For decades, contemporary sociology has examined how social realities are constructed, yet indigenous theory-building must address a more foundational prior question: upon what ground and limits is the social order built? While social constructionism explains institutional making without accounting for limits, and critical realism posits limits without detailing the process of making, this article proposes a tripartite model termed “Anchored Constructivism,” drawing inspiration from Mohammad Hossein Tabatabai’s theory of conventional perceptions (I’tibariyyat). The model comprises three core components: first, the Anchor, representing the non-constructed, real ground of human fitrah, authentic needs, and ontological regularities; second, the Construct, encompassing variable norms, institutions, and legal categories; and third, Mediation, designating processes such as ijtihad and public interest reasoning that keep constructs answerable to the anchor. This framework is structured around four falsifiable propositions: bounded construction rooted in real needs, institutional “drift” (reification in the absence of mediation), the correlation between mediation speed and societal resilience during shocks, and cross-cultural applicability. The special axis of “war and social order” is examined as a rigorous test case, wherein formal institutions collapse and only constructs addressing persistent human needs are regenerated. Ultimately, this model is offered not as a definitive conclusion, but as a research agenda and a critical invitation to operationalize the anchor and measure institutional drift within social sciences.