Abstract This paper introduces the Asymmetry Criterion, a structural principle governing ontological eliminability. Standard demarcation criteria—verification, falsification, empirical testability—operate within epistemic domains that presuppose a symmetric space of possible states. They assess which hypotheses are scientifically legitimate. But they leave a prior question unanswered: when is ontological denial itself structurally legitimate? The Asymmetry Criterion addresses this question. Working within a minimally constrained Kripke framework, the paper defines ontological symmetry in terms of unrestricted accessibility relations and invertible identity conditions, and characterizes asymmetry as any structural restriction that eliminates bidirectionality or cyclical return. The criterion states: a concept carries genuine ontological commitment if and only if its elimination requires the introduction of primitive asymmetry into an otherwise symmetric modal structure. The criterion is negative and structural. It does not assert the existence or fundamentality of any entity. It does not decide metaphysical realism. It functions as a filter on eliminativist strategies: a constraint on what denial is permitted to cost in silence. The paper applies the criterion to existence, mathematics, logical fictions, consciousness, and normativity. It also addresses a reflexive question that the original formulation left open: does the criterion itself satisfy its own condition? The answer is yes, and the argument for this is made explicit. Extensions discuss the illusionist challenge to consciousness and expressivist strategies for normativity, both of which are shown to introduce structural asymmetry rather than eliminate it. Keywords: meta-ontology; ontological commitment; eliminability; modal symmetry; asymmetry; structural metaphysics; Kripke semantics; consciousness; normativity; existence; realism; illusionism; expressivism.
Alastair Waterman (2026) studied this question.