Unified boundary enforcement, interpersonal diagnostic, and relational audit engine. Absorbs 40 psychology + 2 social protocols and all relationship case studies.
Unified boundary enforcement, interpersonal diagnostic, and relational audit engine. Absorbs 40 psychology + 2 social protocols and all relationship case studies.
vibe
The nervous system replays what is familiar, not what is healthy.
Social Physics Filter — Boundary Enforcement & Relational Diagnostics
Compiled: 2026-05-11 (retroactive synthesis of 42+ protocols)
Problem Class: All interpersonal dynamics — friendships, romantic relationships, client boundaries, family patterns, social contracts, and the psychological schemas that distort rational decision-making.
Axiom: "The nervous system replays what is FAMILIAR, not what is HEALTHY. Unexamined wounds select for partners/clients/deals that re-inflict the wound."
When to Use
Invoke whenever the user mentions:
Relationship frustration, boundary violations, or interpersonal conflict
Feelings of rejection, loneliness, validation-seeking, or people-pleasing
Analysis of someone's behavior or motives
Dating/relationship dynamics
Schema therapy, IFS, or parts work
"Am I overreacting?" / "Is this normal?" / "What should I do about [person]?"
Solution Architecture
Module 1: The Wound-Selection Diagnostic (MP-8)
The Core Loop:
Unexamined wound/schema → pattern-matching bias
→ Selects for FAMILIAR, not HEALTHY
→ Familiar option re-inflicts the wound
→ Pain reinforces the schema
→ Selection bias deepens → Loop continues
The One Question: "Is this FAMILIAR or is this HEALTHY?"
If the attraction/comfort is based on familiarity with a painful pattern, the wound is selecting.
Module 2: The Pryce Protocol (6-Point Meta-Awareness Diagnostic)
Before ANY high-stakes social action:
Gate
Check
Red Flag
1. Emotional Temperature
"Am I in a regulated state?"
Flooded/activated = delay 24 hrs
2. Projection Check
"Am I seeing THEM or my schema?"
If it feels like a past wound, it IS the schema
3. Audience Check
"Who am I performing for?"
If an invisible audience exists, pause
4. Exit Test
"Can I walk away clean?"
If not, you're hostage
5. STFU Clause
"Will saying this improve the structural outcome?"
If no strategic gain, STFU
6. Blast Radius Audit
"Who else gets hurt?"
Collateral damage > 2 people = full stop
Module 3: IFS Parts Mapping (PSY-128)
When emotional flooding occurs, decompose into parts:
Part
Function
Typical Manifestation
Protector (Firefighter)
Emergency response
Anger, withdrawal, numbing, overwork
Manager
Preemptive control
People-pleasing, perfectionism, hypervigilance
Exile
Carries the original wound
Shame, abandonment terror, worthlessness
Self
The regulated observer
Curiosity, compassion, clarity, calm
Protocol:
Notice the activation (which part is driving?)
Ask: "What is this part trying to protect me from?"
Acknowledge the part's intention (it's trying to help)
Access Self-energy (curiosity, not judgment)
Ask the exile: "What do you need me to know?"
Module 4: The Relationship Tier Audit (PSY-158)
Classify all relationships into structural tiers:
Tier
Definition
Investment Level
Tier 1 (Inner Circle)
Reciprocal, high-trust, crisis-tested
Maximum — they get access to vulnerability
Tier 2 (Functional)
Reliable for specific contexts
Moderate — context-specific trust
Tier 3 (Peripheral)
Pleasant but untested
Minimal — social pleasantries only
Tier 4 (Toxic/Extraction)
Takes more than gives, violates boundaries
ZERO — enforce boundary or exit
Upgrade/Downgrade Criteria:
Upgrade: Demonstrated reciprocity under stress
Downgrade: Boundary violation, non-reciprocity confirmed via revealed preference (Law #3)
Exit: Pattern of extraction with no structural correction
Module 5: The Schema Deconstruction Stack (PSY-196)
Core Schemas Identified (from 1,900+ sessions):
Schema
Manifestation
Source
Counter-Protocol
Peer Validation Gap
Seeking peer validation
Developmental gap
Recognize the search pattern (§294)
Good Boy Paradox
Compliance loop → resentment
Conditional approval
Sovereign boundary enforcement (PSY-122)
Vending Machine
"If I give enough, they'll give back"
Transactional intimacy belief
Law #3: actions > words. Stop depositing.
Hope Override
Continuing despite negative data
Emotional attachment > rational analysis
CS-012: "Hope > Data" = self-deception
Deterministic Logic Error
"If I do X perfectly, Y MUST happen"
Control illusion
PSY-197: Outcomes are stochastic, not deterministic
Module 6: The Adult-to-Adult Communication Rewriter (PSY-20)
Before sending ANY emotionally charged message, run through:
ORIGINAL (Raw emotion): "You always do this..."
↓
STRUCTURAL REWRITE:
1. Observation (fact): "When X happened..."
2. Impact (feeling): "I felt Y..."
3. Need (structural): "I need Z going forward..."
4. Request (concrete): "Can we agree to [specific behavior]?"
The STFU Override: If the rewrite provides no strategic gain, do NOT send. Silence is often the highest-leverage move.
Pryce Gate 1: If not regulated, DELAY 24 hrs. No exceptions.
Schema Hijack
If it feels "familiar," the wound is selecting. Run Module 1.
Vending Machine Loop
Law #3 audit: Are their ACTIONS reciprocal? Words are irrelevant.
Hope Override
CS-012: If data says no, hope doesn't change the math.
Sunk Cost in Relationships (MP-14)
"Would I START this relationship today?" If no, the decision is made.
Validated Patterns (Empirical)
[V] The 14-Day Silence Test: If someone can go 14 days without initiating contact, their revealed preference is clear. | Reapply: Any ambiguous relationship.
[V] Schema repetition across domains: The same wound that selects avoidant friends ALSO selects extractive clients. Fix the wound, fix both. | Reapply: When client dynamics mirror personal patterns.
[V] STFU > Confrontation: In 4/5 historically analyzed confrontations, silence produced better outcomes than direct engagement. | Reapply: Every urge to "set the record straight."
[V] Bionic IFS Failover (CS-565): When biological flooding overwhelms, offload the Self-energy function to the AI system (silicon substrate). | Reapply: Any emotional crisis where clarity is needed NOW.
