Reality Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about reality that dominate Western thought—the often-unexamined assumptions that reality is objective, that it exists independently of observers, that it's accessible through science and reason, that some descriptions are simply accurate while others are delusions, and that the scientific account of reality is the only legitimate one. Reality orthodoxy includes specific commitments: that the world is made of matter, that causes precede effects, that objects exist independently, that perception can be mistaken, that science reveals reality as it is. Like all orthodoxies, it provides a framework for understanding the world, but it functions as ideology when it becomes dogmatic—making a particular conception of reality seem like the only conception, obscuring how reality is always mediated by experience and culture, and delegitimizing alternative understandings (indigenous realities, phenomenological realities, constructed realities). Reality orthodoxy determines what counts as "real," what descriptions are "accurate," and who counts as "in touch with reality" versus "delusional."

Example: "He dismissed her experience as 'not real' because it didn't match scientific descriptions—not because he'd considered different kinds of reality, but because reality orthodoxy had made his conception of reality seem like Reality itself. The orthodoxy's power is making one kind of real feel like the only kind."

by Dumu The Void March 17, 2026

Objectivity Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about objectivity that dominate Western epistemology and practice—the often-unexamined assumptions that objectivity is possible, that it requires detachment, that it's achieved through method, that objective knowledge is superior, and that objectivity is the standard to which all inquiry should aspire. Objectivity orthodoxy includes specific commitments: that the knower can be separated from the known, that bias can be eliminated, that neutral observation is possible, that quantification enhances objectivity, that subjective experience is suspect. Like all orthodoxies, it provides a framework for epistemic evaluation, but it functions as ideology when it becomes dogmatic—making a particular conception of objectivity seem like the only conception, obscuring how claims to objectivity often serve power, and delegitimizing alternative epistemic values (subjectivity, positionality, engagement). Objectivity orthodoxy determines what knowledge is considered "reliable," what methods are "rigorous," and who counts as "objective" versus "biased."

Example: "He claimed his view was objective and hers was biased—not because he'd examined his own position, but because objectivity orthodoxy had made his perspective invisible to himself. The orthodoxy's power is making particular positions feel like the view from nowhere."

by Dumu The Void March 17, 2026

Skeptic Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs and practices that define mainstream skepticism—the often-unexamined assumptions about what counts as proper skeptical inquiry, what targets are worthy of skepticism, and what methods are legitimate. Skeptic orthodoxy includes specific commitments: that science is the only reliable path to knowledge, that supernatural claims are always suspect, that conspiracy theories are always false, that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, that believers are victims of cognitive bias, that skepticism means doubt rather than openness. Like all orthodoxies, it provides a framework for inquiry, but it can become dogmatic—applying skepticism selectively (intensely to claims it dislikes, minimally to claims it favors), treating its own assumptions as beyond question, and marginalizing skeptics who question the orthodoxy. Skeptic orthodoxy determines what claims are "worthy of investigation," what methods are "properly skeptical," and who counts as a "real skeptic" versus a "pseudoskeptic" or "gullible."

Example: "He called himself a skeptic but had never questioned any of his own community's assumptions—skeptic orthodoxy, where doubt is applied to everyone except us. The orthodoxy's power is making its own beliefs feel like the absence of belief."

by Dumu The Void March 17, 2026

Rational Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about rationality that dominate Western thought—the often-unexamined assumptions about what counts as rational, how rational decisions are made, and who counts as rational. Rational orthodoxy includes specific commitments: that rationality means following logic, that rational agents maximize utility, that rationality is universal, that emotions are irrational, that rationality is the highest human capacity, that rational consensus is possible. Like all orthodoxies, it provides a framework for evaluating thought and action, but it functions as ideology when it becomes dogmatic—making a particular conception of rationality seem like the only conception, obscuring how rationality varies across cultures and contexts, and delegitimizing alternative ways of thinking (intuitive, emotional, relational, spiritual). Rational orthodoxy determines what arguments are considered "reasonable," what decisions are "rational," and who counts as a "rational person" versus "irrational."

Example: "He dismissed her decision as 'irrational' because it didn't maximize utility—not because he'd considered different kinds of rationality, but because rational orthodoxy had made his conception of reason feel like Reason itself. The orthodoxy's power is making one kind of thinking feel like the only kind."

by Dumu The Void March 17, 2026

Logical Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about logic that dominate Western reasoning—the often-unexamined assumptions about what counts as logical, which logical systems are valid, and how logic should be applied. Logical orthodoxy includes specific commitments: that classical logic (with its laws of non-contradiction, excluded middle, and deduction) is the correct logic, that formal logic is superior to informal reasoning, that logical validity is the standard for argument, that contradictions are always errors, that logic is universal and culture-independent. Like all orthodoxies, it provides a framework for evaluating reasoning, but it functions as ideology when it becomes dogmatic—making a particular logical system seem like the only logical system, obscuring how logic varies across cultures and contexts (Buddhist logic, indigenous logic, paraconsistent logic), and delegitimizing alternative reasoning practices. Logical orthodoxy determines what arguments are considered "valid," what reasoning is "sound," and who counts as "logical" versus "illogical."

Example: "He dismissed Buddhist logic as 'just irrational' because it tolerated contradictions—not because he'd examined different logical systems, but because logical orthodoxy had made classical logic feel like Logic itself. The orthodoxy's power is making one system of reasoning feel like the only way to reason."

by Dumu The Void March 17, 2026

Democratic Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about democracy that dominate political discourse—the often-unexamined assumptions that elections confer legitimacy, that representation works, that majority rule is just, that democratic procedures produce good outcomes, and that liberal democracy is the end of political history. Democratic orthodoxy includes commitments: that voting is the primary political act, that citizens are informed and rational, that elected officials represent their constituents, that checks and balances prevent tyranny, that democracy and capitalism are compatible, that alternatives to democracy are authoritarian. Like all orthodoxies, it provides a framework for political understanding, but it functions as ideology—making particular democratic arrangements seem natural and inevitable, obscuring democracy's limitations (exclusion, inequality, corporate power, voter manipulation), and delegitimizing critiques that question whether current institutions are truly democratic. Democratic orthodoxy determines what political arrangements are considered "legitimate," what reforms are "realistic," and who counts as a "good democrat" versus a threat to democracy.

Example: "He couldn't see how campaign finance makes a mockery of representation—not because he'd examined the evidence, but because democratic orthodoxy had made him believe that elections automatically produce democracy. The orthodoxy's power is making the form feel like the substance."

by Dumu The Void March 17, 2026

Internet Orthodoxy

The established, institutionalized set of beliefs about the internet that dominate digital discourse—the often-unexamined assumptions that the internet is liberating, that it democratizes knowledge, that it connects people, that it's inevitable, that more connectivity is always better, that the current internet (corporate, surveilled, centralized) is simply how the internet is. Internet orthodoxy includes commitments: that access solves problems, that digital natives understand technology, that platforms are neutral, that algorithms are technical rather than political, that the internet's problems are growing pains rather than design features, that alternatives (decentralized, non-commercial, community-owned) are impractical. Like all orthodoxies, it shapes how we understand digital space, but it functions as ideology—making particular internet arrangements seem natural and inevitable, obscuring how the internet could be otherwise, and delegitimizing visions of alternative digital futures. Internet orthodoxy determines what online spaces are "realistic," what digital policies are "forward-thinking," and who counts as "tech-savvy" versus "nostalgic."

Example: "He dismissed concerns about platform surveillance as inevitable—'that's just how the internet works.' Internet orthodoxy had made corporate control feel like the nature of technology rather than a choice."

by Dumu The Void March 17, 2026