Interior sovereignty is the core of the interiority function: the recognition that a person is not merely a recipient of signal but the author of what they make of it, and that this authorship is protected. It is stronger than free speech, because it covers not only what a person may say but what they may believe, doubt, interpret, and refuse.
No institution has automatic jurisdiction over the interior conclusions a participant must draw from available signal.
Two boundaries keep it from collapsing into either extreme. It does not erase external reality — belief freedom is not evidentiary authority, so intuition does not outrank engineering about whether a bridge holds. And it does not license imposing private conviction on shared reality where others bear the consequences. Within those limits, the domain is the person’s: signal may be received, interpreted, integrated, or rejected without automatic loss of standing. Its precondition is privacy, and its ultimate safeguard is that no model of a participant may replace the participant’s own interior reality.