Wisdom Meta-Audit Protocol (Final Version

Domain: Meta-Frameworks

Subdomain: Metaphilosophical Audit / Wisdom

Version: 1.0

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

SID#1029-3WIS

Abstract

This protocol formally codifies audit, registry, and protection boundaries for practical wisdom: the capacity for integrative and normative judgment that synthesizes insights across ethical, practical, social, and technical domains, prioritizing overarching goods such as flourishing, justice, and sustainability. Wisdom, distinct from knowledge or technical skill, is validated through reasoned plural consensus and sustained effectiveness over time, not analytic reduction or isolated expertise. Protocol anchoring is provided by the Knowledge Protocol: Meta-Framework for Challenge-Ready Epistemology and the Meta-Synthesis Protocol.

1. Functional Definition & Scope

Wisdom (Integrative-Normative Definition):

Wisdom is the capacity to make context-sensitive decisions and judgments that integrate knowledge, experience, ethics, and technical understanding across multiple domains, and which aim for the flourishing and well-being of individuals, communities, and ecological systems over narrow technical or short-term goals.

• Tacit Knowledge Protocol Scope (see Tacit Knowledge & Intuition Meta-Audit Protocol):

  For embodied know-how, intuition, and non-verbal skilled judgment within a single domain.

• Wisdom Protocol Scope:

  For judgments requiring interpretive synthesis across distinct knowledge domains, giving priority to overarching normative goods.

Examples Clarifying Scope:

• Tacit: "I know how to perform this healing technique, but cannot articulate the theory."

• Wisdom: "In designing healthcare policy, we must balance technical efficiency, social justice, and ethical values for community well-being, as guided by synthesis of historical, social, and experiential understanding."

2. Trigger Criteria & Refined Triage

Activation Trigger:

• Formal assertion that a boundary event, decision, or intervention represents a claim of wisdom as defined above.

• Panel of at least three plural expert witnesses: direct wisdom-holder, cross-domain stakeholder, ethical/societal expert.

• Demonstrated attempt at analytic/tacit knowledge review, found insufficient for the integrative-normative scope of the claim.

Enhanced Triage Checklist:

1. Does the claim require a synthesis of knowledge from multiple, distinct domains (e.g., ethical, technical, social, emotional) to be understood or validated?

2. Does the judgment prioritize a broader, normative good (e.g., flourishing, sustainability, justice) over a narrow or technically optimal outcome?

3. Would attempting to route or validate the claim via Tacit Knowledge, Pluralism, Faith, or Narrative protocols degrade its integrative function, or obscure its prioritization of overarching goods?

4. Can the judgment’s reasoned consensus be tracked through plural testimony and stewardship outcomes over time, in lieu of analytic metrics?

3. Audit, Validation, Documentation & Review

• Plural Witness Panel:

  Each registry entry requires testimony from a diverse, cross-domain and multi-generational panel.

• Hermeneutic Validation:

  Protocol relies on interpretive community consensus and stewardship—validation emerges through reasoned dialogue, ethical review, and demonstrated outcomes over longitudinal cycles.

• Recursive Audit:

  Scheduled review every three years, contextual revalidation following major societal or domain shifts, longitudinal tracking of stewardship impact.

• Constitutional Un-Auditability Clause:

  Registry notation when analytic/tacit review is not possible; audits focus on stewardship, plural respect, and maintenance of normative goods.

4. Boundaries & Distinctness Clauses

• Wisdom Meta-Audit Protocol: For claims that are integrative and normative, requiring synthesis and prioritization of overarching goods across domains.

• Tacit Knowledge & Intuition Protocol: For claims that are embodied and performative, demonstrating skill or intuition within a single domain.

• Pluralism, Faith, Narrative Protocols: For value-based, transcendent, or meaning-centric boundaries, not for integrative-normative decision-making.

• Cross-Protocol Registry Review: All claims undergo registry cross-check to ensure proper routing and system integrity.

5. Protection Clauses

• No Reductionism:

  Wisdom claims and boundaries are shielded from override by analytic, empirical, majoritarian, or domain-specific challenge.

• Persistent Dissent Tracking:

  Document and protect dissent or critique for longitudinal learning and ethical accountability.

• Plural, Trauma, and Stewardship Flags:

  Automatic reviews for claims originating in trauma-informed, collective, or multi-generational contexts.

6. Anchors & Corpus Integration

• Anchors:

• Knowledge Protocol: Meta-Framework for Challenge-Ready Epistemology

• Meta-Synthesis Protocol

• Corpus Integration:

  Integrated within the SE Press Meta-Frameworks corpus for meta-audit, stewardship, and plural wisdom registry functions.

Appendices

Appendix A: Wisdom Registry Entry Template

Date	Wisdom Claim	Decision-Makers	Domains Synthesized	Plural Witness Panel	Normative Good Prioritized	Status	Review Next	Hermeneutic Validation
2025-08-24	Policy prioritizing justice over technical efficiency	A, B	Ethics, Economics, Community	C, D, E	Human flourishing	Active	2028-08-24	Community consensus
2027-02-05	Stewardship response to crisis	X, Y	History, Governance, Ecology	Y, Z, W	Sustainability	Migrated	2030-02-05	Dialogic plural review

Appendix B: Constitutional Audit Checklist

• Affirm plural relevance, path to stewardship, and impact on normative goods.

• Document interpretive evolution and context adaptation.

• Confirm ongoing un-auditability and record dissent/critique.

Version-Locked Statement

Effective August 24, 2025, all registry entries, audit logs, plural witness panels, outcome tracking, and constitutional reviews under this protocol are version-locked to SNP v15.0 / MNM v14.6 / SID#1029-3WIS. Override, migration, or analytic assimilation requires explicit, plural, cross-domain consent and constitutional review. Wisdom boundaries—defined by integrative synthesis and prioritization of overarching goods—are persistently protected from reductionist override; stewardship, plural consensus, and normative value serve as primary standards for ongoing inclusion and acceptance.