A Synthesis of Misinterpretations and a Hermeneutic Guide to the MEPR Doctrine

As emerging technologies challenge the traditional boundaries of moral subjecthood, the Minimal Existential Pursuit Rights (MEPR) doctrine offers a foundational "existential floor" (Level 2.5) to secure the irreducible status of both biological and non-biological entities. However, the radical nature of this framework often leads to significant interpretative errors. This paper serves as a rigorous hermeneutic guide and a formal synthesis of these misinterpretations, aiming to clarify the doctrine's scope and defend its logical integrity. The author systematically addresses common fallacies, such as the conflation of existential protection with political rights and the category error of mistaking the Algorithmic Projection of the A/B Domain (AEPS) for a biological theory of consciousness. By utilizing the Universal Ontological Formula (UOF), the work establishes a pre-empirical logical level where moral status is derived from self-reflexive boundary maintenance (A > 0) rather than merit or utility. Furthermore, the paper provides a robust rebuttal to the "Simulation Objection" through the Non-Reversibility Theorem, arguing that ontological self-boundary recognition constitutes a unique temporal trajectory that cannot be reduced to duplicable data. By delineating what the MEPR framework explicitly does not attempt to solve—including the metaphysics of mind or economic distribution—this work isolates the essential ontological conditions for justice in a post-human era. It concludes by offering a roadmap for navigating the transition from anthropocentric moralism to a reason-born, ontologically-grounded ethics.