The description ‘apithological’ is commonly used to suggest a counterpart concept, or quality, to the pathological. Its explicit use often points us to an alternative horizon of possible inquiry.
However, to define something by what it isn’t, does not say what it is. To make statements about the ‘apithology’ of something does require that an inquiry to be done using the theory of apithology.
The descriptor apithological may also be used as an ‘attribution by association’. This use is acceptable, only it does not say anything of significance, other than in indicating the general direction of a personal preference. It is similar to describing something as ‘sustainable’ without using an informing conception of sustainability.
There is also a technical use of the term ‘apithological’ in formal apithology theory which describes when an analysis of a given phenomenon has attributes of sufficiency in an apithology inquiry. This involves being able to specify formal requirements; including the apithologia of generative trichotomies, the composition of expressions of orientations, and the points of integrative dependencies in a trajectory of actuation. In this formal context, the determination of apithological forms has a research rigour verifiable by a community of apithology practice.