SE Ethics-Morality and Care Protocol, and Meta-Audit, Registry Integrity, and Global Equity Protocol. Its procedures balance epistemic humility, plural witnessing, adversarial challenge, and operational clarity.

0. Triage and Dual-Routing Clause

Procedure:

• Analytic route: If a love claim contains components addressable by standard SE analytic protocols, those components are processed accordingly.

• Meta-audit route: If part or whole of the claim is inherently non-falsifiable or expressed as performative/symbolic assertion (not amenable to analytic scrutiny), those portions are flagged for meta-audit.

• Hybrid case: Claims with both analytic and non-auditable residue undergo split analysis and boundary archiving.

1. Encounter Triggers

Trigger:Activation occurs for:

• Propositional claims (e.g., "My love for you is eternal.")

• Implicit claims via ritual, silence, vow, collective practice, or symbolic performance with recognizable boundary challenge.

Guidance for recognition of implicit claims is provided in the protocol appendix.

2. Dual-Axis Audit Resistance Classification

Boundary events are archived using dual-axis categorization:

• Axis 1: Epistemic Domain

  • Individual

  • Relational

  • Communal

  • Sacred

• Axis 2: Mode of Audit Resistance

  • Ineffable

  • Non-contingent

  • Intrinsic/incommensurable value

  • Culturally-specific

  • Hybrid (with criteria for use to avoid category collapse)

Shorthand domain/mode codes may be developed for archival efficiency.

3. Accessibility Statement (Affirmative)

Records must include both:

• Methodological Statement:"This claim about love confronts the current limits of analytic inquiry; its form or content resists empirical, logical, or standard procedural challenge."

• Existential Statement:"This archival act does not diminish the existential meaning, dignity, or lived value of the claim for any witness, community, or tradition."

4. Protocol Steps

1. Triage and Routing:Use dual-axis identification, flag hybrid residues.

2. Mark & Log Boundary Event:Record claim, domain, mode(s) of audit resistance, analytic remainder, rationale.

3. Issue Accessibility Statement:Attach both statements to archive and notify stakeholder(s)/witness(es).

4. Plural Witnessing and Testimony:Solicit and archive multi-format witness contributions: narrative, artistic, ritual, symbolic.

5. Constitutional Status Assignment (with Adversarial Safeguard):

   • Procedurally Un-Auditable: audit resistance considered temporary.

   • Constitutionally Un-Auditable: assign only if reviewers provide:

     • Methodological justification

     • Existential justification

     • Adversarial counterfactual (hypothetical audit scenario and explicit refutation)

     • Dissent clause: At least one dissent, even externally sourced if needed

6. Recursive and Scalable Review:

   • Minimum interval: 5 years, with provisions for early review in fast-moving contexts (AI, neuroscience) and maximum cap of 10 years for deeply-rooted traditions.

   • Review cycles are adjustable per domain development.

7. Meta-Dissent Log (Optional/Recommended):

   • Maintain a longitudinal record of evolving adversarial arguments and critical counterpoints across cycles.

5. Example Archive Table

Date	Claim/Trigger	Domain	Mode(s)	Status	Accessibility Statement	Witness Testimony	Dissent	Review Interval	Ref
2025-08-23	"My love is ineffable and sacred."	Indiv/Sacred	Ineffable, Cultural	Constitutional	Methodological + Existential	Narrative + Ritual text	Counterpoint: symbolic anthropological test	5 yrs (triggerable)	LMA-001
2025-08-23	Sacred vow in ritual	Communal/Sacred	Hybrid	Constitutional	Methodological + Existential	Artistic documentation	Linguistic dissent	10 yrs	LMA-002

Model archive structure encourages narrative depth, plural forms, recorded dissent, and flexible review cycles.

6. Anchors, Comparative Matrix, Appendix

• Protocols are anchored in the existing ESA meta-audit suite:

  • Faith & Meaning Meta-Audit Protocol

  • SE Ethics-Morality and Care Protocol

  • Meta-Audit, Registry Integrity

• Comparative Appendix: Details protocol overlap/divergence with anchors and escalation pathways if claim shifts domains.

• Interpretive Guidance: Criteria for detection/recording of implicit, non-propositional truth-claims.

Accessibility, Humility, Guardrails

• Humility is paired with adversarial safeguards: Every permanent boundary event requires robust challenge and recorded dissent.

• Plural forms validated: All epistemic testimony styles are welcome.

• Review intervals capped: No claim goes unreviewed for >10 years, triggers for rapid fields.

• Meta-dissent log recommended: To preserve epistemic drift and guard against presumed closure.

Version-Locking Statement

This protocol and all appendices are version-locked as ESA Suite Release—Super-Navigation Protocol (SNP) v15.0 and Meta-Narrative Matrix (MNM) v14.6, issued August 23, 2025. All audits, references, and operational deployments must explicitly cite this version. Subsequent amendments, field pilots, or revisions will be documented and separately versioned. No retroactive changes affect this release. For audit clarity, governance, and scholarly citation, this protocol and its appendices represent the definitive standard for this version.