Epistemology and Chronology

Epistemology of the Past: Those in previous eras embraced an epistemology of the past. The idea was that the wisdom of the ages were embodied in institutions and something was trustworthy by virtue of being old. They said we should trust old institutions (like the Constitution or Great Books) because, in a Darwinian sense, they would not have survived if they were not superior.

Epistemology of the Future: Today’s orthodoxy adheres to an epistemology of the future. The idea is that things are always on an upward course and so newer is necessarily better by virtue of being closer to the future. Reject old ideas and institutions (the American Founding, Great books) and embrace whatever is the latest, since it’s necessarily the greatest (tech companies, wokism). The key to being correct on any given issue is simply identifying trends: see which way the winds are blowing and then conform to those fads. In a Darwinian sense, there is continuous improvement so being closer to the future means being more correct.

Epistemology of the Present: I prefer the epistemology of the present, which evaluates ideas and institutions on the basis of reason and evidence. Truth is independent of age, and we determine belief based on visible evidence in the here and now, as in science.

This shouldn’t be controversial, and if people thought about it, they would agree that a present, scientific, rational approach is better than the epistemology of the past or the epistemology of the future, but it’s remarkable how much those mistaken epistemologies have captured our public consciousness, probably because each one easily attaches to narratives justifying our two political tribes.