I35a. Shared Terms, Different Theoretical Architectures: Independent Conceptual Convergence Between Vitology and the Social Battery Model

Terminological similarity does not by itself establish conceptual identity, common theoretical origin, or direct borrowing. Identical or similar terms may emerge independently within different research programs, perform different functions, occupy different positions within theoretical architectures, and lead to different testable consequences. This article compares Vitology with William Griffin III’s Social Battery model [1]. The documented development history of Vitology shows that before April 12, 2026—the date of Griffin’s paper—its early corpus already included viability as a central criterion of system state and development, the Norm of Harmony, feedback, self-regulation, regeneration, Part–Whole interdependence, problems of suppression and exploitation, and an interdisciplinary investigation of the viability of the individual, society, and civilization. The first documented exposure of the author of Vitology to Griffin’s work occurred on September 6, 2026. At the same time, Social Battery-specific constructs—including gradient, viability pressure, constraint of alternatives, the Survival Path Constraint Principle, exit as a structural diagnostic, enclosure–aperture coupling, and temporal compression—do not appear in the earlier Vitology corpus as an integrated theoretical system and therefore retain attribution to Griffin. To distinguish different forms of similarity, the article uses the T–C–S–P framework: T — Terminological Overlap C — Conceptual Overlap S — Structural Correspondence P — Provenance Dependence with the central rule: T ⇏ C C ⇏ S S ⇏ P The Spatial-Chronal Architecture extends the analysis through: Local Result → Spatial Distribution of Consequences → Δt → Feedback Return → Regeneration / Degradation → Change in ΩV → Next Viable Cycle where ΩV denotes the Space of Viable Continuations. The article additionally proposes an integrated Spatial-Chronal Method for Comparing Theoretical Architectures, represented as: T–C–S–P → D1–D6 → Space → Δt → Feedback → Next-Cycle Outcome The resulting framework separates two fundamental questions: Does terminological similarity establish theoretical similarity? and: Does local functionality establish long-term viability? In both cases, an affirmative conclusion requires additional evidence. Keywords: Vitology; viability; Field of Life; Spatial-Chronal Architecture of Viability; Social Battery; William Griffin III; Norm of Harmony; Source of Life; Fragment Egocentrization; Part–Whole relation; regeneration; ΩV; Synchronauthenticity; Aw–Con–CON; cross-domain validation; comparative theory analysis; provenance.