The view that scientific knowledge is not a discovery of a pre-existing reality, but a construction deeply influenced by social, cultural, and historical contexts. Scientific "facts" and even what counts as good evidence are relative to the prevailing paradigm, worldview, or community of scientists. Truth is made, not found.
Example: Thomas Kuhn's concept of "paradigm shifts" is a classic expression of Scientific-Epistemological Relativism. Before and after the Copernican Revolution, scientists lived in different intellectual worlds with different facts. A scientific-epistemological relativist argues that the "objective" evidence was interpreted through incompatible frameworks. Similarly, modern debates (like over certain sociological theories) often involve clashes between groups with fundamentally different epistemological standards for what constitutes valid evidence.
by Abzugal January 24, 2026
Get the Scientific-Epistemological Relativism mug.The view that scientific truth is relative to a conceptual framework, paradigm, or cultural context—what's true in one framework may not be true in another. This is often misunderstood as "everything is equally true," which is not the claim. The claim is that truth-claims are evaluated within frameworks, and frameworks themselves are not neutrally comparable. Newtonian physics is true within its domain of medium-sized objects moving at medium speeds; relativistic physics is true in a broader domain. They're not both true in the same way—they're true relative to their conditions of application. The relativism is about frameworks, not facts.
"Is mental illness a brain disorder or spiritual crisis? Scientific Relativism says: it depends on your framework. Both are real ways of understanding; neither is the final truth. The trick is knowing which framework fits which situation, not fighting about which is universally right."
by Abzugal February 23, 2026
Get the Scientific Relativism mug.