NL · EN
Design by Authenticity Foundations – Validation

Phenomenological Validation

How a consciousness model can be tested without numbers, yet remain reproducible.

The I·V·O model is not a mathematical system, but a formalized phenomenological structural language. That means:

  • no numbers
  • no units
  • no calculations

but instead:

  • consistent symbolism
  • exact relationships
  • reproducible phenomena
  • intersubjective recognizability

This page describes how the model can be tested, validated, and confirmed within its own domain — that of direct experience, field dynamics, and pre-verbal signals.

This is not a scientific protocol in the classical sense.
It is a clear and usable framework for anyone who wants to test the model in practice and observation.

1. What phenomenological validation means

Phenomenological validation does not require:

  • measuring instruments
  • numbers
  • statistics
  • large sample sizes

But something different:

  1. Repeatability of experience
  2. Shared recognition between observers
  3. Consistent application of the same structure
  4. Comparable interpretation of the same field

In this domain, a model is valid when:

  • multiple observers recognize the same patterns
  • the same dynamic becomes visible in different contexts
  • the language of the model sharpens situations, rather than obscuring them
  • noise and coherence become recognizable to everyone who looks

The I·V·O model meets this form of testability.

2. The three layers where validation takes place

A. Observation (I)

Can an observer:

  • recognize pre-verbal signals?
  • see micro-physical reactions (breath, timing, rhythm)?
  • notice phase shifts in a conversation or space?

When multiple observers point to the same signals,
that is phenomenological convergence.

B. Relationship (V)

Does the model provide consistent direction:

  • do people recognize the same tension vector?
  • does the shift occur at the same moment?
  • does interpretation align without prior exchange?

When direction independently corresponds,
that is structural validation.

C. Field (O)

Can an observer:

  • see the difference between a tense and a resonant field?
  • recognize when a field "tips"?
  • name the same pattern as another person?

When two people see the same field,
that is field tolerance of the model.

3. Test forms (practically applicable)

Here follows a formal validation method you can use directly.

Test 1 — Double observation (two observers, one field)

Steps:

  1. Two people receive a brief explanation of I–V–O.
  2. They observe the same situation (conversation, interaction, space).
  3. They independently make an I–V–O analysis.
  4. The analyses are compared.

Validation is achieved when:

  • I is named at comparable points
  • V indicates the same direction
  • O shows the same atmosphere/pressure

This is the most direct form of testing.

Test 2 — Micro-signal recognition

  1. One person registers micro-signals: breathing changes, rhythm breaks, timing fluctuations.
  2. A second person does this without knowing what the first saw.
  3. Signals are placed side by side.

Overlap indicates:

  • pre-verbal recognition
  • field signal reproducibility

This is a crucial form of validation:
it shows that it's not about interpretation, but about observation.

Test 3 — Field shift analysis

  1. An interaction or conversation is followed.
  2. Both observers note the moment when "it tips."
  3. Is the same time point seen?
  4. Is the same dynamic named?

When field shifts are reproducible,
the model is intersubjectively valid.

Test 4 — Case translation by third parties

The case is given to someone who doesn't know the model.
Then they are taught the model,
and that person makes the same analysis again.

If the model:

  • sharpens,
  • clarifies,
  • remains consistent,

then it is functionally valid.

4. What is validatable in the I·V·O model

  1. Coherence and decoherence — Every observer can immediately feel when something aligns or breaks.
  2. Flow and friction — The difference is phenomenologically directly recognizable.
  3. Noise and tension — These are visible in timing, breath, interruption, and rhythm.
  4. Pre-verbal signals — These are independently observable.
  5. Field shifts — Usually felt by multiple people present at the same time.
  6. Direction (V) — Shift in vector is recognizable to different people.
  7. Future loops / déjà-vu — Often recognizable as a pattern for multiple observers.

5. What is not validatable (and thus falls outside the model)

  • Predictions
  • Magical claims
  • Absolute truth
  • Linear causality
  • Personal interpretation
  • Subjective emotion

These are explicitly excluded domains.
The model only works on phenomena that:

  • are repeatable
  • are observable
  • are pre-verbal
  • are coherently noticed by multiple people

That's why the model remains sober.

6. Two requirements every phenomenological model must meet

1. Applicability

The model must be able to carry real situations. This already happens in:

  • conversations
  • team dynamics
  • systems work
  • Sail4Recovery
  • personal decisions
  • field observations

2. Reproducibility

Two people must be able to independently recognize the same phenomena.

That is exactly what the test forms above do.

7. Conclusion

The I·V·O model is testable within its own domain.

Phenomenological validation:

  • confirms the power of the model
  • makes it transferable
  • gives it a scientific edge
  • prevents misinterpretation
  • is fully in line with the intention of the model

What is tested is not "truth,"
but pattern recognition, structure, and consistency.

That is the only way to validate consciousness models without reducing them to numbers.