History-Dependent Ontology (HDO)

This document presents History-Dependent Ontology (HDO) , a philosophical interpretation of the empirical regularities investigated by History-Dependent Dynamics (HDD). HDO is the newest version of a project previously developed under the name Informational-Processual Monism (IPM) . HDD is a methodology for testing when a system's history changes its future. It distinguishes five constructs — predictive dependence, causal trajectory dependence, feedback, functional self-reference, and self-modeling — with protocols for investigating each. As of the current HDD deposit, only the first (predictive history dependence) has been empirically validated; the other four are proposed extensions requiring independent experimental validation. HDO builds on that foundation. Its central claim is that when historical organization changes the space of dynamically available transitions through which a process can continue, history ceases to be merely causal background and becomes constitutive of what the process is. The organizing question is: When does history become part of what a system is? This claim is presented as abductive — the best available interpretation of the evidence, not a deductive consequence of it. The Bridge Principle governs the relation: HDD establishes empirical facts; HDO interprets their ontological significance; accepting or rejecting HDO has no bearing on HDD's standing as a methodology. The framework remains processual, but shifts its center of gravity from "lack" to "history," and from a strong monism to an ontology anchored in testable constructs. The physical foundation is drawn from Prigogine's theory of dissipative structures, bifurcations, and irreversibility. The document develops seven ontological theses, an individuation criterion linked to the HDD constructs, a reworking of "lack" as a secondary structural concept, a precautionary ethical heuristic under uncertainty, and critical dialogues with classical (Heraclitus, Bergson, Whitehead, Simondon, Varela, Dupré, Parfit) and contemporary (Jablonka & Ginsburg, Tononi, Levin, Friston, Seth) thinkers.