Epistemological shift.

Epistemological shift. (machine translated from Russian) The basis of science is empirical knowledge — ἐπιστήµη {1}. Empirical, i.e., a posteriori knowledge is purified of logical errors and false knowledge in the process of verifying its truthfulness, and therefore it is accurate and reliable. This distinguishes science from self-referential monological systems based on prejudice. Prejudice is not knowledge, since it is possible to make a priori assumptions, but it is impossible to know anything with certainty. Conclusions made a priori are all false, unfounded, arbitrary, and based solely on belief in the truth of a priori assumptions and the self-confidence of the person making them. This self-confidence explains the logical errors and misconceptions that arise from the absence of doubt in the trueness of a statement, the only basis for which is not knowledge, but assumption. Overconfidence arises from confusion of concepts, resulting in assumptions being mistaken for knowledge. Without awareness of this confusion and substitution of concepts, it is impossible to understand the fallacy of a logical conclusion based on a misconception. Until the causes of the misconception are understood, it cannot be corrected. However, awareness is impossible in self-referential monologue systems of thinking that reject the very assumption of their defectiveness. By avoiding and rejecting dialogue, autistic people who assume the infallibility of their own assumptions are unable to overcome the sick state in which they exist and break out of the cycle of self-justification and self-confidence. Insisting on being right despite the obvious fallacy of a biased judgment is a symptom of a sick state that is incapable of recognizing its own sickness. Such flawed logical systems, in which truth is replaced by dogma, give rise to fundamentalism, despotism, and Nazism, including fundamentalism of academic pseudo-science, academic despotism, and academic Nazism. In other words, without epistemological justification, statements are meaningless. Without bothering to verify the trueness of their statements, people who consider themselves experts in a particular field of knowledge are mistaken about the infallibility of their knowledge, judgments, and opinions, which leads to logical errors in their reasoning and conclusions, and the accumulation of logical errors without correction becomes a method of creating false systems of justification, as observed in the case of selfreferential systems known as peer review and endorsement. {2} Almost 15 years have passed since my first publication in arXiv {3}, but my publication had no impact on the system for selecting manuscripts for publication in arXiv. As before, I was required to obtain approval for my publication from supposedly verified experts, for which I sent a letter describing my intention to a number of authors whom arXiv administrators had granted the right to make recommendations, as well as to arXiv administrators themselves. Since most of my letters went unanswered, and the responses I did receive did not contribute in any way to achieving my goal, I sent a letter to the Scientific Director of arXiv with a justification of my request to be allowed to publish in arXiv. I sent a copy of my letter to the same authors to whom I had sent the first letter. The correspondence that I publish in the appendix {23} allows only one conclusion to be drawn: the system for selecting manuscripts for publication in arXiv is completely arbitrary, because the decision to publish or to reject publication is not justified by anyone in any way. However, my own experience only confirms what is already known: there are no rules for publication in arXiv. Proof of this assertion can be found in publications that, according to the rules of publication in arXiv, should not have been there. I am referring to the so-called COVID-19 e-prints, most of which are not scientific publications. That is why they were and continue to be published in arXiv to this day without any verification. A keyword search in arXiv gives an insight into the number of such publications: 8,327 results for abstract: covid-19 0 results 2019 2,294 results 2020 2,180 results 2021 1,402 results 2022 1,002 results 2023 789 results 2024 660 results 2025 Either the rules exist, or they don't. The above examples show that the rules that arXiv administrators insist on following {4} do not exist. However, a keyword search of the published abstracts allows us to draw conclusions about the unwritten rules that guide arXiv administrators and to get some idea of what is missing in arXiv. The results of the keyword search are quite telling: 24 results for abstract: LGBT 135 results for abstract: Queer 369 results for abstract: Gay 18 results for abstract: Lesbian 307 results for abstract: Schizophrenia 4,753 results for abstract: Hallucination 19 results for abstract: Psychoanalysis 4,624 results for abstract: Psychology 117 results for abstract: Psychiatry 3,727 results for abstract: Neuroscience 16,863 results for abstract: Brain 99 results for abstract: homeless OR homelessness 436 results for abstract: Poverty 28 results for abstract: Famine 80 results for abstract: Bible 183 results for abstract: Christian OR Christianity 2 results for abstract: Jesus Christ 111,160 results for abstract: Communism 0 results for abstract: Communism NOT communication 4,467 results for abstract: Capitalism OR Capital OR capitalizing OR related 58 results for abstract: USSR 57 result for abstract: Laugh 221,591 results for abstract: Mechanism 4 results for abstract: Mechanicism 4 results for abstract: Fascism 0 results for abstract: Nazism 43,435 results for abstract: Science 24 results for abstract: unscientific 20 results for abstract: Pseudoscience 1 results for abstract: Scientism 229 results for abstract: Nonsense 107 results for abstract: Absurd OR Absurdity 29 results for abstract: Stupid OR Stupidity 41,645 results for abstract: Intelligence 0 results for abstract: Idolatry 5 results for abstract: Thoughtlessness OR thoughtless 316 results for abstract: "critical thinking“ 17 results for abstract: "wishful thinking" 6 results for abstract: "magical thinking" Recently, an Australian author proposed a system for verifying the validity of statements made in the