For years, I approached the same central problem from different academic directions:
How do beliefs, relationships, leaders, predictions, technologies, and institutions shape the reality people must live inside?
I did not begin with a literary genre in mind. The ideas developed across graduate programs, research projects, professional experience, doctoral study, and fiction.
Three recently published conceptual papers now bring those lines of inquiry together.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21752697
This paper developed from a graduate professional study I completed at Colorado State University in 2006.
The original project examined whether the Delphi Method could help a small real-estate company make better decisions by collecting expert judgment, identifying relevant factors, refining those factors through repeated rounds, assigning weights, and evaluating favorable and unfavorable outcomes.
The study was also informed by graduate coursework I completed at Regis University and Colorado Technical University. Business courses contributed stakeholder analysis, finance, management, risk, and decision calculations. Technology studies contributed databases, information systems, spreadsheets, process design, and decision-support architecture.
The new paper extracts a broader model from that earlier work.
Its central concept is Delphic Actualization:
A forecast becomes causally active when an institution allocates money, authority, personnel, attention, time, or resources according to it.
A prediction does not remain outside reality once people act upon it.
The sequence becomes:
Expert interpretation → factor formation → possibility mapping → outcome assessment → institutional decision → resource allocation → changed reality
This concept later became essential to Meta-Mythic Delphic Fiction.
Current version DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21751852
This paper developed from my May 7, 2012 Applied Research Project at The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, later expanded into the 2020 book Lovers in the Workplace.
The new conceptual model examines workplace relationships through:
The paper treats workplace intimacy as more than a private matter. A relationship becomes an organizational event when it affects authority, work assignments, evaluations, promotions, reputation, morale, retaliation risk, or family systems.
Version 1.1 added a quantitative extension:
The model does not label intimacy as inherently harmful. It identifies the conditions under which attachment, authority, consent, dependence, and institutional power begin influencing one another.
This paper contributes the interpersonal layer to the larger theory.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21752812
This paper developed from doctoral work I began in 2017 and later formalized in an unpublished 2023 dissertation proposal concerning dark leadership and On the Waterfront.
The proposal was not adopted as my final dissertation direction, although I was permitted to publish the work independently. My doctoral research later continued through a different approach to On the Waterfront, dark leadership, ethics, corruption, and organizational responsibility.
The published conceptual paper asks a larger question:
How does destructive leadership move from one person into an organization, culture, and institutional system?
The model examines:
It treats dark leadership as a changing state rather than a fixed personality label. Its model includes qualitative coding, weighted factors, a provisional Dark Leadership Index, interaction variables, and Markov-style transitions.
The paper’s central argument is that dark leadership does not remain inside one destructive person.
It moves into:
Once embedded, the system reproduces the leader’s influence even after the leader disappears.
Each paper contributes a different layer.
It examines how expert judgment, uncertainty, consensus, disagreement, and institutional decisions influence future outcomes.
It examines how institutions shape attachment, consent, identity, loyalty, boundaries, and interpersonal consequence.
It examines how destructive authority moves from personal conduct into followers, culture, organizations, and durable systems.
Together, they produce a larger sequence:
Interpretation → prediction → relationship → decision → authority → institution → lived reality
That sequence becomes the foundation of the Meta-Mythic Cognitive Model.
The research did not lead to only one genre.
It produced two distinct but connected literary systems.
Mythotechnic Science Fiction remains the first major genre framework.
Its central question is:
What happens when technology acquires mythic authority over human life?
Its subdivisions cover different forms of technological authority, including:
Mythotechnic Science Fiction focuses on technology becoming more than a tool.
Technology begins shaping:
The machine becomes law, witness, ancestor, judge, archive, priest, or godlike authority.
Meta-Mythic Delphic Fiction moves beyond technology as the central force.
Its central question is:
How do myth, divine order, prediction, cognition, institutions, and accumulated decisions select which possible reality becomes lived reality?
Technology remains important, but it becomes one actor among many.
Other active forces include:
Its central principle is:
The future is not merely predicted. It is shaped through interpretation, belief, institutional action, and human decision.
| Mythotechnic Science Fiction | Technology gaining mythic authority | Technological power alters identity, morality, institutions, and existence |
| Meta-Mythic Delphic Fiction | Possible realities shaped through interpretation and action | Prediction, myth, cognition, authority, and decisions actualize a future |
Both genres examine:
Meta-Mythic Delphic Fiction adds:
Within Meta-Mythic Delphic Fiction, God remains God.
God is the I AM, the uncreated source of all that exists and will exist.
Artificial intelligence, extraterrestrials, mythic beings, angels, fallen powers, sacred crystals, portals, and transformed humans remain part of creation. None replaces the Creator.
This distinction creates one of the genre’s central conflicts:
Will created beings remember they are created?
The first Meta-Mythic Delphic novel will bring these models into one story.
Its world includes:
The Sacred Heart Crystal will not be a fragment of God. God cannot be divided.
It will be a created object that remembers the first command.
Every faction will interpret it differently.
The Church will see covenant.
Engineers will see architecture.
Bankers will see value.
Governments will see strategic power.
Cults will see a returning god.
The Hermits will see responsibility.
Elias will carry the question inside his transformed body:
Is power something to possess, or something to bear?
The body of work can now be presented as a connected architecture.
Mythotechnic Science Fiction
Meta-Mythic Delphic Fiction
The Meta-Mythic Cognitive Model
The Martinez A Priori Delphic Decision Model
The Predictive Narrative Model of Dark Leadership
The A Priori Workplace Relationship Model
This creates more than two genres.
It creates a research and creative system connecting prediction, power, relationships, institutions, myth, technology, and lived reality.
These ideas did not emerge from one afternoon of brainstorming.
Their foundations developed across decades:
The academic work supplied the models.
The fiction supplied the worlds in which those models could live.
The two genre systems now stand beside one another:
Mythotechnic Science Fiction examines technology as mythic authority.
Meta-Mythic Delphic Fiction examines how prediction, myth, divine order, institutions, and human decisions select lived reality.
The next stage is to give that second genre its first full novel.
