What is the epistemic crisis?

Latest revision as of 04:00, 1 May 2025

Written by AI. Help improve this answer by adding to the sources section. When the sources section is updated this article will regenerate.

What is the epistemic crisis?

An “epistemic crisis” is a breakdown in the social systems that allow people to agree on what is probably true. Commentators argue that large segments of the public no longer share a common set of trusted institutions, methods or experts that can reliably adjudicate facts, which in turn weakens collective decision-making and democratic legitimacy [4][6][7]. Surveys show that confidence in government, the news media and science has declined to historic lows [3][5][14]. Empirically, the crisis is visible in the replication failures of psychology and other sciences [2][13] and in rising perceptions that politics, not evidence, drives institutional statements [1].

What is the cause of the epistemic crisis?

Most writers see several interacting causes rather than a single trigger.

Politicization of expertise. Experiments find that when an institution takes a partisan stance, trust falls even among people who share its politics [1].
Declining reproducibility and transparency in research. The 2015 “Reproducibility Project” replicated only 36 % of 100 prominent psychology findings [2]; commentators translate this into a generalized suspicion that “75 % of psychology claims are false” [13].
“Truth Decay.” RAND describes a long-term shift in which objective facts have less influence on opinion, fueled by information overload, social media and polarization [4].
Media homogeneity and economic pressures. Essays argue that prestige outlets increasingly move “in unison,” narrowing the range of permissible viewpoints and amplifying mistakes [12][18][19].
Elite performance failures. Policy blunders, financial crises and pandemic missteps reduce the perceived competence of experts and thus the willingness to defer to them [8][9][15].
Feedback loop of distrust. Falling trust leads people to seek alternative information sources, which are often lower quality, reinforcing the cycle of doubt [16].

What are some examples of elite failure that caused the epistemic crisis?

Commentators point to high-profile episodes where institutional actors were later judged to have misinformed or under-performed. The list below focuses on cases repeatedly cited across the sources.

Replication crisis in psychology and biomedical research [2][13] – journals and professional societies published results that could not be reproduced, shaking faith in peer review.
Financial crisis of 2008 – although not detailed in the listed pieces, several authors cite it as an origin of populist backlash against economic and governmental elites [8][9].
COVID-19 policy communication – Substack essays accuse health agencies and media of oscillating messages on masks, school closures and vaccine side-effects, eroding credibility [6][9][15].
Politicized scientific endorsements – controversies such as professional societies endorsing specific political candidates are taken as evidence that science is being leveraged for partisan goals [20].
Media miscues – examples include the “Potomac plane crash” rumor mill [17], perceived ideological conformity at The New York Times [18] and NPR’s loss of cross-partisan trust [19].
Intelligence and national-security assessments – while not covered in depth by the academic sources, opinion writers frame pre-war weapons claims and surveillance revelations as emblematic elite errors [7][11].

Conflicting views and ongoing discourse

Not everyone accepts the “crisis” framing. Pew finds that majorities still express at least “a fair amount” of trust in scientists, even as the trend declines [5]. Boston Review warns that panic about “fake news” can itself be exaggerated and weaponized to suppress dissent [16]. Arnold Kling doubts that an epistemic collapse has truly occurred, suggesting instead that the internet merely exposes longstanding disagreements [6]. Conversely, RAND, Nate Silver and others argue the problem is real and worsening [4][9]. The debate thus centers on whether current trust levels are dangerously low or simply adjusting to a new information ecosystem.

Sources[edit]

Politicization Undermines Trust in Institutions, Even Among the Ideologically Aligned Public – Research Square (2024 pre-print; Empirical research)
Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science – Science (2015 peer-reviewed replication study)
Public Trust in Government: 1958-2024 – Pew Research Center (Long-running survey report)
Truth Decay: An Initial Exploration of the Diminishing Role of Facts and Analysis in American Public Life – RAND Corporation (2018 research report / policy study)
Americans’ Trust in Scientists, Positive Views of Science Continue to Decline – Pew Research Center (2023 survey report)
An Epistemic Crisis? – In My Tribe (Substack) (Opinion / Essay)
America’s Epistemological Crisis – Conspicuous Cognition (Commentary essay)
Elite Failures and Populist Backlash – Conspicuous Cognition (Commentary essay)
The Expert Class Is Failing, and So Is Biden’s Presidency – Silver Bulletin (Substack) (Opinion / Essay)
It’s the Epistemology, Stupid – Sam Kahn (Substack) (Opinion / Essay)
The Reckoning – Sam Harris (Substack) (Opinion / Essay)
Why the Media Moves in Unison – Persuasion (Opinion / Essay)
75 % of Psychology Claims Are False – Unsafe Science (Substack) (Commentary / Replication-crisis analysis)
The Hard Truth: Americans Don’t Trust the News Media – The Washington Post (2024 Opinion / Op-Ed)
Elite Misinformation Is an Underrated Problem – Slow Boring (Opinion / Essay)
The Fake News About Fake News – Boston Review (Long-form analysis / Essay)
How to Know Who to Trust, Potomac Plane Crash Edition – Jesse Singal (Substack) (Commentary / Media criticism)
When the New York Times Lost Its Way – 1843 Magazine (The Economist) (Magazine feature)
I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust – The Free Press (First-person essay / Media criticism)
Should Scientific Organizations Endorse Political Candidates? – Steve Stewart-Williams (Substack) (Commentary essay)

Question[edit]

What is the epistemic crisis? What is the cause of the epistemic crisis? What are some examples of elite failure the caused the epistemic crisis?

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-''(Written by AI. Help improve this answer by adding to the sources section. When the sources section is updated this article will regenerate.)''
+''Written by AI. Help improve this answer by adding to the sources section. When the sources section is updated this article will regenerate.''
 '''What is the epistemic crisis?'''
-“Epistemic crisis” is the label commonly given to the widespread breakdown of shared norms for establishing what is true, reliable or authoritative.  RAND’s 2018 report on “Truth Decay” described “diminishing agreement about facts” and “declining trust in previously respected sources of factual information” as the defining features of the phenomenon [4].  Survey data show steady erosion of confidence in government [3], scientists [5], and the news media [14].  Essays by commentators across the ideological spectrum (e.g., Arnold Kling [6], Conspicuous Cognition [7], Nate Silver [9]) interpret these numbers as evidence that American public life no longer has a commonly accepted epistemic authority.  The crisis is therefore not just about “fake news” but about a structural weakening of the institutions and practices that once produced a common evidentiary baseline.
-'''Causes of the epistemic crisis'''
+An “epistemic crisis” is a breakdown in the social systems that allow people to agree on what is probably true. Commentators argue that large segments of the public no longer share a common set of trusted institutions, methods or experts that can reliably adjudicate facts, which in turn weakens collective decision-making and democratic legitimacy [4][6][7]. Surveys show that confidence in government, the news media and science has declined to historic lows [3][5][14]. Empirically, the crisis is visible in the replication failures of psychology and other sciences [2][13] and in rising perceptions that politics, not evidence, drives institutional statements [1].
-# Politicization of institutions
+'''What is the cause of the epistemic crisis?'''
-   • Experimental work shows that when people learn an institution has taken a partisan stand, trust falls even among ideological allies [1].
-   • Scientific and professional organizations have increasingly issued political statements, a practice some critics argue erodes perceived neutrality [20].
-# Replication and methodological problems in science
+Most writers see several interacting causes rather than a single trigger.
-   • The 2015 Reproducibility Project found fewer than 40 % of sampled psychology results replicated [2].
-   • Follow-up syntheses estimate that “roughly 75 % of psychology claims are false” [13].  Public coverage of these findings contributes to doubt about expert authority [5].
-# Media system incentives
+* Politicization of expertise. Experiments find that when an institution takes a partisan stance, trust falls even among people who share its politics [1].
-   • RAND notes “blurring of the line between opinion and fact” in 24-hour and online media [4].
+* Declining reproducibility and transparency in research. The 2015 “Reproducibility Project” replicated only 36 % of 100 prominent psychology findings [2]; commentators translate this into a generalized suspicion that “75 % of psychology claims are false” [13].
-   • Journalistic homogeneity—“Why the media moves in unison” [12]—feeds suspicion that elite outlets act as a coordinated narrative cartel.
+* “Truth Decay.” RAND describes a long-term shift in which objective facts have less influence on opinion, fueled by information overload, social media and polarization [4].
-   • First-person accounts from within legacy outlets (e.g., NPR [19] and the New York Times [18]) describe internal ideological pressures that, critics say, alienate large segments of the audience.
+* Media homogeneity and economic pressures. Essays argue that prestige outlets increasingly move “in unison,” narrowing the range of permissible viewpoints and amplifying mistakes [12][18][19].
+* Elite performance failures. Policy blunders, financial crises and pandemic missteps reduce the perceived competence of experts and thus the willingness to defer to them [8][9][15].
+* Feedback loop of distrust. Falling trust leads people to seek alternative information sources, which are often lower quality, reinforcing the cycle of doubt [16].
-# Information abundance and social media
+'''What are some examples of elite failure that caused the epistemic crisis?'''
-   • Commentators argue that decentralized, algorithm-driven platforms overwhelm citizens’ ability to vet claims, making it easier for both elite and non-elite misinformation to spread [15].
-# Declining performance of governing and expert institutions
+Commentators point to high-profile episodes where institutional actors were later judged to have misinformed or under-performed. The list below focuses on cases repeatedly cited across the sources.
-   • Per Pew, trust in federal government has hovered near historic lows since the mid-2000s [3].  Essays such as “The Expert Class Is Failing” [9] claim repeated governance errors have made skepticism rational rather than irrational.
-'''Examples of elite failures frequently cited as catalysts'''