process of artificial text or speech generation {5} because, as another author writes {6}, “Large language models exhibit intelligence without genuine epistemic understanding, exposing a key gap: the absence of epistemic architecture.” However, it is not only machines that demonstrate a lack of “genuine epistemic understanding”, but also people whose thinking takes place automatically within a circle of familiar concepts. By shielding themselves from criticism and the need for epistemological justification, people become like machines and identify themselves with machines {7}, thereby losing their human qualities. The consequence of selfreferential closure in what is defined as computing science is a narrowing of consciousness, as a result of which the study of artifacts becomes the predominant occupation of those who create them. At the same time, a holistic and scientific worldview is reduced, becoming purely technical; in other words, science is replaced by technology, and this replacement leads to the abuse of technology for purposes far removed from science, such as brainwashing people with technical means. {8-14} Understanding the reasons for the observed narrowing of consciousness does not require any special psychological knowledge; it is enough to read the list of sponsors of arXiv, which includes Google Inc. and Microsoft Research, as well as the names of all those organizations that are interested in maintaining the status quo {15}. As is said, he who pays the piper calls the tune. The result of this policy is a dire situation in science itself and the insane state of those who imagine themselves to be scientists but are not, due to their lack of genuine epistemic understanding. The bleak picture described here is not my fantasy, but merely the result of collective oblivion and ignorance of obvious facts, which are listed here for the purpose of raising awareness {16-20}. The next step after describing and understanding the causes of the current situation is to correct the mistakes that have been made. What needs to be changed in the current flawed system that hinders both the production and dissemination of knowledge, and what should the correct organization of both look like? The answers to these questions have already been given: correction is only possible through the implementation of a set of measures, some of which are essential and urgent, while others are secondary and of lesser priority. The first group of measures includes the introduction of the Universal Metadata Standard for scientifically based documentography, which is functionally necessary for the interpretation of documents in automated operating systems. Another priority measure is the abolition of the current flawed paradigm of corporate governance of science and its replacement with an epistemological one, which is described in my book {1}. Among the priority measures is the reorganization of the personnel of administrators and moderators, which should include representatives of different ethnic groups, different professions, different ages, and different minorities to ensure diversity of opinion and respect for the rights and responsibilities of those involved in the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge. At the same time, people who hinder its implementation, who lack scientific qualifications, or who are incapable of logical thinking due to mental illness should be systematically excluded from this process. {2, 21, 22} References. 1. A, Poleev. Science in the 21st century. (2025) http://enzymes.at/download/episteme.pdf 2. Freedom of thinking. Letter addressed to Dr. Jay Bhattacharya on the occasion of the 10th International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication. In: A. Poleev. Letters to the American People, Part III (2025). 3. Andrej Poleev. Universal Metadata Standard. arXiv:1103.4218. 4. arXiv Policies. https://info.arxiv.org/help/policies/index.html 5. Matthew Kelly. The Epistemic Suite: A Post-Foundational Diagnostic Methodology for Assessing AI Knowledge Claims. arXiv:2510.24721. 6. Myung Ho Kim. Executable Epistemology: The Structured Cognitive Loop as an Architecture of Intentional Understanding. arXiv:2510.15952. 7. Fangfang Li, Xiaojie Zhang. The Principles of Human-like Conscious Machine. arXiv:2509.16859. 8. Robin Gröpler et al. The Future of Generative AI in Software Engineering: A Vision from Industry and Academia in the European GENIUS Project. arXiv:2511.01348. 9. Ehsan Latif et al. A Systematic Assessment of OpenAI o1-Preview for Higher Order Thinking in Education. arXiv:2410.21287. 10. Scherer, R., Siddiq, F. & Sánchez Viveros, B. The cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2019, 111(5), 764-792. 11. Jiachu Ye, Xiaoyan Lai, Gary Ka-Wai Wong. The transfer effects of computational thinking: A systematic review with meta-analysis and qualitative synthesis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 2022, 38,6:1620-1638. 12. Chiara Montuori et al. The cognitive effects of computational thinking. Computers & Education, 2024, 210: 104961. 13. Tevfik Uyar. ASI as the New God: Technocratic Theocracy. arXiv:2406.08492. 14. Seth Lazar. Automatic Authorities: Power and AI. arXiv:2404.05990. 15. Funding Support. https://info.arxiv.org/about/funding.html 16. Lauren Klein et al. Provocations from the Humanities for Generative AI Research. arXiv:2502.19190. 17. Josu Ceberio, Borja Calvo. Time to Stop and Think: What kind of research do we want to do? arXiv:2402.08298. 18. Zackary Okun Dunivin, Paul E. Smaldino. Recommender systems, stigmergy, and the tyranny of popularity. arXiv:2506.06162. 19. Barve A, Wagner A. A latent capacity for evolutionary innovation through exaptation in metabolic systems. Nature. 2013 Aug 8;500(7461):203-6. 20. Hochberg ME, Marquet PA, Boyd R, Wagner A. Innovation: an emerging focus from cells to societies. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2017 Dec 5;372(1735):20160414. 21. Gordon Banks et al. Cognitive BPM as an Equalizer: Improving Access and Efficiency for Employees with (and without) Cognitive Disabilities. arXiv:2401.06375. 