Slave Owner Game/Diagnostic Inversion Test
Welcome to the MoA–TSG Lab. The wiki is the bench. The work is Metrology of the Abstract. Adopt the tools or leave them on the rack — either way, the need doesn't wait.
- Lab Note: A redlink is not a failure. It identifies Calibration Debt—work waiting to be measured, mapped, and calibrated.
|
CYCLE Calibration position Status — Active Development
This page is a conceptual instrument under Permanent Beta. It declares a real calibration position, not a finished product waiting to ship. Checking continues; an edit is only required when evidence demands it. Stage: Seed to Fruit. Feedback welcome — especially clarity, failure modes, and calibration gaps. Use discussion or Contribute. |
Meta
Slave Owner Game/Diagnostic Inversion Test
| Type | Core Diagnostic Game |
|---|---|
| Functional Layer | |
| Application Layer | Multi-Layer |
| Category | Core Diagnostic |
| Version | 0.4 |
| Maturity | Development |
| Last Calibration | 2026-07-30 |
| Status | Permanent Beta |
| Description | Tests whether this diagnostic is being applied symmetrically — the same evidence standard, regardless of who is being diagnosed. Tribalism is the most visible failure mode, but not the only one. Passing this test is necessary but not sufficient for a valid diagnosis. |
Menu
Core Principles
- Reality gets final vote
- See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.
- Permanent Beta
Navigation
Related
Canonical Question: Would you reach the same conclusion, using the same evidence, if the identity of the person or group being diagnosed were swapped for someone or something you feel differently about — and was that swap itself a fair one?
Diagnostic Inversion Test
The **Diagnostic Inversion Test** is a symmetry check. It asks whether a diagnosis is being applied using the same standard of evidence, regardless of who is being diagnosed. Tribalism (treating your own group more leniently than an out-group for identical behavior) is the most common and visible failure of this symmetry, which is why it is often used as the primary example. However, it is only one instance of a broader problem.
- Passing this test is necessary, but not sufficient.** A symmetric conclusion is not automatically correct. This test only rules out one specific failure mode (diagnostic asymmetry). The actual mechanism test (see Observable Behavior Rule and False Positives) must still be run and passed.
The Test
Take the specific claim you are about to make and ask:
- Would I reach the same conclusion, using the same evidence and the same standard, if I substituted someone or something I feel differently about?**
If the conclusion changes based on identity rather than evidence, the diagnosis is not calibrated.
Failure Modes
Diagnostic asymmetry can appear in several forms. Tribalism is the most visible, but the others are equally real and often harder to detect because they do not obviously involve group identity.
- **Tribal Bias** — Applying a looser standard to one’s own in-group and a stricter standard to an out-group for behavior that is otherwise identical.
- **Familiarity Bias** — Applying a looser standard to someone known personally and a stricter standard to a stranger, even within the same group or category.
- **Recency/Sympathy Bias** — Applying a looser standard to someone currently sympathized with (for example, because they were recently harmed), even when the behavior being evaluated is unrelated.
- **State-Dependent Bias** — Applying a stricter standard when angry, hurt, or personally invested, and a looser standard when calm — producing different verdicts on the same evidence depending on the evaluator’s emotional state.
- **Status Bias** — Applying a looser standard to someone with greater social, institutional, or professional power (assuming their position signals legitimacy), or conversely, applying a stricter standard specifically because someone holds power.
None of these require an out-group. A person can apply this diagnostic asymmetrically to two members of their own family, political side, or friend group based purely on current favor or emotional state.
Meta-Bias Warning: Gaming the Test
This test can itself be gamed. A person can satisfy its surface requirements while defeating its purpose by choosing a substitution deliberately designed to be easy to distinguish from the real case.
- Example:** Substituting “a stranger you’ve never met” for “your close friend” is usually a weak test, because differences in available evidence can explain asymmetry without requiring bias.
A genuine substitution holds power differential, context, and available evidence roughly constant, and only varies the identity or relationship being checked.
- If a person cannot clearly articulate *why* their chosen substitution is fair *before* running the test (not after the result is known), the test has likely been gamed rather than genuinely applied.**
Substitution Fairness Criteria
A valid substitution should hold roughly constant:
- **Power differential** — Comparable relative power between the parties.
