Before Comparison Relatum Authorization and the Preconditions of Metaphysical Evaluation

Standard debates in metaphysics evaluate competing first-order theories while presupposing that rival accounts operate over a shared domain of relata. We identify this unexamined assumption as the Domain Fixity Presupposition (DFP). When rival theories implicitly authorize non-identical candidate domains without a trans- parent structural mapping, comparative evaluation can collapse into structurally misidentified disagreement. To resolve this impasse without collapsing into arbi- trary conventionalism or substantive ontological dogmatism, this paper develops the Domain Relatum Authorization Framework (DREF). DREF functions not as a first-order selection device for fundamental entities, but as a prior constraint-based architecture for relatum authorization. We formalize this through four diagnostic instruments: (1) the core DREF schema indexing domain eligibility to an inquiry- constituting explanatory target T ; (2) the Selection Entitlement Condition (SEC), which enforces negative structural constraints (¬FailE , ¬FailP r, ¬FailS , ¬FailRr ) against degenerate domain authorization; (3) the Relatum Bridge Requirement (RBR), es- tablishing intradomain inferential continuity; and (4) the Cross-Domain Alignment Constraint (CAC), governing interdomain cross-theoretical commensurability. Cru- cially, DREF does not determine which metaphysical theory is true; rather, it func- tions strictly as a constitutive constraint on comparative epistemic entitlement for metaphysical evaluation