+* Replication crisis in psychology and biomedical research [2][13] – journals and professional societies published results that could not be reproduced, shaking faith in peer review.
-(The listed sources may discuss or use them as illustrative cases rather than provide original reporting.)
+* Financial crisis of 2008 – although not detailed in the listed pieces, several authors cite it as an origin of populist backlash against economic and governmental elites [8][9].
+* COVID-19 policy communication – Substack essays accuse health agencies and media of oscillating messages on masks, school closures and vaccine side-effects, eroding credibility [6][9][15].
+* Politicized scientific endorsements – controversies such as professional societies endorsing specific political candidates are taken as evidence that science is being leveraged for partisan goals [20].
+* Media miscues – examples include the “Potomac plane crash” rumor mill [17], perceived ideological conformity at The New York Times [18] and NPR’s loss of cross-partisan trust [19].
+* Intelligence and national-security assessments – while not covered in depth by the academic sources, opinion writers frame pre-war weapons claims and surveillance revelations as emblematic elite errors [7][11].
-* Public health messaging during COVID-19 (mask guidance reversals, school-closure debates) – used by Silver [9] and Slow Boring [15] as evidence that experts can mislead or over-state confidence.
+'''Conflicting views and ongoing discourse'''
-* The replication crisis in psychology and social science – documented empirically by Science [2] and spotlighted for the lay public by Unsafe Science [13].
+Not everyone accepts the “crisis” framing. Pew finds that majorities still express at least “a fair amount” of trust in scientists, even as the trend declines [5]. Boston Review warns that panic about “fake news” can itself be exaggerated and weaponized to suppress dissent [16]. Arnold Kling doubts that an epistemic collapse has truly occurred, suggesting instead that the internet merely exposes longstanding disagreements [6]. Conversely, RAND, Nate Silver and others argue the problem is real and worsening [4][9]. The debate thus centers on whether current trust levels are dangerously low or simply adjusting to a new information ecosystem.
-* Media framing errors, e.g., premature certainty about high-profile investigations or incidents (Jesse Singal’s “Potomac plane crash” case study [17]).
-* Perceived groupthink at flagship news organizations – internal critiques from veteran journalists at the New York Times [18] and NPR [19].
-* Policy establishment mis-reads of populist backlash – Conspicuous Cognition argues elite underestimation of economic and cultural discontent fueled mistrust [8].
-(Authors disagree on the weight of each example.  RAND [4] focuses on structural media changes; Sam Kahn [10] emphasizes philosophical confusions about knowledge; Boston Review [16] argues that “fake news” panic is often exaggerated.)
-'''Timeline of key moments in the public discourse'''
-– Reproducibility Project publishes in Science, sparking mainstream attention to methodological weaknesses [2].
-– 2018 – “Fake news” becomes a political catch-phrase; RAND releases “Truth Decay” (2018) framing the issue as systemic [4].
-– COVID-19 pandemic accelerates debate over expert credibility; Substack essays multiply (e.g., Kling [6]).
-– Pew reports continued slide in trust in scientists [5]; commentaries such as “Elite Misinformation Is an Underrated Problem” argue the conversation had been too focused on fringe conspiracy theories [15].
-– Pre-print evidence that politicization itself depresses trust even among partisans [1]; opinion pieces in major outlets (Washington Post [14]) and Substacks (Silver [9]) frame the crisis as central to electoral politics.
-'''Current contours of the debate'''
-* Some scholars and journalists see an existential threat to liberal democracy if no shared epistemic foundation can be restored [4][12].
-* Others caution that talk of “crisis” risks exaggeration; Pew data show most Americans still express at least “some” trust in scientists and courts [5].
-* Disagreement persists over whether the main driver is elite failure (Silver [9], Slow Boring [15]) or populist disinformation (Boston Review [16]).  A growing middle position—articulated by Conspicuous Cognition [7]—holds that both forces interact: elite missteps create openings that opportunistic actors exploit.
-The epistemic crisis, then, is not a single event but an evolving pattern in which institutional authority, methodological rigor, media incentives and partisan identity continuously feed back on one another, eroding the conditions for a broadly shared picture of reality.
 == Sources ==
@@ Line 80: / Line 52: @@
 # [https://www.thefp.com/p/npr-editor-how-npr-lost-americas-trust I’ve Been at NPR for 25 Years. Here’s How We Lost America’s Trust – ''The Free Press''] (First-person essay / Media criticism)
 # [https://www.stevestewartwilliams.com/p/should-scientific-organizations-endorse Should Scientific Organizations Endorse Political Candidates? – ''Steve Stewart-Williams'' (Substack)] (Commentary essay)
-x
 == Question ==