This conceptual working paper reconstructs Cognitive Continuity Methodology (CCM) as a bounded programme concerned with explicitly identified distinctions across changes of representation, user, time or context. Preservation, documented revision, loss and unresolved comparison remain separate outcomes. The paper describes six entities, five relation families, four research questions and a constructed civilian reading-room example. Systematic Neology is located through a documented programme relationship; no umbrella over every neighbouring programme is asserted. The paper relates this object to epistemology, distributed cognition, conceptual work and provenance. No empirical study, validated instrument, global novelty finding or established new disciplinary status is reported. The historical source files are consulted selectively and remain separate restricted records. Whole-file identity between local and archived historical texts is not claimed. English paper with German abstract, conceptual model JSON, README and SHA-256 manifest. Drafting and editorial checks were AI-assisted; no external peer review or personal sentence-by-sentence author review is claimed. This new open edition contains the bounded conceptual reconstruction, not technical source procedures or internal provenance files.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andreas Ehstand (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: