Nobody is suggesting "Philosophies" aren't important in understanding and correctly applying rules, but, "what's good for the goose isn't ALWAYS good for the gander", and regarding football rules, some "philosophies" are far more applicable to, and intended for, different levels of the game.
How YOU apply philosophies to YOUR judgments, is essentially up to YOU. I'm suggesting that how YOU decide to apply certain philosophies is YOUR] choice, as well as YOUR responsibility to explain and/or defend if questioned.
Concentrating on established and maintained possession at the time of FIRST touching the ground inbounds, seems a lot more appropriate to the execution and satisfaction of NFHS rules regarding whether a forward pass was complete or not[/i], than some arbitrary, not all that well defined, or specific, concepts like either, "survive the ground" or "act common to the game". established and intended for, and documented by RULES governing other levels of the game.
There are significantly different skill levels inherent to each level of the game of Football, that often require specific adjustments in how "basic philosophies" apply to THAT level, which may, or may not, apply or be practical to other levels. "One size RARELY fits all, the same".
However, YOUR call is based on YOUR judgment, which is likely influenced by YOUR understanding and appropriate application of "philosophies", as they apply to the game YOU are working. As long as YOU are comfortable with, and accept responsibility for explaining YOUR decision, it's YOUR call.