ONEIRORABack to ONEIRORA

Modern decision theory at the centre, with four distinct evidence domains

ONEIRORA is an integrated decision-support model built on modern decision science. It adds the normative perspectives of religious, philosophical, and classical traditions that people have long used to navigate choice and adversity. Dreams, spontaneous imagery, intuition, and tarot are used to explore latent or symbolic signals in human cognition that science does not yet fully explain. We also connect each person’s decision process with what happens afterwards to identify which methods genuinely helped. These four domains do not validate one another: their epistemic status and authority remain distinct. The purpose is not to deliver a one-time conclusion, but to discover the process that genuinely works for each person and develop it into a personal decision model for future choices.

Explore my options

Human judgement is not made from explicit information alone.

Decision research gives us rigorous ways to examine values, alternatives, uncertainty, trade-offs, and cognitive bias. It has not, however, explained every instance of recurring dreams, compelling images, or direction sensed before it can be articulated. ONEIRORA remains open to the philosophical possibility that human beings possess forms of perception, including potentially transcendent capacities, that current science does not yet fully describe. We treat this as an exploratory premise, never as an established fact. Emotion is acknowledged as information about the person; it is checked against evidence, risk, and consequences rather than allowed to decide by itself.

Science structures the decision; accumulated wisdom supplies normative perspectives; dreams, imagery, and tarot open questions into the unknown; the user retains authority.
01

Four evidence domains, combined by role rather than rank

Professional discipline begins by refusing to present unlike materials as the same kind of evidence. Each domain has a defined contribution and a defined limit.

01

The scientific domain

Decision Quality, the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, value-focused thinking, and behavioural decision research structure the problem, values, alternatives, facts, uncertainty, trade-offs, and bias.

02

Wisdom across cultures and centuries

The Bible, Buddhist sutras, the Qur’an, the Yijing, the Bhagavad Gita, and Greek and Stoic philosophy are examined as normative traditions people have used to guide conduct and endure adversity.

03

The not-yet-explained human domain

Dreams, spontaneous imagery, intuition, and the user’s response to a self-selected tarot card are used to explore unspoken values, fears, possibilities, and potentially transcendent signals.

04

The personal empirical record

The reasoning used at the time, the later reality, and the user’s assessment of the process are connected to identify which decision methods actually helped this person.

02

We begin with reality, then expand towards wisdom and latent signals

Modern theory controls the core structure and safety boundaries. Religious and philosophical traditions, dreams, imagery, and tarot do not replace reality; they operate as separate reflective layers for detecting overlooked criteria and possible branches.

  1. 01

    Support-needs assessment

    Does the person need to be heard, make sense of the situation, obtain information, prepare to act, or make a decision?

    We identify the requested form of support and whether a decision actually exists before opening a decision tree.

  2. 02

    Scientific structuring

    How are the problem, values, alternatives, facts, uncertainty, and trade-offs configured?

    Modern decision theory and structure-specific trees provide a consistent quality standard.

  3. 03

    Normative-wisdom inquiry

    What have major religious and philosophical traditions urged people to protect or question in a choice like this?

    The Bible, Buddhist sutras, the Qur’an, and Eastern and Western classics are presented as comparable perspectives, not commands.

  4. 04

    Symbolic and latent inquiry

    What might responses to dreams, imagery, intuition, or tarot reveal that has not yet been articulated?

    We explore an uncertain domain without converting it into an external fact or a prediction.

  5. 05

    User-integrated judgement

    Where do reality, values, inherited wisdom, and inner signals converge or conflict?

    The system makes candidates and tensions visible; the user confirms the criteria and path in their own words.

  6. 06

    Longitudinal learning

    What happened afterwards, and which parts of the reasoning were genuinely useful?

    Outcome and process quality are reviewed separately. Only user-confirmed methods enter the personal model.

03

The evidence architecture becomes a visible path of questions and choices

This is an adaptive decision tree, not a bank of predetermined answers. It checks the judgement points a person is most likely to miss. When there is no decision to make, no decision tree is opened.

INTEGRATED DECISION MODEL

The integrated decision model at a glance

A structure that helps you discover your criteria without making the decision for you

01

Your story, in your own words

An unstructured account of the concern, situation, emotions, and any relevant dream

02

Safety and support routing

Is there a decision to make?

