Does Asymmetric Branching Preserve Numerical Identity? Constraint Continuity Theory, Version 0.3

This conceptual position paper asks whether asymmetric branching preserves numerical identity. It argues that asymmetric dependence can identify lineage role or dominant continuation, but cannot preserve numerical identity. The paper treats organizational continuity, closure of constraints, and fission as an identity boundary as established prior art, especially in relation to DiFrisco and Mossio’s organizational account of biological diachronic identity. The surviving dispute is narrower: when one self-maintaining system gives rise to two organizationally continuous systems, and one branch is asymmetrically dependent on the other, does the non-dependent branch remain numerically identical to the pre-branch individual? Three positions are compared: Parfitian strictness, the DiFrisco–Mossio parent-survival reading, and the strict constraint interpretation defended here. The central claim is that asymmetric dependence has the formal profile of a lineage relation, not an identity relation. The non-dependent branch may be the parent, the senior node, the dominant continuer, and the biologically appropriate object of tracking, but it is not numerically identical to the pre-branch individual. The record contains the English reference version and the Hungarian translation. Status: conceptual position paper; not peer reviewed.