The Meta Fallacy: On Ungrounded Regressive Reasoning and the Necessity of Epistemic Layering

This paper introduces and develops the Meta Fallacy, a structural error in reasoning
that arises when one attempts to generate conclusions about a higher-level or meta-level
domain without first establishing stable knowledge at the base level upon which that domain
depends. Through a classical poisoned-cup puzzle, metaphysical regress arguments concerning
divine creation, and an analogy from higher-dimensional physics, the paper shows that
ungrounded meta-layer reasoning produces only indeterminacy, confusion, and collapse. A
formal argument is presented, along with a clarification of the epistemic conditions required
for legitimate meta-level inquiry. The result is a coherent framework for distinguishing
productive conceptual ascent from destructive, unconvergent regress.