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