Salvato in:
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Recurso digital |
| Lingua: | |
| Pubblicazione: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Accesso online: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18517182 |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866901100172410880 |
|---|---|
| author | Maley, Amos |
| author_facet | Maley, Amos |
| contents | <p>This paper establishes a boundary result concerning the misuse of fixed point theorems in closed admissible systems. It proves that fixed point constructions, when treated as generators of legitimacy, stability, or self-justification, function as standing traps: they appear to close a system by self-reference while illicitly importing external authority, hidden parameters, or deferred admissibility. Within a closed framework with conserved standing, fixed points are shown to be permissible only as descriptive artifacts under standing-preserving redescription, not as sources of admissibility or enforcement. The analysis is strictly eliminative and non-constructive: it introduces no new primitives, specifies no procedures, and provides no operational or mathematical prescriptions. The result functions as a boundary theorem, ruling out fixed point arguments as admissible foundations for closure, legitimacy, or self-grounding.</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_18517182 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Fixed Point Theorems as Standing Traps Maley, Amos <p>This paper establishes a boundary result concerning the misuse of fixed point theorems in closed admissible systems. It proves that fixed point constructions, when treated as generators of legitimacy, stability, or self-justification, function as standing traps: they appear to close a system by self-reference while illicitly importing external authority, hidden parameters, or deferred admissibility. Within a closed framework with conserved standing, fixed points are shown to be permissible only as descriptive artifacts under standing-preserving redescription, not as sources of admissibility or enforcement. The analysis is strictly eliminative and non-constructive: it introduces no new primitives, specifies no procedures, and provides no operational or mathematical prescriptions. The result functions as a boundary theorem, ruling out fixed point arguments as admissible foundations for closure, legitimacy, or self-grounding.</p> |
| title | Fixed Point Theorems as Standing Traps |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18517182 |