Difference Stripping Method (DSM): A Layered Framework of Minimal Distinctions from Minimal Distinction to Ownership Distinction

This paper proposes and systematically develops a novel method of conceptual analysis, the Difference Stripping Method (DSM). DSM is presented as a framework for identifying the minimal distinctions that a category of objects cannot lose while remaining discussable as that category.The central claim of this paper is that many fundamental disputes persist because inquiry often begins by asking what a thing essentially is. When the object under investigation lacks a commonly accepted definition, this approach easily leads to theoretical circularity, conceptual confusion, and endless disputes among competing positions. DSM reverses this order of inquiry. Rather than asking what a concept is, DSM asks:If a category of objects is valid, what is the minimal distinction that it cannot lose?Accordingly, DSM does not attempt to answer the question, “What is the world?” Instead, it investigates the minimal distinctions required for concepts to enter and remain within discourse.Unlike traditional forms of conceptual analysis, DSM does not seek to determine the essence of a concept directly. Rather, it proceeds through progressive stripping: candidate distinctions are removed one by one, while the analysis examines whether the object category remains discussable as that category. If the category remains discussable after a candidate distinction is removed, that condition is not its minimal distinction. If removing a condition causes the category to lose its discussability, the stripping process reaches a point of conceptual collapse.Applying this method, the paper develops a four-layer analytical structure:Layer of Existence: Minimal Distinction Layer of Individuality: Definability Layer of Stable Individuality: Historical Irreplaceability Layer of Subjectivity: Ownership DistinctionThese layers are not four independent theories, but successive specifications of distinction:This ≠ Not-This ↓ This Object ≠ That Object ↓ This History ≠ That History ↓ This Position of Ownership ≠ That Position of OwnershipThe paper further develops a twofold argument concerning the undiscussability of the Whole. At the pragmatic level, every act of assertion already introduces distinction, thereby depriving the Whole of its status as a Whole. At the semantic level, the Whole remains open to both any predicate and its negation, preventing any description from imposing effective constraints upon it.From this, the paper argues that we cannot determine what existence ultimately is. We can only investigate the minimal conditions under which something becomes discussable. DSM is therefore neither a substantive ontology nor a theory of the ultimate structure of reality. It is a methodological framework for minimal-distinction analysis.The goal of DSM is not to reveal the ultimate essence of reality, but to provide a systematic method for decomposing complex concepts and identifying the minimal distinctions they cannot lose. The four-layer structure developed in this paper is therefore not an endpoint, but a provisional result within an open method of continuous stripping and deeper analysis.