Abstract

The foundations of knowledge rely on axioms, yet not all axioms are equally valid. This paper introduces the Generality-Observability Principle (GOP), a model for assessing axiom reliability based on two key criteria: Generality, the ability of an axiom to consistently apply across multiple systems, and Observability, the requirement that an axiom be empirically verifiable. By examining various scientific frameworks, we explore how some models remain useful despite limitations, while others collapse under broader scrutiny. The principle also reveals why certain belief system axioms lack epistemic strength, failing to meet the necessary criteria for reliability. This model provides a structured approach to evaluating knowledge, distinguishing between incomplete yet functional knowledge and those that are fundamentally invalid.