22. A. Poleev. Metaanalysis of psychoanalysis. (2016, 2019) 23. Correspondence related to the submission of two of my reviews for publication in arXiv. The letters were sent to the following addresses: Eduardo C. Garrido-Merchán [email protected] Maurice HT Ling [email protected] Jacob Morrison [email protected] Kaiqu Liang [email protected] Yoshua Bengio [email protected], [email protected] Robert Long [email protected] Eric Elmoznino [email protected], [email protected] Rufin VanRullen [email protected] Zihan Ding [email protected] Andrej Karpathy [email protected], [email protected] Murray Shanahan [email protected] Ilia Shumailov, Zakhar Shumaylov [email protected], [email protected] make gross logical errors in expressing their thoughts. I prove all this in the text of my reviews. And since I am the reviewer of these publications, no one has the right to review me and prohibit me from publicly criticizing the reviewed publications and their authors. Any attempts to prevent me from speaking publicly will be a gross violation of my rights and US federal law, and will have serious consequences for the violators. I hope I have clearly expressed my views on our cooperation, the aims of which should be to maintain high standards of scientific work and accountability. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me Andrej, Please let me know which ACM publications these papers were published in. I would need to check to see if this would violate any ACM Publications Policies, such as our single and double anonymous peer review policies, before responding to your request. Thank you in advance for sending this information to me and giving me some time to evaluate your request. Regards, Scott Delman ACM Director of Publications Assoc. Computing Machinery 1601 Broadway, 10th Floor New York, New York 10019 Office: +1-212-626-0659 Mobile: +1-212-729-7515 https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottdelman ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0381-0696 from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Delman, I don't know which ACM publications these papers were published in or not, I just want to get access to arXiv in order to submit my two reviews. Please visit the following URL: https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=SH3MYQ If that URL does not work for you, please visit http://arxiv.org/auth/endorse.php and enter the following six-digit alphanumeric string: Endorsement Code: SH3MYQ Thank you very much in advance for help. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me Andrej, I am confused by your messages. If these are not ACM Publications, then why are you contacting ACM. Without knowing which publications these articles are a part of, it is impossible to know if posting public peer reviews would be a violation of ACM Publications Policy. As you likely know, arXiv is not a Publisher (i.e.- they are a preprint service), so articles posted in arXiv are not peer reviewed or officially “published”. Please advise. Scott Delman ACM Director of Publications from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Delman, I contact you because your name is listed in Computer Science Section Editorial Committee of arXiv https://info.arxiv.org/help/cs/index.html, therefore you can help me to get access to arXiv in order to submit my two post-publication peer reviews of publications, which have been published in arXiv. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me Andrej, Got it. My role with arXiv is as a volunteer advisor. For operational questions, I’m carbon copying Ramin Zabih, who should be able to either answer your question or connect you to a staff member at arXiv who can. Regards, Scott Delman ACM Director of Publications from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Delman, I would ask you to forward my request in your name to Mr. Ramin Zabih or to someone else who can assist me. Because your are listed in cs editorial committee of arXiv, it is your duty to respond such requests as for example my in an appropriate way. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Dietterich, I don't want to steal your time, just visit the following URL: https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=SH3MYQ If that URL does not work for you, please visit http://arxiv.org/auth/endorse.php and enter the following six-digit alphanumeric string: Endorsement Code: SH3MYQ Dr. Andrej Poleev Polymath and publisher of the Journal Enzymes ISSN 1867-3317 http://enzymes.at Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me Endorsement requires reading your proposed submission carefully. I’m sorry, but I do not have the time to do this. Thomas G. Dietterich, University Distinguished Professor (Emeritus) School of EECS, Oregon State University US Mail: 1148 Kelley Engineering Center, Corvallis, OR 97331-5501 USA Office: 2063 Kelley Engineering Center Voice: 541-737-5559; FAX: 541-737-1300 https://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~tgd/ Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to me I’m not sure why I received this email message. Can you explain the background? Thomas G. Dietterich Chair, CS Section of arXiv (also known as CoRR: The Computing Research Repository) from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Because I can not proceed with my submission. from: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to me Have you contacted the user support team? https://info.arxiv.org/help/contact.html Thomas G. Dietterich Chair, CS Section of arXiv (also known as CoRR: The Computing Research Repository) from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Yes, I contacted the user support team and several other people within and outside arXiv, but without result. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to me How long have you been waiting for a response? Thomas G. Dietterich Chair, CS Section of arXiv (also known as CoRR: The Computing Research Repository) from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Since October 20 I am waiting for approval of my submissions, without possibility to proceed and to complete them. Such behavior is not acceptable. There is clear description of what I want to submit: https://info.arxiv.org/help/policies/content-types.html Policies for specific content types Comments and Replies to Comments arXiv encourages dialogue and debate about scientific matters. Normally this occurs via a series of papers that build on or critically examine each other. These are moderated each individually as standalone papers. Sometimes, a remark on or note about another paper that is not a full standalone paper is of sufficient interest to arXiv readers. These can be put on arXiv as so-called "comments-on" papers. