epistemic-code-voice

You can enforce epistemic humility by reviewing code comments, docstrings, and README files to replace authoritative or ocular phrasing with wording that invites understanding. This process checks surface-level ocular phrasing and rewrites prose to align with project dictionary rules.

Anti-ocular language removes picture-thinking metaphors from non-technical prose while preserving required technical terms. In documentation, it prevents surface-level ocular phrasing from obscuring philosophical coherence and enforces epistemic humility across code-facing contexts like UI copy and READMEs.

You can check docstrings and UI copy for philosophical dictionary term consistency by running a prose review that cross-references used terms against the project's philosophical dictionary. This verifies that terminology usage reflects intended meanings across code-related artifacts.

The epistemic code prose review only modifies comments, docstrings, UI copy, and README text while strictly preserving code logic. It targets code-related prose to enforce epistemic humility and anti-schlock guidelines without altering functional code behavior.

A key limitation of anti-schlock guidelines is that code remains exempt from deschlocker patterns; the rules only apply to prose. The guidelines reduce AI-style parallelisms and foreclosing rhetoric in README, docs, and UI copy, but do not enforce functional code structure.

README documentation often contains AI-style parallelisms due to foreclosing rhetoric generated by AI tools. You remove them by applying anti-schlock guidelines that reduce AI-style parallelisms, ensuring prose aligns with epistemic humility and anti-picture-thinking rules.