Local appropriation
Whether a worldview can use one named argument for one named question without contradiction, borrowing, or a locally ad hoc exception. Passing this test means only that this argument does not discriminate against that worldview — not that the worldview is adequate as a whole.
Local appropriation asks one narrow question: can worldview W use argument A for explanandum E without contradiction, borrowing, or a locally ad hoc exception? The allowed outputs are local — survives, excludes, borrows, symmetric cost, open, or not the same question.
Passing this test means only that this argument does not discriminate against W. It does not mean W is on parity with Eastern Orthodoxy as a whole, and it does not repair an invalid inference elsewhere.
The mistaken everyday reading is "they can say the same sentence, so the worldviews are equal." Same local tool, different systemic inventory.
Where this comes up
Sources
- research/perfect-divine-love-eternal-other-and-whole-worldview-parity-audit-2026-08-17.md §8