Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Language: | |
| Published: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18524752 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Table of Contents:
- <p>This paper establishes a <em>generator–terminal</em> impossibility result for <em>meta-foundational re-anchoring</em> as a purported mechanism of repair or justification. It proves that no admissible formal system can generate, recover, or stabilize legitimacy by appealing to a higher-level foundation once admissibility has failed.</p> <p>The analysis exhausts all standard re-anchoring strategies—appeals to stronger logics, richer meta-languages, alternative semantic foundations, external justificatory frameworks, and hierarchical ascent. In every case, re-anchoring functions as an illicit operator that presupposes the very standing it claims to restore or requires unlicensed scope transport across the admissibility boundary.</p> <p>The generator–terminal structure is decisive: once admissibility is violated, there exists no admissible generator capable of producing a repaired foundation, nor any terminal regime in which legitimacy can be re-established by “going meta.” Foundational failure is absorbing, not recoverable.</p> <p>The result is strictly negative and non-constructive. The paper introduces no alternative foundations and proposes no recovery mechanisms. Its contribution is to demonstrate, by exhaustion, that meta-foundational ascent cannot serve as a generator of legitimacy.</p> <p>This work forms a central component of the broader generator–terminal closure program, placing hard limits on hierarchical justification, foundational repair, and legitimacy transfer across mathematics, logic, and physics.</p>