If a decision is needed
03

Select the decision structure

Compare optionsAct or waitAwait an external outcomeSet a relationship boundaryClarify the decision
04

Common decision-science spine

Problemvaluesalternativesfacts and uncertaintytrade-offsreversibility
05Are any criteria missing?
No
Yes
06

Your integrated judgement

Chosen path → first action → alternative route → conditions for reconsideration

07

Your personal decision model

Decision path → later reality → useful process → reconfirm and refine in the next decision

This is an adaptive decision tree, not a bank of predetermined answers. It checks the judgement points a person is most likely to miss. When there is no decision to make, no decision tree is opened.

We explore broadly without exceeding the authority of the evidence

What we do

  • Use modern decision theory as the model’s primary structure and quality standard.
  • Use religious, philosophical, and classical traditions as sourced normative perspectives.
  • Use dreams, imagery, and tarot to explore latent cognition, grounding the inquiry in the user’s own response.
  • Record scientific facts, inherited perspectives, symbolic hypotheses, emotions, and user confirmations as distinct material.
  • Review later reality to identify and refine the decision process that actually helped the individual.

What we do not do

  • Present a potentially transcendent human capacity as a scientifically established product function.
  • Dismiss emotion, intuition, or symbolic experience simply because science has not fully explained it.
  • Let emotion, optimism, scripture, tradition, or a card override facts, risk, consequences, or the user’s judgement.
  • Use a dream or symbol to claim a future event, another person’s intention, or a universally binding instruction.
  • Copy a past conclusion into a new decision or call a weak process sound merely because the outcome was favourable.

The purpose of ONEIRORA is to help you build the decision model that fits you.

Everyone already relies on some way of deciding. One person trusts evidence and analysis; another also consults scripture, philosophy, experience, intuition, dreams, or symbols. ONEIRORA does not declare one method universally correct. It connects the reasoning used in a decision with what later occurred, identifies which criteria, questions, tools, and sequence helped this person in that context, and develops them into a reusable personal decision model. Our commitment to hope does not mean emotional optimism: it means facing reality and risk while preserving agency, an alternative path, and a clear condition for reconsideration.

04

Sources you can inspect for yourself

These primary texts, frameworks, and studies informed the model’s evidence architecture and question design. Each is used only within its proper scope; different traditions are not merged into a single doctrine.

01

Modern decision science and support models

These sources structure decision quality, values and alternatives, uncertainty, bias, autonomy, and learning from later review.

  • Decision QualitySociety of Decision Professionals
    Open source
  • Ottawa Decision Support Framework 2020Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
    Open source
  • A three-talk model for shared decision makingElwyn et al. · BMJ
    Open source
  • Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategyBechara et al. · Science / PubMed
    Open source
  • Self-determination theoryAmerican Psychological Association
    Open source
  • The Past and Possible Futures of HopeC. R. Snyder · Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology
    Open source
  • Steve Jobs’ 2005 Stanford Commencement AddressStanford University
    Open source
02

Normative wisdom in religion, philosophy, and the classics

The Bible, Buddhist sutras, the Qur’an, and Eastern and Western classics are examined as guidance people have long used in choice and adversity—not as scientific evidence.

03

Dreams, intuition, and non-conscious processing

Dreams and affective signals are treated as personal material connected with waking life. Where science remains unsettled, the content remains an exploratory hypothesis.

  • What about dreams? State of the art and open questionsPeer-reviewed review · PubMed Central
    Open source
  • A General Introduction to PsychoanalysisSigmund Freud · Project Gutenberg
    Open source
  • Dreaming, Philosophy ofInternet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Open source
04

Imagery, tarot, and symbolic inquiry

We use the capacity of ambiguous images to elicit personal associations while keeping tarot history and philosophical belief in transcendence distinct from scientific efficacy claims.

  • Arousing Motives or Eliciting Stories?Peer-reviewed research · PubMed Central
    Open source
  • Before Fortune-Telling: The History and Structure of Tarot CardsThe Metropolitan Museum of Art
    Open source

We link to sources without reproducing modern translations or commentary, and write product explanations in our own words.