FRAMEWORK TYRANNY: The Digital Inquisition and the Structural Isomorphism of Epistemic Suppression from Galileo to the Sincere Science Project

Abstract: Framework Tyranny and Epistemic Suppression This paper documents and formalizes the phenomenon of Framework Tyranny: the active suppression of scientific information triggered not by the content’s perceived incorrectness but by evidence of its growing relevance. Key Definitions Framework Tyranny vs. Framework Lock: Framework Tyranny is distinguished from Framework Lock—the passive inability of a paradigm-trained system to process contradictory information—by the presence of deliberate institutional action: deletion, invisibilization, and systematic removal of the dissenting agent’s capacity to disseminate. Epistemic Suppression: The institutional act of removing, concealing, or rendering inaccessible scientific information based not on its merit but on its incompatibility with the established paradigm. Asymmetric Epistemic Defense (The Arrogance-Cowardice Binomial): The condition in which a practitioner exhibits certainty of correctness without examination of evidence (arrogance) and refusal to engage in substantive debate when challenged (cowardice). Analysis of the Phenomenon We demonstrate that the epistemic suppression experienced by the Sincere Science research program across six independent platforms (Figshare, Nature Physics, Physics Stack Exchange, Reddit, TikTok, and Google) is structurally isomorphic to the ecclesiastical suppression of Galileo Galilei in the 17th century. The isomorphism is complete across four dimensions: Logical Structure: Dogma protected by procedural authority. Motivation: Preservation of institutional power. Mechanism: Suppression of the information carrier, not refutation of the content. Result: Delay in the progress of knowledge. The difference is exclusively in the medium of execution: physical in the 17th century, digital in the 21st. The Efficiency of the Digital Inquisition We propose that the efficiency of digital suppression exceeds that of its ecclesiastical predecessor in one critical dimension: it produces no visible martyrs, and therefore no symbols around which counter-movements can organize. The Digital Inquisition does not need a pyre. It needs only the delete button. Evidence and Documentation All evidence presented in this paper is primary: screenshots with timestamps, automated system responses, platform metrics, email correspondence, and editorial communications. The Documentary Dossier v4.0, comprising over 50 exhibits across six platforms, accompanies this paper as supplementary material.【摘要：框架暴政与认知压制（Framework Tyranny and Epistemic Suppression）】 本文对框架暴政（Framework Tyranny）现象进行了记录与形式化建模：该现象指并非因感知到内容错误，而是因其相关性日益凸显而主动压制科学信息的行为。 关键定义 框架暴政与框架锁定（Framework Lock）：框架暴政有别于框架锁定——后者指范式训练系统被动无法处理矛盾信息的状态——二者的核心差异在于前者存在刻意的制度性行动：删除、隐形化处理，以及系统性剥夺异议主体的信息传播能力。 认知压制（Epistemic Suppression）：指制度性地移除、隐藏或使科学信息无法被获取，其依据并非信息本身的质量，而是其与既有范式相悖。 非对称认知防御（傲慢-怯懦二元性）（Asymmetric Epistemic Defense (The Arrogance-Cowardice Binomial)）：指科研人员在未审查证据的情况下确信自身观点正确（傲慢），且在受到质疑时拒绝进行实质性辩论（怯懦）的状态。 现象分析 我们发现，“真诚科学”（Sincere Science）研究项目在六个独立平台（Figshare、Nature Physics、Physics Stack Exchange、Reddit、TikTok及谷歌（Google））上遭遇的认知压制，在结构上与17世纪教会对伽利略·伽利莱（Galileo Galilei）的压制同构。 这种同构性完整体现在四个维度： 1. 逻辑结构：以程序权威庇护教条 2. 动机：维护制度权力 3. 运作机制：压制信息载体，而非驳斥内容本身 4. 结果：延缓知识进步 二者的唯一区别仅在于实施媒介：17世纪为物理媒介，21世纪则为数字媒介。 数字宗教裁判所的效能 我们提出，数字压制在一个关键维度上的效能远超其教会前身：它不会产生可见的殉道者，因此无法形成反运动可以集结的符号。数字宗教裁判所不需要柴堆，只需要删除键。 证据与存档 本文呈现的所有证据均为一手资料：带时间戳的截图、自动化系统回复、平台数据指标、邮件往来及编辑沟通记录。包含六个平台共计50余件展品的“存档卷宗v4.0（Documentary Dossier v4.0）”作为补充材料随本文一同发布。