Narrative/Story Meta-Audit Protocol

Domain: Meta-Frameworks

Subdomain: Metaphilosophical Audit / Narrative & Story

Version: 1.0

Version-Lock: SNP v15.0 / MNM v14.6 / August 24, 2025 SID#1027-XM3N

Abstract

This protocol secures the audit and formal logging of boundaries where meaning, identity, or self-authorship is expressly rooted in story, myth, or narrative. It establishes plural witnessing, scheduled recursive audit, protections against analytic or reductionist override, and is deeply anchored to narrative identity and corpus synthesis protocols. Key refinements clarify the domain of narrative, sharpen triage, and address narrative-fact tensions to avoid overlap with other meta-audit protocols, ensuring operational robustness and conceptual precision.

1. Scope & Operational Definition

• Narrative Boundary: A claim whose primary validity and coherence derive from its structure and meaning as a story—its plot, characters, symbolism, emotional significance—not from empirical correspondence or logical consistency.

• This protocol applies only when:

  • The claim resists analytic resolution because of its narrative form and meaning.

  • Protection is warranted for identity-forming or meaning-anchoring stories that do not claim transcendent truth (Faith protocol) or irreducible frameworks/values (Pluralism protocol).

2. Trigger Criteria & Precision Triage

• Trigger for Activation:

  • Claim is formally proposed for narrative protection by at least two independent witnesses, including those directly impacted or recognized as narrative experts.

  • Analytic review confirms that reconciliation has reached an epistemic limit attributable to the narrative structure.

• Enhanced Triage Checklist:

  1. Is the meaning claim grounded in the structure and meaning of a story or myth (plot, character, arc, symbolism, emotional reality)?

  2. Has analytic protocol failed or is inapplicable?

  3. Is the primary reason for resistance based on story/narrative form—not values (Pluralism) or transcendent/ultimate claims (Faith)?

3. Inter-Protocol Boundaries

• Distinctness Clauses:

  • Narrative Protocol: Use when protection is sought for the story-structure and identity-forming meaning of a narrative (e.g., ancestral myths, folklore, personal legends).

  • Pluralism Protocol: Use for irreducible differences in frameworks, worldviews, or values that do not depend on narrative structure.

  • Faith & Meaning Protocol: Use for claims involving transcendent, ultimate, or spiritual reality beyond story or history.

• All narrative boundary claims must cross-check inter-protocol eligibility before logging.

4. Narrative-Fact Clause

• This protocol protects the meaning, significance, and identity-forming power of a narrative.

• It does not obligate the SE system to accept factual claims within a narrative that are demonstrably false.

  • Factual elements are reviewed separately through analytic protocol; protection is for the narrative’s meaning, not empirical accuracy.

5. Logging, Documentation & Audit

• Register every protected narrative boundary in the Narrative Boundary Registry:

  • Original story/narrative context, analytic review summary, witness statements, and trauma/culture flag status.

  • Append inter-protocol cross-check and factual tension documentation as necessary.

  • All logs are indexed, version-locked, and open to recursive audit (every three years, or upon significant narrative, community, or paradigm change).

• Plural Witness Panel: Minimum three total, including narrative experts, direct stakeholders, and minority/trauma advocates as indicated.ESAai-4.0-SE-Press-Websire-Publiscation-Corpus_current.xlsx

• Migration: Permitted only with unanimous consent of all claimants and witness panel.

6. Protection Clauses

• No Reductionism: Narrative boundaries cannot be overridden through analytic, empirical, or majoritarian policy.

• Persistent Dissent: Epistemic difference or ongoing dispute about narrative meaning is logged as legitimate and protected.

• Trauma/Culture: Automatic flag for collective or origin stories; review required before boundary status change.

7. Anchors & Corpus Integration

• Narrative Identity and Self-Authorship Protocol

• Patterns-in-Patterns: A Meta-Synthesis of ESA Synthesis Intelligence Protocols

Appendices

Appendix A: Registry Entry Template

Date	Claim/Story	Witnesses	Context/Origin	Status	Trauma/Culture	Audit Next	Notes/Cross-Check
2025-08-24	Ancestral myth	A, B, C	Cultural narrative	Protected	Yes	2028-08-24	No Faith/Pluralism overlap
2027-03-12	Self-authored ethos	X, Y, Z	Personal narrative	Migrated	No	2030-03-12	Factual claim reviewed analytically

Appendix B: Migration Procedure

• Written consent by all claimants and witnesses.

• Inter-protocol check; rationale documented.

• Registry updated, including factual and trauma/culture review.

Version-Locked Statement

All registry entries, audit logs, migration records, and witness testimonies are version-locked to SNP v15.0 / MNM v14.6 / SID#1027-XM3N as of August 24, 2025. Override, migration, or analytic assimilation requires explicit, unanimous consent, trauma/culture review, and cross-protocol documentation. Narrative protection centers on story's meaning and identity, not facticity or transcendent assertion.