This article establishes a criterion for ontological bearing in constitutive facts, suggesting implications for understanding existence.
Article 13 identified a single configuration as the sole ontological bearer of constitutive significance surviving a boundary event, but reached this by exhausting the cases considered, not through a criterion. This article states that criterion. It separates a constitutive fact from the significance it carries, and sets out an identity criterion that Article 13's own argument already relied on without naming it. On this basis, a bearer instantiates a fact under exactly two conditions: it must derive from the decision that produced the fact, and it must preserve the organization that keeps the fact in existence. Checking the published series against these conditions shows that every case ties one fact to exactly one active bearer at a time; none requires or shows distributed bearing. A single case, anywhere in the series, of two bearers instantiating one fact at once would refute this. Joint sufficiency of the two conditions is not established, and the question of overdetermined acts remains open. The article confines itself to the series' own internal ontology; comparison with external theories is deferred.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Volodymyr Hlynskyi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: