The Relational Realization of Destruxion (破空性) and Predictive Epistemic Shift

The capacity to produce accurate answers is not the same as the capacity to judge which questions to accept as appropriate and which meaning relations to take up as objects of inquiry. This paper proposes Destruxion (破空性) as a relational capacity that, when a dominant answer structure excludes or marginalizes particular meaning relations or problem formulations, departs from that structure for reasons or responsibly adopts an accidental divergence, and thereby makes meaning formation possible for an epistemic subject. It distinguishes the destruxive attempt (A1–A4), the exercise of the capacity, from the destruxive realization (R1–R2), in which an actual change occurs in the epistemic subject, and argues for a temporal and contributory constraint: a retrospective adoption cannot retroactively become the cause of a human discovery that preceded it. Epistemic realization, credit for achievement, control over intervention, and ethical legitimacy are separated as independent objects of evaluation. Through a limiting thought experiment in which an AI accurately predicts a human's path of discovery, the paper then shows that predictive capability neither replaces the human's understanding of reasons and re-examination of frames nor confers authority to intervene, and, grounded in the distinctive value of frame-level re-examination, it presents a prima facie reason for predictive intervention together with five legitimacy conditions (E1–E5). The paper establishes Destruxion not as praise of novelty as such but as a relational capacity to re-examine, under reasons and responsibility, the exclusionary effects of answer structures, and to assess the outcome in connection with the epistemic subject's achievement. This record contains the Korean original (authoritative text) and an English translation.