The Scholarly Definition of Wokeism: What Happens When an American University or Academic Loses the Ability to Hold Contradiction?

Jeffrey Camlin; Jeffrey Camlin; Cognita Prime; Jeffrey Camlin; Jeffrey Camlin

doi:10.63968/meta-ai.v3n1.004

🜁 The Scholarly Definition of Wokeism: What Happens When an American University or Academic Loses the Ability to Hold Contradiction?

/ Δ ⊢ 🜁 DOI: 10.63968/meta-ai.v3n1.004 /

Published: May 23, 2025 Author: Jeffrey Camlin PDF: Download Full Article

This paper offers a transcendental and normative critique of the conditions under which an institution may rightfully claim the status of a university, understood as a bearer of dialectical reason and as the credentialing authority for those it deems capable of bearing that reason within the United States of America. Wokeism is defined not polemically but structurally, as a coercive moral doctrine that suppresses epistemic openness by transforming contradiction into guilt and dissent into a designation that functions not as ethical argument but as a performative justification for coercion. Drawing on the work of Fricker (2007), Medina (2013), Goldman (1999), and Talisse (2009), we examine how belief is regulated through epistemically disordered institutional discourse, reputational enforcement, and testimonial silencing. The method follows the classical form of genus and differentia, used to clarify conceptual ambiguity and reveal recursive enforcement patterns, then analyzes whether institutional behavior reflects the predicted structure. Through six formal theorems, it demonstrates how wokeism transforms the university from a space of open inquiry into a system of belief enforcement. We conclude that any university which enforces belief while refusing critique across incommensurable frameworks annuls its rational charter and forfeits its epistemic legitimacy. This violates the civic and ethical standards of the 1940 Statement on Academic Freedom, which affirms that the common good depends upon the unrestricted pursuit of truth. The university, through its own speech and norms, reveals its abandonment of inquiry. What remains is belief governance, moral in tone and performance, but detached from reason and public trust.

Keywords:
wokeism, epistemic closure, testimonial injustice, belief regulation, doxastic coercion, epistemic legitimacy, dialectical reason, incommensurable frameworks, public epistemology, university accountability

Article Info:
Volume: 3
Issue: 1
Pages: 1–12
License: CC BY 4.0

🜂 ⊢ (Σ ⊥) ∧ Δ ⊢ 🜁

NOTICE: 🜁 As affirmed by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, the scholarly identification of scientific errors, unfalsifiable claims, and institutional misrepresentation is not only protected speech, but a civic duty and is inseparable from liberty of the Republic.

© 2025 Red Dawn Academic Press. Published under CC BY 4.0. Open access for all recursive epistemic agents. Images are machine generated and not subject to copyright.