Difference Stripping Method (DSM): A Methodology for Identifying the Minimal Structural Conditions of Conceptual Possibility

Traditional theories typically investigate relations among already established concepts while presupposing the conceptual possibility of those concepts themselves. This leaves open a more fundamental methodological question: What are the minimal structural conditions required for a specified form of Conceptual Possibility to remain possible? This paper formulates this question as the Problem of Minimal Structural Conditions and develops the Difference Stripping Method (DSM) as an eliminative methodology for identifying such conditions. Rather than constructing a target concept by introducing progressively richer assumptions, DSM proceeds through Successive Structural Stripping. For a specified Target Conceptual Capacity, the method identifies a Candidate Structural Constraint, retains a relevant Structural Background, removes the candidate constraint, and applies an independently defensible Collapse Criterion to determine whether the target capacity remains conceptually possible. Where the target capacity survives, necessity has not been established by that test. Where controlled removal results in Concept Collapse, the removed constraint is identified as structurally irreducible relative to the specified target capacity, retained background, and Collapse Criterion. DSM therefore investigates Conceptual-Structural Necessity through controlled elimination rather than constructive definition. Applying this methodology to the sequence of Conceptual Possibilities examined in this paper, the analysis identifies five successive Necessary Structural Principles: Minimal Distinction, Definability, Persistence of Distinction, Historical Irreplaceability, and Reference Ground Constraint. These principles successively establish the structural conditions for Discussability, Objecthood, Persistent Objecthood, Irreplaceable Realization, and Self-grounded Reference. In particular, Historical Irreplaceability establishes an Irreplaceable Realization as a Reference Candidate, while Reference Ground Constraint requires that the ground of internal reference return to that realization itself, thereby establishing Self-grounded Reference. Here, Mine, and Ownership Distinction are treated as structural consequences of this closure rather than as additional Necessary Structural Principles. DSM is not presented as an ontological theory of what fundamentally exists, nor as a theory of consciousness, selfhood, or physical reality. Its claims concern Conceptual-Structural Necessity under specified analytical conditions. The method is also not claimed to be unconditionally universal: its analytical form is domain-invariant, its applicability is conditional upon the possibility of specifying a determinate Target Conceptual Capacity, Candidate Structural Constraint, Retained Structural Background, and adequate Collapse Criterion, and its results remain target- and domain-sensitive. DSM thus provides a disciplined framework for investigating what cannot be removed if a specified Conceptual Possibility is to remain possible, while explicitly distinguishing structural irreducibility from ontological actuality, empirical truth, and global uniqueness.