revelation
Enable an AI agent to recognise a revelation episode, assess what became newly apparent to whom, and decide how its content may be interpreted, checked or further disclosed.
Research draft, second pass
A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.
Researched by: Codex + Grok
Purpose and description
Enable an AI agent to recognise a revelation episode, assess what became newly apparent to whom, and decide how its content may be interpreted, checked or further disclosed.
Divine disclosure of otherwise inaccessible knowledge, typically claimed as communication from a deity or ultimate reality to a human recipient or community.
It can be Reconstruct what became apparent and compare the recipient's prior and subsequent understanding.; Separate reported experience, revealed content, source attribution and corroborating evidence.; Identify whether a disclosure actually reached and was understood by its intended recipient.; Seek clarification or corroboration appropriate to the kind of content revealed.; Determine whether further disclosure requires consent, qualification or a narrower audience.; Reassess an episode when later evidence changes its interpretation or undermines its content..
Distinguishing features
Identify content that was hidden, inaccessible or unrecognised for a particular recipient; routine receipt of already understood information does not establish revelation.
Locate a discernible transition in apparent understanding; possession of a secret without any such transition is not a revelation episode.
Separate making content available from the recipient recognising its significance; a disclosure may occur without producing revelation.
Distinguish a recipient's sense of certainty or extraordinary significance from independent support for the revealed content.
For an insight or discovery, identify what makes it a revelation in this context rather than treating every new inference as one.
Scope
+ The specific content revealed and what previously concealed or obscured it
+ The recipient-relative transition from unawareness or suspicion to apparent recognition
+ The revealing act, encounter or experience and its claimed source
+ The distinction between experienced revelation, attributed authority and corroborated content
+ Recipient uptake, unresolved interpretation and constraints on further disclosure
- The enduring truth or history of the subject revealed
- General communication channels and routine message delivery
- Complete investigations, experiments and discovery processes
- Religious traditions, doctrines and institutions beyond their role in this episode
- Long-term belief systems and psychological conditions
- Downstream decisions and actions beyond their immediate connection to the revelation
Characteristics
- Revelation mode
- deliberate disclosure | accidental exposure | recognition through encounter | inward insight | claimed supernatural communication | unresolved Determines which account of the episode, evidence and handling questions are relevant without endorsing an attributed source.
- Prior epistemic position
- unaware | suspected | misinterpreted | knew content but not significance | disputed | unknown Establishes what changed for the recipient and whether anything was revealed to them.
- Recipient relation
- content-to-recipient relation, distinguishing direct recipient, witness and later audience The same content may be revelatory for one person and already familiar to another.
- Claimed source attribution
- attributed source, attribution maker and basis; source may be unresolved Keeps the origin asserted by participants separate from an origin an agent can substantiate.
- Recognition interval
- elapsed time or bounded interval between encounter and reported recognition; unknown permitted Distinguishes an immediate revelation from delayed recognition of previously encountered material.
- Recipient uptake
- unnoticed | partially understood | accepted | doubted | rejected | reinterpreted | unknown Prevents exposure, comprehension and acceptance from being treated as the same event.
- Content warrant
- unchecked | supported in part | independently corroborated | contested | contradicted | not presently testable Allows the agent to acknowledge the episode while qualifying what can be asserted about its content.
- Further-disclosure constraint
- public | recipient-limited | consent-dependent | confidential | disputed | unknown Becoming aware of content does not itself establish permission to pass it on.
Also called
Where this came from
wikidata · CC0 1.0
Also registered as vr.tr.revelation
Drafted structure
Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 6 bundles · 11 layers · 11 findings · 21 questions.
Hidden content and novelty What became apparent and why it counts as newly revealed for this recipient.
A revelation requires an identifiable change in access or understanding, not merely an interesting statement.
Revelatory content
The content encountered, distinguished from meanings later attached to it.
Content and interpretation
Record the proposition, identity, connection or meaning said to have been revealed, preserving ambiguity where necessary.
- What exactly became apparent, and which parts are the recipient's subsequent interpretation? definition
- What account, quotation or observation supports this description of the revealed content? provenance
Prior hiddenness
The recipient's earlier relation to the content and the barrier that changed.
Recipient-relative novelty
Distinguish concealed information, inaccessible evidence and previously unrecognised significance.
