Admissibility Before Verdict: A Structural Diagnostic Template for Persistence, Knowledge, and Verification

This note argues that many disputes concerning identity, persistence, explanation, knowledge, verification, and governance share a common structural failure: evaluation is attempted before the conditions required for evaluation have been declared. It develops a methodological template derived from the identity–persistence program. On this template, a judgment becomes admissible only relative to a declared evaluation regime specifying the object, authority, admissible transformations, admissible redescriptions, invariants, continuation conditions, drift bounds, proof obligations, and re-verification conditions. The note does not decide which evaluation regimes are correct, nor does it offer ontological closure. Its aim is narrower: to determine whether a claim has become a coherent object of evaluation. The central principle is that admissibility precedes verdict.