Definitions by Abzugal

Sociology of Epistemology

A hybrid and unusual field that applies sociological methods and concepts to epistemology itself as an intellectual practice. It investigates how theories of knowledge (what counts as knowing, who is authorized to know, which criteria of justification are accepted) emerge from social, historical, and institutional contexts. For example: the dominant analytic epistemology in the Anglophone world is a product of Western universities, academic power networks, and certain colonial traditions. Sociology of epistemology asks: why was propositional knowledge privileged over practical or traditional knowledge? Who defines what "good justification" is? It is a radically deconstructive approach.

Sociology of Epistemology Example: "A sociologist of epistemology argued that Popper's criterion of falsifiability became hegemonic not due to its logical superiority but because the post-war scientific community needed an anti-communist demarcation. His colleague replied: 'You are relativizing reason itself!'"

Sociology of Epistemology by Abzugal May 26, 2026

Philosophy of Epistemology

Meta-reflection: the philosophy of epistemology is the philosophical investigation of epistemology itself (theory of knowledge). It asks: what is knowledge? Justification? True belief? What does it mean to "have reasons"? But at a deeper level: is epistemology itself a normative or descriptive discipline? Are its methods empirical, conceptual, or transcendental? Philosophy of epistemology examines the assumptions of epistemological theories (foundationalism, coherentism, externalism, etc.) and the relationships between epistemology and other areas (metaphysics, philosophy of mind, cognitive science). It is an abstract field rarely visited by science communicators.

Philosophy of Epistemology Example: "A student asked: 'If epistemology studies knowledge, what does the philosophy of epistemology study?' The professor replied: 'It studies whether epistemology is asking the right questions – and whether it can itself be justified without falling into circularity.'"

Philosophy of Epistemology by Abzugal May 26, 2026

Scientific Anti-communism

A variant of anti-communism that uses the authority of science (or a distorted image of it) to delegitimize Marxist thought. Its defenders claim that communism contradicts supposedly universal natural, biological, or economic laws—such as scarcity, competition, genetic selfishness, or private property as an extension of animal territory. Unlike epistemological anti-communism (which attacks Marxist method), scientific anti-communism attacks the conclusions of Marxism as "scientifically false." It often invokes alleged studies on hierarchy in primates or innate economic rationality.

Scientific Anti-communism "An influencer said: 'Nature is not egalitarian. Communism fails because it goes against human biology. Look at chimpanzees: the alpha male always leads. That's science!' – ignoring centuries of critical anthropology."

Scientific Anti-communism by Abzugal May 26, 2026

Philosophy of Science

Branch of philosophy that investigates the foundations, methods, implications, and limits of scientific knowledge. It examines questions such as: what distinguishes science from non-science (the demarcation problem), how scientific theories develop (Kuhn, Lakatos, Feyerabend), what scientific explanation is, the role of observation and experimentation, the nature of scientific laws, and scientific realism versus anti-realism. Philosophy of science does not do science but thinks about science—its premises, its historical transformations, and its place in human knowledge. It is often ignored or ridiculed by hard-narrow scientism.

Example: "A physicist asked: 'What is philosophy of science for? I just do calculations and publish.' The philosopher replied: 'And who defined that your method is valid? Who decides what counts as evidence? That is philosophy, even if you deny it.'"

Philosophy of Science by Abzugal May 26, 2026

Epistemological Anti-communism

A theoretical stance that rejects Marxism and dialectical materialism not through political or economic arguments, but by considering them epistemologically invalid—i.e., as false knowledge, pseudoscientific, or metaphysically unfounded. Its adherents, often aligned with scientism or neopositivism, claim that Marxism violates criteria of falsifiability, verifiability, or logical coherence, while naturalizing capitalism as an undeniable empirical given. Asymmetry is central: the same rigor is not applied to categories of neoclassical economics or private property.

neoclassical economist argued: 'Surplus value is an unfalsifiable concept, therefore it's pseudoscience. Marginal utility, on the other hand, is observable in demand curves – that is science.' Epistemological anti-communism in action."

Epistemological Anti-communism by Abzugal May 26, 2026

Neo-Atheism

Intellectual and cultural movement that emerged in the early 21st century, associated with authors such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel Dennett. It is characterized by a militant and often aggressive critique of religion, treating it not merely as false but as intrinsically harmful to society, science, and morality. It differs from classical atheism (which simply denies the existence of deities) through its public activism, confrontational tone, and defense that religion should not only be criticized but actively fought and overcome by scientific reason. Critics point out that neo-atheism tends toward scientism, reductionism, and disregard for the social and psychological role of faith.

Neo-Atheism "In a lecture, a neo-atheist declared: 'Creationism is child abuse. Teaching religion to a child is as ethical as teaching that the Earth is flat.' The audience applauded; religious attendees felt attacked."

Neo-Atheism by Abzugal May 26, 2026

Hard-Narrow Scientism

A dogmatic, fundamentalist, and exclusivist movement in online science communication that treats science not as a fallible, self-correcting method but as a closed system of absolute truths. It is characterized by neo-atheist hostility toward any belief or practice outside the natural sciences, extreme pathologization of dissent (accusing opponents of delusion, charlatanism, pseudoscience, or criminal denialism), and the weaponization of logical fallacies and bias claims. A key tactic is the Formal Guillotine: the violent separation of data, statistics, and scientific evidence from their social, political, cultural, and constructed contexts. Numbers are treated as self‑speaking, experiments as context‑free. Any critique of science as a human institution is dismissed with straw‑man labels like “postmodernism,” “relativism,” “revisionism,” or “continental philosophy.” Adherents mistake natural science for science as a whole, method for dogma, and evidence for infallible truth. Hard‑narrow scientism is an ideology that defends science by becoming anti‑scientific—rejecting reflexivity, humility, and the historical understanding of science as a social practice.

Hard-Narrow Scientism Example: “In the YouTube comment section, a hard‑narrow scientism follower dismissed a historian’s critique of scientific racism as ‘continental nonsense’ and demanded an RCT to prove that colonialism was harmful—refusing to engage with any evidence not produced in a lab.”

Hard-Narrow Scientism by Abzugal May 23, 2026