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to me According to the system, the submission process is not completed for these papers. It shows that you are still editing the submission. Are you seeing any error message? Thomas G. Dietterich Chair, CS Section of arXiv (also known as CoRR: The Computing Research Repository) from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> No, I simple have no possibility to edit something because I have no access to editing option. I can not proceed and to complete my submissions. That is all. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to me Are you saying that clicking on the “edit” icon in the Actions column doesn’t work for you? Does the “delete” icon work? You could delete and start the submission process over again. It has been several years since I made a submission to arXiv, so that is the only suggestion I can make. My advice in any communications with the arXiv staff is to be very polite. Otherwise, you will be banned from arXiv. They have zero tolerance for unprofessional language. I hope you can find a way to make your submissions! Sincerely, Thomas G. Dietterich Chair, CS Section of arXiv (also known as CoRR: The Computing Research Repository) from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> It is your duty as Chair of CS Section of arXiv to assist me in such a case. There is following problem: You are not endorsed for this archive. See endorsement help or request endorsement And 2nd problem: --------- Forwarded message --------- From: <[email protected]> Date: Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 6:14 PM Subject: arXiv endorsement request from Andrej Poleev To: <[email protected]> from: Jeffrey Ullman <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 to me I'm sorry. I cannot help you. Your articles, which seem to be poorly translated (for example, the first talks about "psychopaths," which I doubt you intended) have nothing to do with computer science, and do not demonstrate your qualifications to comment about CS. regards, Jeffrey Ullman from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 to: Jeffrey Ullman <[email protected]> Dear Dr. Ullman, "psychopaths" you mentioned in your reply refer to my competency as psychoanalyst and author of corresponding books http://books.enzymes.at. My competence in computer science demonstrate my other books, for example one about ChatGPT (2023). Actually, ChatGPT and other AIs are "diagnosed" as "psychopaths": https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.07377 Do GPT Language Models Suffer From Split Personality Disorder? The Advent Of Substrate-Free Psychometrics https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.08016 Emergence of psychopathological computations in large language models https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.16150 PRISON: Unmasking the Criminal Potential of Large Language Models But you have no competence in psychopathology. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me Before I endorse you, I would have to see the papers you are hoping to post. Based on the titles, cs.CL does not seem like the right subject area. -- Joe Halpern from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Halpern, thank you for your reply. I am not hoping to post something in arXiv, but I want to include in arXiv two of my post-publication peer reviews of publications, which have been published in arXiv. Both my post-publication peer reviews are already published in my book entitled "Science in 21st century" (in Russian). For your knowledge, I am editor and publisher of the Journal Enzymes ISSN 1867-3317, and also author of several books,here are some of them: http:// books.enzymes.at. Furthermore, I am polymath with deep experiences in biology, molecular biology, psychoanalysis, law, literature, linguistics, history and now in artificial intelligence, just look in internet. If you have other questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me I'm afraid that I will still have to see the papers you are planning to post before I endorse you. -- Joe Halpern from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Halpern, as mentioned before, you can free download my book from my site http:// books.enzymes.at. Especially, my book with two my post-publication peer reviews of publications, which have been published in arXiv has following address: http://enzymes.at/download/episteme.pdf I hope you can read it in Russian, or ask your colleagues who can read Russian, or translate it from Russian into English. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me I'm afraid that I can't read Russian. I will ask yet again that you send me what you plan to post, including an English abstract (which is required for arxiv). -- Joe from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Halpern, please find included a copy of my review as pdf file. Narration and reality. A Review of: Michaël Gillon. A Modular Theory of Subjective Consciousness for Natural and Artificial Minds. (2025) (in Russian) A summary and pdf file for second review will follow tomorrow. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 21, 2025 to: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Halpern, please find included a copy of my review as pdf file. Reciprocity. A Review of: Joel Z. Leibo et al. A theory of appropriateness with applications to generative artificial intelligence. (2024) Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Oct 21, 2025 to me Dear Dr. Poleev, Sorry to have put you through the work of sending me the paper,s but I'm afraid that I can't endorse you. Arxiv focuses on research papers. While we do occasionally take reviews, we hold them to a higher standard than regular research papers; they must of interest to the community in the subject area of interest. Both of your papers are on topics that are not CS, and have only extremely limited relationship to CS. (I find topics like consciousness quite interesting, but it is not CS.). Actually, while the papers claim to be reviews, from what I could tell from the English, neither