- **Context** — Comparable relationship type or setting.
- **Stakes and evidence available** — Comparable amount and quality of evidence.
If a substitution fails these criteria, the test has not actually been run — it has only been performed.
How to Run the Test in Practice
1. State the specific claim and the specific evidence supporting it. 2. Identify who is being diagnosed. 3. Choose a substitution that satisfies the Substitution Fairness Criteria above. Be able to explain *why* it is fair **before** running the test. 4. Substitute while holding the evidence constant. Ask honestly: Does the conclusion change? 5. If the conclusion changes, identify which failure mode is producing the difference. 6. If the conclusion holds under a fair substitution, the diagnosis has passed this test. It has **not** thereby been proven correct — only shown to not be failing this particular check.
Relationship to Other Pages
This test supports several other pages that depend on consistent application:
- Slave Owner Game/Legitimate Authority — The Symmetry Table is a direct application of this test.
- Slave Owner Game/False Positives — Misdiagnosis becomes far more likely when this test has not been run.
- Observable Behavior Rule — These two are related but distinct. Observable Behavior Rule governs *what counts as evidence*. This test governs whether that evidence is being *applied consistently*.
Development Breadcrumb
The five failure modes listed above are a first-pass taxonomy. Future calibration should test: - Whether these categories are genuinely distinct or overlapping. - Whether additional failure modes exist. - Whether the Substitution Fairness Criteria are sufficient to prevent gaming, or whether gaming can still occur within technically “fair” substitutions.
Calibration Dependencies
- Slave Owner Game
- Observable Behavior Rule
- Slave Owner Game/False Positives
- Slave Owner Game/Legitimate Authority
See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.
Page Transparency & Calibration
This page does not have its own dedicated Calibration Log or Decision Records — both are tracked at the Main Page level.
- This page is closed for discussion. Discuss at the Main Page's Talk page instead.
- ← Back to Main Page
- View Current Page History — Complete edit history of this specific page.
- Calibration Log — Full history of reviews and calibration decisions, tracked at the hub level.
- Decision Records — Governance reasoning behind decisions, tracked at the hub level.
This page is under continuous calibration in line with the Permanent Beta principle.
Calibration References
This page is calibrated against the following core standards and reference materials:
- The Sovereign Games Framework — Overall framework philosophy and operating principles
- Permanent Beta — Core maintenance and continuous improvement standard
- Reference Standards — Principles for traceable, confirmed standards
- Calibrating Conceptual Instruments — Methodology for evaluating and refining pages
- Civilizational Traceability Hierarchy — How standards should connect to reality across levels
- Diagnostic Inversion Test — Mandatory self-application standard
- Reality Game — Foundational reality-alignment tool
- Reality Override Game — Standing discipline against protecting an existing model rather than updating it
- Observable Behavior Rule — Standing principle that diagnostics evaluate observable actions, mechanisms, and consequences, not internal motive, belief, or intent
- One-Way Nature of the Sovereign Games — Anti-capture design principles
- The Royal Cubit Civilization (Strategy) — Long-term civilizational vision and metrology metaphor
- Conceptual Instruments — Overall direction and metrology metaphor
- Breadcrumb Philosophy — Standing discipline for making unresolved questions and provisional decisions explicit
- Calibration Dependencies: Standards and Process — Rule that visible and hidden dependency lists must match, and that dependencies describe genuine reliance
Calibration Dependent
Pages that list this page as a load-bearing dependency:
| Page | Priority | Instrument Grade | Last Updated | Cycle Status | Drift Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slave Owner Game/How This Framework Can Be Abused | Supporting | Development | 2026-07-20 | Current | Breadcrumb-Open |
If this page is edited substantively, review the list above per the Ripple Review rule — see Calibration Dependencies: Standards and Process#Rule: Core-Priority Changes Trigger Mandatory Ripple Review.
Calibration Dependencies
Pages this page relies on as load-bearing dependencies: Slave Owner Game • Observable Behavior Rule • Slave Owner Game/False Positives • Slave Owner Game/Legitimate Authority If incorrect, edit the `depends_on` field in Admin Page Status — do not edit this section directly, it is auto-generated.