This paper systematically exposes a deep-rooted categorical error in contemporary philosophy: the misapplication of scientific standards—such as the principle of falsifiability and Occam's Razor—to the field of ontology. To remedy this, it establishes an independent Four-Dimensional Meta-Framework for ontological evaluation, comprising Accuracy of Problem Positioning, Self-Consistency of Methodology, Productivity of the System, and Termination Power over Predecessors' Predicaments. Applying this framework, the paper rigorously demonstrates that Dao Meta-Theory achieves systematic transcendence over Laozi, Plato, Kant, and Aristotle in terms of problem coverage, methodological purity, empirical verification, and the resolution of historical predicaments.
Changwu Wang (Fri,) studied this question.