paper even discusses the paper it's supposed to be reviewing (although I clearly may be missing something, since I don't speak Russian). Regrads, Joe Halpern from: Andrew Odlyzko <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me Dear Mr. Poleev, Sorry, but I cannot offer any assistance. I am currently working in an entirely different area. Furthermore, I am getting an increasing number of requests for comments about various observations, claimed proofs (and disproofs) of the Riemann Hypothesis, etc., so, although I used to try to respond to all people who had questions on this topic, I have had to give up. Best regards, Andrew Odlyzko Professor Emeritus School of Mathematics University of Minnesota 127 Vincent Hall 206 Church St. SE Minneapolis, MN 55455 voice phone 612-625-6413 https://www-users.cse.umn.edu/~odlyzko from: Michael J. O'Donnell <[email protected]> Oct 21, 2025 to me Dear Dr. Poleev, I think I might not be the person to whom you intended to send this endorsement request. I am moderator of cs.SD, not cs.CL nor cs.AI. I don't remember the "registered as an endorser" phrase, so I'm not sure whether or not I am "registered" for cs.CL or cs.AI. I am having some memory problems due to some neural damage, so there may be a connection that I've forgotten, and you should remind me. As a long-time moderator, I have found some of the arXiv procedures, including the endorsement procedure, quite confusing, but the intent is not to exclude anyone doing research. If you are confused, I encourage you to keep asking the staff. If you are sure that I should consider the endorsement, the rules seem to require me to look at the article(s) you wish to submit. The message to you might not have mentioned that. So, in that case, perhaps you can send me copies. But, I looked up the Leibo and Gillon articles that you mentioned, and I am not familiar with their topics. Both are listed as primarily cs.AI, so there may be an error in the message to you mentioning cs.CL. Best wishes to straighten things out, Mike O’Donnell Эпистемологический сдвиг. Основанием науки является послеопытное знание — ἐπιστήμη {1}. Послеопытное, т.е. апостериорное знание очищено от логических ошибок и ложного знания в процессе проверки его истинности, и поэтому оно верное и достоверное. Этим наука отличается от самореферентных монологовых систем, основанных на предубеждении. Предубеждение не является знанием, поскольку априорно возможно предполагать, но невозможно ничего знать достоверно. Выводы, которые делаются априорно, все ложные, ничем не обоснованные, произвольные, их единственным основанием является вера в истинность доопытного предположения и самоуверенность предполагающего. Этой самоуверенностью объясняются логические ошибки и заблуждения, возникающие по причине отсутствия сомнения в истинности высказывания, единственным основанием которого является не знание, а предположение. Самоуверенность возникает из-за путаницы понятий, в результате чего предположение принимается за знание. Без осознания этой путаницы и подмены понятий невозможно понимание ошибочности логического вывода, построенного на заблуждении. До тех пор, пока не произойдёт осознание причин заблуждения, невозможно его исправление. Однако осознание невозможно в самореферентных монологовых системах мышления, отвергающих само предположение об их дефектности. Избегая и отвергая диалог, аутисты, предполагающие непогрешимость собственного предположения, неспособны преодолеть то болезненное состояние, в котором они находятся, и выйти из круговорота самообоснования и самоуверенности. Отстаивание своей правоты вопреки очевидной ошибочности предвзятого суждения является симптомом болезненного состояния, неспособного распознать свою болезненность. Из таких дефектных логических систем, в которых истина подменяется догмой, происходят фундаментализм, деспотизм, нацизм, в том числе фундаментализм академической наукообразности, академический деспотизм, и академический нацизм. Иначе говоря, без эпистемологического обоснования высказывания являются бессмысленными. Не обременяя себя проверкой истинности своих высказываний, люди, мнящие себя экспертами в какой-либо области знания, заблуждаются относительно безошибочности своего знания, суждения, и мнения, что приводит к логическим ошибкам в процессе их рассуждения и умозаключения, а накопление логических ошибок без их исправления становится методом создания ложных систем обоснования, что и наблюдается в случае peer review и endorsement. {2} Со времени моей первой публикации в arXiv прошло почти 15 лет {3}, однако моя публикация не оказала никакого влияния на систему отбора рукописей для публикации в arXiv. Как и тогда от меня потребовали одобрения моей публикации от якобы проверенных экспертов, что я и сделал, направив письмо с описанием моего намерения ряду авторов, которых администраторы arXiv наделили правом рекомендации, а также самим администраторам arXiv. Поскольку большая часть моих писем осталась без ответа, а полученные мной ответы нисколько не способствовали достижению моей цели, я отправил письмо Научному директору arXiv с обоснованием моего требования, предоставить мне возможность публикации в arXiv. Копию моего письма я разослал тем же авторам, которым уже было направлено первое письмо. Переписка, которую я публикую в приложении {23}, позволяет сделать только один вывод: система отбора рукописей для публикации в arXiv является полным произволом, потому что решение о публикации или об отклонении публикации никем и никак не обосновывается. Однако мой собственный опыт лишь подтверждает и без того известное: никаких правил для публикации в arXiv не существует. Доказательством этого утверждения являются публикации, которых согласно правилам публикации в arXiv не должно было быть. Я имею ввиду так называемые COVID-19 e-prints, большинство из которых не являются научными публикациями. Именно поэтому они публиковались и продолжают публиковаться в arXiv по сей день без всякой проверки. Поиск по ключевым словам в arXiv позволяет получить представление о количестве подобных публикаций: 8,327 results for abstract: covid-19 0 results 2019 2,294 results 2020 2,180 results 2021 1,402 results 2022 1,002 results 2023 789 results 2024 660 results 2025 Или правила существуют, или их нет. Вышеприведённые примеры свидетельствуют о том, что тех правил, на соблюдении которых настаивают администраторы arXiv {4}, нет. Однако поиск по ключевым 18. Zackary Okun Dunivin, Paul E. Smaldino. Recommender systems, stigmergy, and the tyranny of popularity. arXiv:2506.06162. 