| _version_ | 1866901227632066560 |
|---|---|
| author | Maley, Amos |
| author_facet | Maley, Amos |
| contents | <p>This paper establishes an impossibility result for post-hoc justification within a closed admissible framework. It proves that legitimacy cannot be conferred retroactively—after an outcome, decision, or assertion—without violating admissibility or standing conservation. Any attempt to justify ex post is shown to rely on deferred validation, outcome-dependent authority, or hidden scope transport, all of which collapse admissibility. The analysis is strictly eliminative and non-constructive: it introduces no new primitives, specifies no procedures, and provides no evaluative or remedial mechanisms. The result functions as a boundary theorem, ruling out post-hoc justification as an admissible source of legitimacy in closed systems.</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_18516758 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | B9 Post Hoc Justification Is Impossible Maley, Amos <p>This paper establishes an impossibility result for post-hoc justification within a closed admissible framework. It proves that legitimacy cannot be conferred retroactively—after an outcome, decision, or assertion—without violating admissibility or standing conservation. Any attempt to justify ex post is shown to rely on deferred validation, outcome-dependent authority, or hidden scope transport, all of which collapse admissibility. The analysis is strictly eliminative and non-constructive: it introduces no new primitives, specifies no procedures, and provides no evaluative or remedial mechanisms. The result functions as a boundary theorem, ruling out post-hoc justification as an admissible source of legitimacy in closed systems.</p> |
| title | B9 Post Hoc Justification Is Impossible |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18516758 |