Sadistic Epistemology (700 words)

The First Cloud, Sir William Quiller Orchardson (1832-1910)

[Content note: brief discussion of psychological abuse.]

Masochistic epistemology is a pattern of thought in which a person gravitates toward beliefs that validate their worst fears and insecurities: “Whatever hurts is true.” You instantly accept brutal criticisms of yourself while rejecting praise as insincere; you’re so worried about developing false hope about climate change that you believe only the worst predictions, regardless of their merits. Since the twin concept is almost self-explanatory, I’ll keep this post short.

A snappy definition of sadistic epistemology would be “Whatever hurts others is true.” This is a good start, but it’s not specific enough. Sadistic thinking always points toward a target, whether that’s a person or a group of people. The group could be real or imagined; what matters is that the sadist takes pleasure in trying to harm them. Sadistic epistemology is a mode of thought in which “Whatever I can weaponize is true.” 

Sadistic epistemology is characterized by a “seeking phase” in which the sadist is motivated to find a belief that will hurt the target, followed by a “kill phase” in which they latch onto a belief and revel in its destructive power. During the seeking phase, the sadist rapidly surveys claims which might be true, discarding the ones which are most outlandish or trivial until they settle on whichever candidate beliefs are most likely to cause harm. Since it’s difficult to believe something that one knows to be totally false, the sadist is likely to endorse claims which are vague enough that they could be true on some interpretation (for example, I conclude that my partner’s inconsiderate behavior is abuse). At the end of the seeking phase, the sadist is completely satisfied; the belief is persuasive because it’s a good weapon, in the same way that some arguments are persuasive because they’re funny. The belief snaps into place with a thrill of pleasure. By endorsing the belief, the sadist moves into the kill phase. They become intoxicated by self-righteousness and the perception of moral certainty, and they can express the hateful belief with total conviction.

When a sadist targets a masochist, they commit epistemic abuse: The sadist is motivated to express views that harm the masochist, and the masochist is motivated to believe harsh criticisms of themselves. The masochist might feel grateful toward the sadist or even admire them for saying what other people are unwilling to say; it might feel as though the sadist is the only person they can really trust. Together, they create and validate beliefs that systematically harm the masochist.

***

The goal of this post is not to lambast a kind of person, but to criticize a mode of thought that I believe most people enter at different times. I wouldn’t have been able to describe this state of mind if I hadn’t experienced it. At times when I’ve felt attacked, sadistic epistemology has met my short-term emotional needs to feel virtuous and to feel that a messy conflict has been settled in my favor, but it conflicted with my long-term intentions to be virtuous and to resolve conflicts rather than declaring myself the victor. Now, when I feel the impulse to rationalize in a hateful direction, I instinctively stop in my tracks. I ask myself over and over, Is this true? Am I being unfair? Have I ever done the same thing as the person I'm criticizing? I haven’t done this perfectly, but I’ve radically improved over the past year, and I've found that it's pretty easy to stay out of "kill phase."

Epistemic masochism is also a state of mind that people can occupy at different times or in different parts of their lives. From the inside, masochism can feel like virtue: Having recognized a source of deep shame, I throw up my hands and invite someone else to rewire my brain, replacing my vices with virtues and my incompetencies with competence. This is especially fraught because, as a strong general rule, nice people do not play God: If someone takes me up on the offer to re-write my source code, then it's unlikely that they're looking out for my best interests.

My advice is very general, but has still been useful in my own experience. Sadists should drop their weapons, masochists should raise their guard, and if someone invites you to commandeer their worldview, then you should engage with that person in a way that restores their autonomy rather than damaging it.