19. Barve A, Wagner A. A latent capacity for evolutionary innovation through exaptation in metabolic systems. Nature. 2013 Aug 8;500(7461):203-6. 20. Hochberg ME, Marquet PA, Boyd R, Wagner A. Innovation: an emerging focus from cells to societies. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2017 Dec 5;372(1735):20160414. 21. Gordon Banks et al. Cognitive BPM as an Equalizer: Improving Access and Efficiency for Employees with (and without) Cognitive Disabilities. arXiv:2401.06375. 22. A. Poleev. Metaanalysis of psychoanalysis. (2016, 2019) 23. Протокол переписки, связанной с подачей заявки на публикацию двух моих рецензий в arXiv. Письма рассылались на ниже перечисленные адреса: Eduardo C. Garrido-Merchán [email protected] Maurice HT Ling [email protected] Jacob Morrison [email protected] Kaiqu Liang [email protected] Yoshua Bengio [email protected], [email protected] Robert Long [email protected] Eric Elmoznino [email protected], [email protected] Rufin VanRullen [email protected] Zihan Ding [email protected] Andrej Karpathy [email protected], [email protected] Murray Shanahan [email protected] Ilia Shumailov, Zakhar Shumaylov [email protected], [email protected] Ross Anderson [email protected], [email protected] Аrseny Мoskvichev [email protected], [email protected], arseny[email protected] Terrence J. Sejnowski [email protected], [email protected] Antonio Damasio [email protected] Hanna Damasio [email protected] Richard Lippmann [email protected] Alex Pentland [email protected] Eric B. Baum [email protected] Melanie Mitchell [email protected] Long Phan [email protected], justinphan31[email protected] Max Tegmark [email protected] Sanmi Koyejo [email protected] Guido Governatori [email protected] Antonio Norelli [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Debdeep Sanyal [email protected], [email protected] Hanti Lin [email protected] Ramin Zabih [email protected], [email protected] Steinn Sigurdsson [email protected] Thomas Dietterich [email protected] Krzysztof Apt [email protected] Ron Boisvert [email protected], [email protected] Carol Hutchins [email protected] Scott Delman [email protected] Jon Doyle [email protected] Ed Fox [email protected], [email protected] Lee Giles [email protected] Joseph Halpern [email protected] Michael Lesk [email protected], [email protected] Andrew McCallum [email protected] Steve Minton [email protected] Andrew Odlyzko [email protected] Michael O'Donnell [email protected] Stuart Shieber [email protected] Jeff Ullman [email protected] Licia Verde [email protected] Mark Doyle [email protected] Bill Freeman [email protected] Tara Holm [email protected] Neil Lawrence [email protected] Marta Mazzocco [email protected] Prineha Narang [email protected] Ronitt Rubinfeld [email protected] from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 to: [email protected], [email protected], … I want to include in arXiv two of my reviews of the following publications, which have been published in arXiv: 1. Joel Z. Leibo et al. A theory of appropriateness with applications to generative artificial intelligence. (2024) 2. Michaël Gillon. A Modular Theory of Subjective Consciousness for Natural and Artificial Minds. (2025) Someone already submitted my reviews instead of me: https://info.arxiv.org/help/submit_status.html submit/6902832 Submission ID: 6902832 submit/6911345 Submission ID: 6911345 Dr. Andrej Poleev from: [email protected] Oct 18, 2025 to me subject: arXiv endorsement request from Andrej Poleev (Andrej Poleev should forward this email to someone who's registered as an endorser for the cs.CL (Computation and Language) subject class of arXiv.) Andrej Poleev requests your endorsement to submit an article to the cs.CL section of arXiv. To tell us that you would (or would not) like to endorse this person, please visit the following URL: https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=SH3MYQ Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me I’m sorry, but I do not have time to evaluate endorsement requests. You should contact a colleague who is already endorsed for arXiv. Thomas G. Dietterich Chair, CS Section of arXiv (also known as CoRR: The Computing Research Repository) from: arXiv Technical Support <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 AH-163296 Re: new submission to me from: arXiv Technical Support <[email protected]> Oct 23, 2025 AH-163451 Re: new submission to me Dear [email protected] This message has been automatically generated in response to your email. Problems with new submissions that are reported before 16:00 US Eastern time are typically responded to the same day. Other issues may take longer for a response. Extensive help pages, answering common questions, are available at: https://info.arxiv.org/help Regards, arXiv User Support Team Ramin Zabih <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 to me, rdz, help We will take a look. from: Steinn Sigurðsson <[email protected]> Oct 23, 2025 cc: [email protected] to me Dear Dr. Poleev, I am a bit confused what you are proposing to submit to arXiv. arXiv does not generally accept reviews of papers. We do allow for “Comment On… arXiv Paper” as an option for criticism or dialogue on a paper, with the authors allowed a “Reply to Comment On…“ further iteration is expected to be done by submitting revised version respectively. "Comments On…” are expected to be in format of an article, with associated references and citations. The submission IDs you list are empty nothing is submitted to them. To proceed with a submission you need an endorsement from someone qualified to endorse you for the category you intend to submit to, the endorser would be vouching for you as an author and ought to be familiar with or willing to familiarize themselves the intended content being submitted Steinn Sigurðsson from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 23, 2025 to: Steinn Sigurðsson <[email protected]>, Ramin Zabih <[email protected]> cc: [email protected], [email protected] Уважаемый г-н Сигурдссон, Уважаемый г-н Забих, Я приму Ваше предложение опубликовать мои рецензии в качестве комментариев к публикациям, которые