# Future epistemology (Ribbonfarm)

## 1 — Where 'facts' come from

{% embed url="<https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2020/09/03/wittgensteins-revenge/>" %}

Crypto fans will note that **“facts” always require trust in a third party.**

*Facts* are a convention of language, a shorthand for “thing it’s safe to believe without further question.”

Creating “facts” requires deciding which information is important to include — or *trusting* *a third party* to make those decisions on your behalf.&#x20;

### **"Fact-checking" doesn't exist — only fact-deciding**

Most approaches to solving the Credibility Crisis assume “facts lead to trust.” They say “get the facts, then determine who’s wrong, then censor them.”

But Ideamarket flips this on its head: Facts *require* trust.

### Facts require trust

Ideamarket is a trustless, provably fair mechanism for measuring trust. It allows the public to establish trust without relying on a centralized third party to *tell you whom or what to trust.*

Read the full article here:

{% embed url="<https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2020/09/03/wittgensteins-revenge>" %}

## 2 — Trust powers the knowledge economy

> A journalistic article, like a reserve bank note, is a lightweight convenience that invites the holder to redeem it for the promised underlying asset. For worldly currencies, it’s gold. For epistemic currencies, it’s truth.
>
> Articles are not “truth” — they’re *supposedly redeemable* *for truth.* They're promises that if you do your own research, you’ll reach the same conclusions the article claims.
>
> By trading in articles instead of mining for truth yourself, you put your trust in the article publishers.

{% embed url="<https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2020/09/23/epistemic-reserve-notes/>" %}

## 3 — Measuring trust using risk management

> An epistemic currency market would establish a direct relationship between prominence and scrutiny, illuminating the best ROI on your trust. For example, if market participants audit a publisher and find it has no truth in its reserves, then it is *epistemically insolvent*, and demand for its epistemic reserve note goes down (i.e., people exchange its articles less).
>
> If society manages *trust* using the same aggressive meticulousness with which it manages money, could the sheer lucrativeness of epistemic arbitrage make “obscure genius” a thing of the past, and keep the rate of ideological progress above zero forever?
>
> Here’s why this may be worth trying, regardless:
>
> *M*arket incentives create the kind of consensus the information age demands, and also *the kind of people who can tolerate it.*

{% embed url="<https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2020/12/02/pascals-market/>" %}


---

# Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation

If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question.

Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter:

```
GET https://docs.ideamarket.io/philosophy/why-facts-fail.md?ask=<question>
```

The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language.
The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation.

Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.