A branch of metaepistemology that examines the epistemological frameworks we use to evaluate scientific orthodoxy—asking second-order questions about how we know what we know about orthodoxy. The metaepistemology of scientific orthodoxy investigates the standards, criteria, and assumptions we bring to judging when orthodoxy is trustworthy and when it's suspect. It asks: What counts as good evidence for the reliability of orthodoxy? How do we evaluate competing epistemological frameworks for assessing consensus? What are the meta-criteria for choosing between different accounts of when to trust science? It also examines the historical and cultural contingency of our epistemological frameworks—how different eras and different cultures have different standards for evaluating orthodoxy, and how our own standards might be limited by our context. The metaepistemology of scientific orthodoxy is epistemology about epistemology about orthodoxy—the highest-level reflection on how we know what we know about what scientists know collectively.
Example: "Her metaepistemology of scientific orthodoxy work asked: How do we know that our criteria for trusting scientific consensus are the right criteria? It's epistemology all the way down—and realizing that doesn't paralyze us, but it does make us humble about our certainties."
by Abzugal March 16, 2026
Get the Metaepistemology of Scientific Orthodoxy mug.The ability to reflect on the standards and frameworks used to evaluate knowledge claims. It involves understanding that epistemology itself has different schools (foundationalism, coherentism, reliabilism, etc.) and that criteria for “good knowledge” are not universal but historically and socially situated. Metaepistemological literacy helps one recognize when debates about knowledge are really about unstated assumptions.
Metaepistemological Literacy Example: “Her metaepistemological literacy revealed that the argument over ‘evidence’ was actually a clash between two epistemological traditions—one demanding randomized trials, the other valuing ethnographic depth.”
by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal March 24, 2026
Get the Metaepistemological Literacy mug.a combination of Marc and Evelyn. Marc is used to describe a great person, who is kind, chivalrous and supportive. Evelyn is meant to describe abusive girlfriends.
by Matchaguy67 July 20, 2025
Get the Mevelyn mug.Can you memaelade that?
Look at this specific bar called Autopoul, I think I could memaelade that for the local residents.
Look at this specific bar called Autopoul, I think I could memaelade that for the local residents.
by Joergen_2400 October 8, 2025
Get the Memaelade mug.A very handsome, loveable guy. During sex he is always a top. He is an anime nerd and he is the gayest thing you've ever met.
by LSD-PenixSucker. November 10, 2018
Get the William Ro`Meave mug.The brain-melting, ultra-meta conflict about the nature of epistemological disputes themselves. Philosophers here argue: Are epistemological paradigms truly incommensurable, or is there a super-rational way to judge them? What is the status of our talk about ways of knowing? It's doing epistemology on epistemology.
Theory of Metaepistemological Dispute Example: A debate between a relativist ("All knowledge is culturally constructed; no paradigm is objectively better") and a critical realist ("There is a mind-independent reality, and some paradigms approximate it better") is a metaepistemological dispute. They're not fighting about science or culture, but about the very possibility of judging one way of knowing against another.
by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 6, 2026
Get the Theory of Metaepistemological Dispute mug.