Epistemic Conditionality as Universal Scientific Domain Address and Diagnostic Lens for Consequential Knowledge

Abstract

Abstract Scientific knowledge is communicated through claims whose validity depends on assumptions, methods, scope, and environmental conditions. Yet these validity conditions are progressively compressed or lost as knowledge moves through publication, citation, education, policy, and operational deployment. The result is that knowledge is frequently applied outside the domain within which it was established, while the boundary crossing itself remains invisible. This paper proposes epistemic conditionality as a general diagnostic framework for consequential knowledge systems. It introduces Law Zero (the Law of Epistemic Conditional Validity), which states that every consequential knowledge claim is valid only within an explicitly declarable validity domain, D_M = A_R ∩ M_R ∩ S_R ∩ E_R, where the four dimensions represent foundational assumptions, methodological constraints, scope, and environmental conditions. The paper argues that this four-dimensional architecture constitutes the minimal logical structure required to specify the validity domain of consequential knowledge claims, while the domain-specific content of each dimension remains the responsibility of individual scientific communities. Building upon this foundation, the paper introduces the Universal Scientific Domain Address as a formal representation of validity domains and identifies the Epistemic Banality of Science as the structural mechanism through which validity conditions are progressively stripped during scientific dissemination. Four formal principles are derived from this framework, together with a Construct Stripping Consequence for bounded measurement constructs. Nine documented cases spanning mathematics, clinical medicine, AI procurement, engineering, and historical methodology demonstrate the stripping mechanism across the dissemination chain. The framework is illustrated through five cross-domain demonstrations spanning artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, human education, historical practice, and philosophy as epistemic foundation. These demonstrations are presented as illustrative applications of the diagnostic lens rather than as proofs of universality, and are intended to motivate subsequent empirical, computational, and domain-specific research. Finally, the paper proposes a transition from descriptive scientific communication toward addressed scientific communication, in which consequential knowledge claims carry machine-readable validity metadata capable of supporting both cross-disciplinary governance and future human-machine symbiotic decision systems. This proposal is presented as a research programme and invitation to scientific communities rather than as an established standard. Keywords: Epistemic Conditionality, Universal Scientific Domain Address, Law Zero, Epistemic Banality of Science, Validity Domain, Validity Domain Violations, Context Stripping, Epistemic Governance, Scientific Addressing, Construct Stripping, AI Hallucination, Operational Design Domain, Human-AI Symbiosis, Historical Epistemology, Philosophy of Knowledge, Straw Man Fallacy, Semantic Grounding, Man-Machine Symbiotic Governance, Construct Validity, USIS, Universal Scientific Addressing System