- Before the episode, did the recipient lack the content, suspect it or know it without recognising its significance? boundary
- What concealment, access barrier or interpretive obstacle ceased to prevent recognition? definition
Revealing episode How and when the content became apparent.
An intentional unveiling, accidental exposure and inward experience require different accounts of agency and event boundaries.
Mode and agency
The encounter that occasioned revelation and the role of any revealing actor.
Revealing mechanism
Describe how content reached awareness without presuming that an intentional revealer exists.
- Did recognition arise through deliberate disclosure, accidental exposure, observation, inference or a reported inward experience? definition
- If an actor intended to reveal something, what evidence identifies their intended content and audience? provenance
Episode boundaries
The relationship between initial exposure, recognition and any staged unveiling.
Recognition threshold
Locate when the content became apparent while allowing gradual or retrospectively reported recognition.
- When was the content first encountered, and when did the recipient report recognising what it meant? measurement
- Do successive disclosures form one unfolding revelation or distinct episodes with different revealed content? boundary
Source and warrant Where the revelation is said to originate and what supports its content.
Revelatory force, source authority and factual support must remain distinguishable.
Attributed origin
Reported and substantiated accounts of the content's source.
Source attribution basis
Preserve who attributes the revelation to a person, evidence, intuition or supernatural source and on what grounds.
- Who attributes the revelation to its claimed source, and what grounds do they give? provenance
- Which parts of the source attribution can be independently examined, and which remain participant claims? boundary
Content assessment
Support and challenges specific to what was revealed.
Experience versus support
Assess the revealed content separately from evidence that a recipient had a compelling experience.
- What evidence supports or contradicts the content beyond the recipient's conviction that it was revealed? provenance
- What check could discriminate between competing interpretations, or establish that the claim is not presently testable? action
Recipient recognition Who experienced revelation and how their understanding changed.
Revelation is relative to a recipient; delivery alone does not demonstrate recognition or acceptance.
Audience and access
Intended recipients, actual recipients and later audiences.
Actual revelatory reach
Distinguish access to a disclosure from evidence of a revelatory effect.
- Who directly encountered the revealing content, and who only received a later account? provenance
- For which recipients is there evidence that something previously hidden or unrecognised became apparent? boundary
Understanding transition
The recipient's reported change in interpretation, belief or recognition.
Uptake and reinterpretation
Track comprehension, acceptance and later reinterpretation as distinct responses.
- What changed in the recipient's understanding, and did they accept, doubt or reject the apparent revelation? definition
- What later evidence or reflection has changed the recipient's account of what was revealed? provenance
Handling the revelation What may be done with newly apparent content and how mistaken accounts can be corrected.
Revelation can change access to sensitive information or create pressure to act before its meaning and support are settled.
Redisclosure boundaries
The permitted audience and conditions for passing the content onward.
Permission to reveal further
Distinguish knowing the content from authority to disclose it to others.
- Whose confidentiality, consent or stated audience restrictions bear on further disclosure? boundary
- May the agent share the content now, and with what audience limits or qualifications? action
Response and correction
Immediate responses justified by the revelation's current interpretation and evidential standing.
Proportionate next step
Connect proposed responses to supported content and preserve a route for correcting premature conclusions.
- Which proposed next steps depend on the content being true, and what must be clarified or checked before taking them? action
- If the apparent revelation proves mistaken or misleading, which recipients or dependent decisions need an updated account? action
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Kinds and varieties
Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.
- General (natural) revelation
- Special (historical) revelation
- Propositional revelation
- Personal/encounter revelation
- Private revelation (visions, locutions, private locutions)
- Public/canonical revelation (closed canon in many traditions)
- Progressive revelation
- Apocalyptic revelation (unveiling of eschatological events)
- Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of revelation this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
What the second pass must settle
- Does this registry entry intend revelation primarily as an act of disclosure, an experience of recognition, a claimed divine communication or a shared category encompassing these?
- Must revealed content be true for an episode to count as revelation, or should the model explicitly include apparent and subsequently discredited revelations?
- What threshold separates revelation from ordinary learning, insight and discovery, especially when no deliberate concealment occurred?
- Should unsuccessful attempts to reveal content belong here or remain solely in a neighbouring disclosure model?
- Which existing Vercy models own disclosure, discovery, insight and religious experience, and where should this entry link to them instead of duplicating their scope?