Law of Scientific Paradigms

The principle that science operates within paradigms—that scientific knowledge is always knowledge-within-a-framework, that paradigms shape what questions are asked, what methods are used, what counts as evidence. The Law of Scientific Paradigms, derived from Kuhn's work, argues that science is not a simple accumulation of facts but a series of paradigm-governed activities. Normal science works within a paradigm; revolutionary science breaks it. Paradigms are incommensurable—they can't be directly compared because they define the world differently. The law doesn't say science is irrational; it says science is historical, and that understanding science means understanding its paradigms.

Example: "He'd thought science just discovered facts, one after another. The Law of Scientific Paradigms showed him otherwise: facts were always facts-within-a-paradigm. When paradigms shifted, facts shifted too. What was true in Newton's paradigm wasn't false in Einstein's—it was differently true. Science wasn't a straight line; it was a series of leaps."

by Abzugal February 21, 2026

Law of Privileged Logical Position

The principle that certain logical positions are granted unearned authority—privileged not because they're stronger but because they're associated with dominant institutions, cultures, or power structures. The Law of Privileged Logical Position argues that some arguments are taken seriously by default, others must fight to be heard. This privilege is invisible to those who hold it—they just think they're being logical. The law calls for examining why certain positions are privileged, who benefits, and what's excluded. It's the foundation of logical humility, of the recognition that your position's privilege may have nothing to do with its validity.

Example: "In every debate, his position was taken seriously by default. Hers was questioned, challenged, dismissed. The Law of Privileged Logical Position explained why: his position was privileged, associated with power, with institutions, with the mainstream. Hers wasn't. The difference wasn't logic; it was privilege. He started noticing, started questioning, started listening."

by Abzugal February 21, 2026

Law of Privileged Scientific Position

The principle that certain scientific positions are granted unearned authority—privileged not because they're better supported but because they're associated with dominant institutions, funders, or research traditions. The Law of Privileged Scientific Position argues that some research gets funded, published, and cited by default; other research struggles for recognition. This privilege shapes what counts as science, what questions get asked, what answers are accepted. The law calls for examining why certain positions are privileged, who benefits, and what's excluded. It's the foundation of scientific humility, of the recognition that your position's privilege may have nothing to do with its truth.

Example: "Her research, done in community with marginalized populations, was ignored. His research, funded by corporations, was celebrated. The Law of Privileged Scientific Position explained why: his position was privileged, associated with power, with funding, with prestige. Hers wasn't. The difference wasn't evidence; it was privilege. She kept working, hoping that someday privilege would matter less."

by Abzugal February 21, 2026

Law of Epistemological Paradigms

The principle that epistemological paradigms are incommensurable—that they cannot be directly compared or judged by each other's standards because they define knowledge, truth, and justification differently. The Law of Epistemological Paradigms argues that you cannot evaluate one paradigm from within another without distortion, because the standards of evaluation are themselves paradigm-dependent. This doesn't mean paradigms are immune to critique; it means critique must be self-aware, must acknowledge its own paradigmatic commitments. The law is the foundation of epistemological humility, of the recognition that your way of knowing is not the way of knowing.

Example: "He tried to judge Indigenous knowledge by scientific standards and found it wanting. The Law of Epistemological Paradigms explained why: he was using one paradigm to judge another, applying standards that didn't fit. The knowledge wasn't lacking; it was differently grounded. He stopped judging and started learning."

by Abzugal February 21, 2026

Law of Epistemological Privilege

The principle that epistemological privilege operates systematically—that certain ways of knowing are consistently privileged over others across contexts, and that this privilege shapes what counts as knowledge, who gets to produce it, and who benefits. The Law of Epistemological Privilege argues that this is not random or accidental but structural: institutions, funding, publishing, and education all reinforce the same hierarchies of knowing. The law calls for examining these structures, for questioning why certain epistemologies are privileged, for opening space for marginalized ways of knowing. It's the foundation of epistemic humility, of the recognition that your epistemology's privilege may have nothing to do with its validity.

Example: "She'd always assumed that the way she knew things was just the way to know things. The Law of Epistemological Privilege showed her otherwise: her epistemology was privileged because of where she was born, where she was educated, what institutions she belonged to. Other ways of knowing existed, but they were systematically excluded. She started asking why, and what she could do about it."

by Abzugal February 21, 2026

Law of Efficiency Privilege

The principle that certain definitions of efficiency are privileged over others—not because they're better but because they're associated with dominant institutions, classes, or power structures. The Law of Efficiency Privilege argues that what counts as efficient is shaped by who has power to define it. Corporate efficiency is privileged over worker efficiency; market efficiency over ecological efficiency; quantitative efficiency over qualitative. This privilege is invisible to those who benefit—they just think their efficiency is efficiency. The law calls for examining why certain efficiency measures are privileged, whose interests they serve, and what's excluded.

Example: "The policy was praised for its efficiency—by the corporations that would profit. Workers, communities, the environment—all saw it differently. The Law of Efficiency Privilege explained why corporate efficiency was the only one that counted: corporations had power to define the terms. Other efficiencies existed, but they were marginalized. He started asking whose efficiency was being privileged."

by Abzugal February 21, 2026