я рецензирую. С этой целью мне должен быть предоставлен полный доступ к соответствующему разделу архива, чтобы я мог завершить начатую подготовку моих рецензий к публикации. Однако я ожидаю от Вас и от других сотрудников и руководителей архива уважение моей добросовестности и моих прав, а также соблюдение американских федеральных законов, в частности, поправки 1 к конституции США. Также проверка моей компетенции и моей квалификации излишняя, поскольку они уже проверены в продолжении моей жизни, и доказаны моими научными публикациями и книгами. Уважение моих прав подразумевает также, что я решаю, что писать и публиковать, и никто не должен оспаривать это моё право. Я выступаю в качестве рецензента публикаций, которые по сути дела ненаучны, а их авторы не обладают навыками логического мышления, вследствие чего они совершают грубые логические ошибки при изложении их мыслей. Всё это я доказываю в тексте моих рецензий. И поскольку я рецензент этих публикаций, никто не имеет права меня рецензировать и запрещать мне публично критиковать рецензируемые публикации и их авторов. Любые попытки воспрепятствовать моему публичному высказыванию будут являются грубым нарушением моих прав и американских федеральных законов, и будут иметь серьёзные последствия для нарушителей. Я надеюсь, я ясно выразил мои представления о нашем сотрудничестве, целями которого должно быть сохранение высоких стандартов научной работы и отчётности. к.б.н. Андрей Полеев from: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me Andrej, Please let me know which ACM publications these papers were published in. I would need to check to see if this would violate any ACM Publications Policies, such as our single and double anonymous peer review policies, before responding to your request. Thank you in advance for sending this information to me and giving me some time to evaluate your request. Regards, Scott Delman ACM Director of Publications Assoc. Computing Machinery 1601 Broadway, 10th Floor New York, New York 10019 Office: +1-212-626-0659 Mobile: +1-212-729-7515 https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottdelman ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0381-0696 from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Delman, I don't know which ACM publications these papers were published in or not, I just want to get access to arXiv in order to submit my two reviews. Please visit the following URL: https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=SH3MYQ If that URL does not work for you, please visit http://arxiv.org/auth/endorse.php and enter the following six-digit alphanumeric string: Endorsement Code: SH3MYQ Thank you very much in advance for help. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me Andrej, I am confused by your messages. If these are not ACM Publications, then why are you contacting ACM. Without knowing which publications these articles are a part of, it is impossible to know if posting public peer reviews would be a violation of ACM Publications Policy. As you likely know, arXiv is not a Publisher (i.e.- they are a preprint service), so articles posted in arXiv are not peer reviewed or officially “published”. Please advise. Scott Delman ACM Director of Publications from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Scott Delman <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Delman, I contact you because your name is listed in Computer Science Section Editorial Committee of arXiv And 2nd problem: --------- Forwarded message --------- From: <[email protected]> Date: Sat, Oct 18, 2025 at 6:14 PM Subject: arXiv endorsement request from Andrej Poleev To: <[email protected]> (Andrej Poleev should forward this email to someone who's registered as an endorser for the cs.CL (Computation and Language subject class of arXiv.) Andrej Poleev requests your endorsement to submit an article to the cs.CL section of arXiv. To tell us that you would (or would not) like to endorse this person, please visit the following URL: https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=SH3MYQ If that URL does not work for you, please visit http://arxiv.org/auth/endorse.php and enter the following six-digit alphanumeric string: Endorsement Code: SH3MYQ from: Dietterich, Thomas <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to me This is not in fact my duty. My duty is to recruit and manage moderators. I have been helping you as a favor. According to arXiv rules, I was supposed to just refer you to the contact form. You need to find someone in your field who can read your submission and provide the endorsement. I am sorry, but I do not provide endorsements. I lack both the time and the expertise. Thomas G. Dietterich Chair, CS Section of arXiv (also known as CoRR: The Computing Research Repository) from: Nicholas Collins <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to me Hello and thank you for your email. I will be out of the office until Thursday, October 30th. If you are writing with an urgent request, please contact Joey Cifelli ([email protected]). If you are writing in regard to speaking requests for Professor Nelson, please contact Christine Lancman ([email protected]). If you are writing with a media request for Professor Nelson, please contact Ellen Qualls ([email protected]). Best, Nicholas Collins from: Doyle, John <[email protected]> Oct 29, 2025 to me There may be a significant delay in responses to emails sent to this address. If this is related to the QSE PhD program, or is urgent, please text me or contact Nishant Sule at [email protected] (QSE) or Elaine Mangelinkx at [email protected]. I will be in regular email contact 1 November 2025. 休暇中のためすぐに返信できません． 緊急の場合携帯電話におかけ下さい． 2025年11⽉1⽇までには平常通りに返信できるようになります。 Eduardo César Garrido Merchán <[email protected]> Oct 30, 2025 to me Dear Andrej, I do not know who are you nor dr Sigurdsson, please stop sending me emails. Best, Eduardo C. Garrido Merchán Profesor Propio Adjunto. Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos. ICADE Investigador - Instituto de Investigación Tecnológica (IIT) Mesa 424, Cuarta Planta, Sede Rey Francisco, 4. Github: https://github.com/EduardoGarrido90/ from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 to: Krzysztof Apt <[email protected]> Dear Mr.Apt, thank you for your reply. I am not hoping to post something in arXiv, but I want to include in arXiv two of my post-publication peer reviews of publications, which have been published in arXiv. Both my post-publication peer reviews are already published in my book entitled "Science in the 21st century" (in Russian). For your knowledge, I am editor and publisher of the Journal Enzymes ISSN 1867-3317, and also author of several books, here are some of them: http:// books.enzymes.at. Furthermore, I am polymath with deep experiences in biology, molecular biology, psychoanalysis, law, literature, linguistics, history and now in artificial intelligence, just look in internet. Because you are the member of the Advisory Board, it is your duty to assist me in submitting my post-publication peer reviews. Actually, arXiv endorsement system does not work because my inquiries remain unanswered or rejected for no reason. I don't want to steal your time, just visit the following URL: https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=SH3MYQ from: Krzysztof Apt <[email protected]> Nov 3, 2025 to me Dear Colleague, Arxiv is not a venue to submit reviews of papers, in particular not of other Arxiv papers.. Therefore I shall not endorse your papers. Sincerely, K. R. Apt from: Jeffrey Ullman <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 to me I am not sure why you are asking me for this. But I looked you up on Google Scholar, and unless I am finding the wrong person, it appears you do not publish or work in CS. You seem to be interested in enzymes. Am I missing something? regards, Jeffrey Ullman from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 to: Jeffrey Ullman <[email protected]> Dear Dr. Ullman, Yes, your first impression is wrong. I am not hoping to post something in arXiv, but I want to include in arXiv two of my post-publication peer reviews of publications, which have been published in arXiv. Both my post-publication peer reviews are already published in my book entitled "Science in the 21st century" (in Russian). For your knowledge, I am editor and publisher of the Journal Enzymes ISSN 1867-3317, and also author of several books,here are some of them: http:// books.enzymes.at. Furthermore, I am polymath with deep experiences in biology, molecular biology, psychoanalysis, law, literature, linguistics, history and now in artificial intelligence. Because you are the member of the Computer Science Section Editorial Committee, it is your duty to assist me in submitting my post-publication peer reviews. Actually, arXiv endorsement system does not work because my inquiries remain unanswered or rejected for no reason. I don't want to steal your time, just visit the following URL: https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=SH3MYQ If that URL does not work for you, please visit http://arxiv.org/auth/endorse.php and enter the following six-digit alphanumeric string: Endorsement Code: SH3MYQ I include copies of my reviews as pdf files. 1. Reciprocity. A Review of: Joel Z. Leibo et al. A theory of appropriateness with applications to generative artificial intelligence. (2024) 2. Narration and reality. A Review of: Michaël Gillon. A Modular Theory of Subjective Consciousness for Natural and Artificial Minds. (2025) (in Russian) If you have other questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Jeffrey Ullman <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 to me I'm sorry. I cannot help you. Your articles, which seem to be poorly translated (for example, the first talks about "psychopaths," which I doubt you intended) have nothing to do with computer science, and do not demonstrate your qualifications to comment about CS. regards, Jeffrey Ullman from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 22, 2025 to: Jeffrey Ullman <[email protected]> Dear Dr. Ullman, "psychopaths" you mentioned in your reply refer to my competency as psychoanalyst and author of corresponding books http://books.enzymes.at. My competence in computer science demonstrate my other books, for example one about ChatGPT (2023). Actually, ChatGPT and other AIs are "diagnosed" as "psychopaths": https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.07377 Do GPT Language Models Suffer From Split Personality Disorder? The Advent Of Substrate-Free Psychometrics https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.08016 Emergence of psychopathological computations in large language models https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.16150 PRISON: Unmasking the Criminal Potential of Large Language Models But you have no competence in psychopathology. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me Before I endorse you, I would have to see the papers you are hoping to post. Based on the titles, cs.CL does not seem like the right subject area. -- Joe Halpern from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Halpern, thank you for your reply. I am not hoping to post something in arXiv, but I want to include in arXiv two of my post-publication peer reviews of publications, which have been published in arXiv. Both my post-publication peer reviews are already published in my book entitled "Science in 21st century" (in Russian). For your knowledge, I am editor and publisher of the Journal Enzymes ISSN 1867-3317, and also author of several books,here are some of them: http:// books.enzymes.at. Furthermore, I am polymath with deep experiences in biology, molecular biology, psychoanalysis, law, literature, linguistics, history and now in artificial intelligence, just look in internet. If you have other questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Dr. Andrej Poleev from: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to me I'm afraid that I will still have to see the papers you are planning to post before I endorse you. -- Joe Halpern from: Andrej Poleev <[email protected]> Oct 20, 2025 to: Joe Halpern <[email protected]> Dear Mr. Halpern, as mentioned before, you can free download my book from my site http:// books.enzymes.at. Especially, my book with two my post-publication peer reviews of publications, which have been published in arXiv has following address: http://enzymes.at/download/episteme.pdf I hope you can read it in Russian, or ask your colleagues who can read Russian, or translate it from Russian into English. Dr. Andrej Poleev