# Epistemology and Institutional Prejudice

## Purpose

This research track studies how institutions shape what counts as evidence, what questions are respectable, what authorities are trusted, and what anomalies are ignored or minimized.

It exists to support the broader research portfolio by explaining why disputes are often not merely about facts, but about frameworks, credibility assignment, and inherited assumptions.

## Scope

This track will especially support work on:

- Enoch and Second Temple literature
- canon and authority
- inspiration and hermeneutics
- institutional filtering of evidence
- anomaly management in scholarship
- lay explanation of prejudice embedded in systems

## Core Idea

Institutional prejudice often appears before formal argument. It works by assigning credibility in advance.

## Current Files

- `LAY_EXPLANATION.md`
- `ARTICLE_INTEGRATION_MAP.md`
- `SOURCES.md`

## Planned Dossiers

- Kuhn and paradigm / anomaly management
- Properly basic belief and hidden assumptions
- Testimony and authority
- Institutional prejudice as credibility filtering
- Worldview-shaped evidence
