THE BELIEVER'S FAITH DIVERSION PARADOX (BFDP)

This paper proposes the Believer's Faith Diversion Paradox (BFDP), a primary-case framework for examining a specific form of evaluative asymmetry: an evaluating subject applies a criterion to an external target but does not apply the same criterion, where relevant and applicable, to its own position or evaluative process at the corresponding meta-level.The paper distinguishes criterion availability, external application, the possibility of self-application, actual self-application, and resulting asymmetry. This separation is intended to prevent capability, operation, and outcome from being treated as interchangeable constructs.The paper then proposes the Meta-Level Self-Application Divergence Principle (MSADP) as a domain-neutral abstraction of the BFDP mechanism. A formal schema represents the evaluator, criterion, external target, self-target, application operation, and contextual applicability conditions. A conditional divergence measure is introduced only for cases in which the outputs are meaningfully comparable. The framework distinguishes self-application failure from legitimate differences in scope, evidence, or applicability; it also separates object-level evaluation from self-application and criterion reflection. Eight analytical layers, ten boundary-case categories, and a research protocol are specified. The resulting contribution is a structured, falsifiable proposal rather than a demonstrated universal law. Its value depends on whether operational definitions can reliably distinguish the proposed mechanism from related constructs such as double standards, confirmation bias, motivated reasoning, and the bias blind spot.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23674655
Primary Topic
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

THE BELIEVER'S FAITH DIVERSION PARADOX (BFDP)

Shamiul Hoque Shan
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
preprint

THE BELIEVER'S FAITH DIVERSION PARADOX (BFDP)

Shamiul Hoque Shan
preprint en

Abstract

This paper proposes the Believer's Faith Diversion Paradox (BFDP), a primary-case framework for examining a specific form of evaluative asymmetry: an evaluating subject applies a criterion to an external target but does not apply the same criterion, where relevant and applicable, to its own position or evaluative process at the corresponding meta-level.The paper distinguishes criterion availability, external application, the possibility of self-application, actual self-application, and resulting asymmetry. This separation is intended to prevent capability, operation, and outcome from being treated as interchangeable constructs.The paper then proposes the Meta-Level Self-Application Divergence Principle (MSADP) as a domain-neutral abstraction of the BFDP mechanism. A formal schema represents the evaluator, criterion, external target, self-target, application operation, and contextual applicability conditions. A conditional divergence measure is introduced only for cases in which the outputs are meaningfully comparable. The framework distinguishes self-application failure from legitimate differences in scope, evidence, or applicability; it also separates object-level evaluation from self-application and criterion reflection. Eight analytical layers, ten boundary-case categories, and a research protocol are specified. The resulting contribution is a structured, falsifiable proposal rather than a demonstrated universal law. Its value depends on whether operational definitions can reliably distinguish the proposed mechanism from related constructs such as double standards, confirmation bias, motivated reasoning, and the bias blind spot.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon