The American Epistemology Institute
Posts
ARES: A Metaphysical Standard for Law, Media, and Institutions

ARES: A Metaphysical Standard for Law, Media, and Institutions

Restoring Metaphysical Grounding to Policy Evaluation

June 27, 2025

Abstract

The American Realist Evaluation System (ARES) is the American Epistemology Institute’s rubric for determining whether a law, institution, or cultural artifact conforms to the realist metaphysics that informed the American founding. Grounded in the Aristotelian-Thomist hierarchy (metaphysics → ethics → politics → law) ARES employs a binary “Realist Gate” (R-Gate) followed by a five-domain diagnostic index. This entry (a) reiterates ARES’s purpose, (b) provides an expanded explanation of every sentinel question, and (c) demonstrates their application by evaluating the United States Constitution and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

1 Purpose and Philosophical Foundation

Classical realism posits that being precedes knowing (Aristotle, Metaphysics IV.1, 1003a21). When this order is inverted and contingent epistemic constructs are placed above ontology, public reason necessarily shatters into incompatible “realities,” because minds that are no longer jointly anchored to an extra-mental order of being can appeal only to self-referential frameworks. ARES is designed to restore the primacy of metaphysics and to give citizens a shared, precise grammar for diagnosing departures from objective reality.

2 ARES Architecture

2.1 The Realist Gate (R-Gate) — Sentinel Questions in Detail

Sentinel	Expanded Criterion	Diagnostic Cues (Pass / Fail)
S1 — Objective Order	Does the artifact explicitly or implicitly affirm that reality exists independently of human will or consensus?	Pass: Invokes “laws of nature,” “self-evident truths,” intrinsic properties. Fail: Describes reality as “socially constructed,” “negotiated,” or infinitely malleable.
S2 — Fixed Human Nature	Does it treat man as a rational animal possessing an intrinsic, stable telos rather than a self-creating project?	Pass: References “unalienable rights,” duties rooted in common humanity. Fail: Portrays identity, dignity, or moral status as products of choice, state issuance, or technological redesign.
S3 — Natural-Law Morality	Does moral authority flow from a discoverable moral order rather than from legislative fiat or utilitarian calculus?	Pass: Acknowledges higher law that limits human law. Fail: Locates the ultimate “ought” in majority vote, administrative expertise, or collective preference.
S4 — Classical Terminology	Are terms such as “truth,” “right,” “person,” and “justice” used in their classical senses, without euphemistic drift or neologistic re-definition?	Pass: “Right” = moral claim antecedent to the state. Fail: “Right” redefined as state benefit; “dollar” untethered from weight or specie; proliferation of fluidist neologisms.
S5 — Bottom-Up Sovereignty	Does the artifact recognize that legitimate authority originates in persons (under God) and is delegated upward through covenantal structures?	Pass: Enumerated powers, federalism, subsidiarity clauses. Fail: Central board or agency vested with power to override lower jurisdictions without explicit derived consent.

R-Gate Outcome

1 = Realist-Conformant (eligible for positive endorsement)
0 = Constructivist (cannot be endorsed, but still receives full domain scoring)

2.2 Domain Index (0–5 each; mean × 20 = 0–100)

Domain	Focus	“5” Anchor
Metaphysics (M)	Ontology & telos	Explicit affirmation of objective being
Ethics (E)	Moral derivation	Direct natural-law grounding
Political Form (P)	Power structure	Covenant-federalism & subsidiarity
Language Integrity (L)	Term stability	Zero semantic drift
Consequences (C)	Empirical outcomes	Evident human flourishing & liberty

Each domain is rated from zero to five, then the mean is calculated and multiplied by 20 to give the domain score. Fives in each domain yield a score of 100; any lower mark reduces the composite but never overrides an R-Gate = 0 verdict regardless of how high the domain score has reached. Anything less—even a single euphemistic re-definition or a utilitarian carve-out in the ethics clause—would drop that domain to 4 or lower, disqualifying a perfect score.

2.3 Why ARES Employs a Binary R-Gate and a Graduated Domain Index

2.3.1 Metaphysical Logic: The Law of Non-Contradiction (LNC)

Aristotle’s LNC—“the same attribute cannot both belong and not belong to the same subject in the same respect” (Metaphysics IV.3, 1005b 19-25)—governs all coherent reasoning. Realism and constructivism are mutually exclusive unary predicate extensions (i.e., properties) about being:

Realism: Reality is mind-independent; truth is correspondence with reality.
Constructivism: Reality is (in whole or in part) manufactured by will, language, or social power. Truth is relative.

If an evaluated artifact affirms even one constructivist premise, it asserts A and not A at the ontological level. Under the LNC, the presence of a single contradiction renders the whole internally incoherent as a realist document. Hence realism + constructivism collapses to constructivism, not “mixed realism.”

2.3.2 Function of the R-Gate (Binary)

The R-Gate applies five sentinel questions to test for any contradiction with realist first principles. Because the LNC is absolute, the gate must itself be binary:

Gate Result	Logical Meaning
1 (Pass)	No detected contradiction; artifact is internally realist at the level of being.
0 (Fail)	At least one contradiction; artifact is metaphysically constructivist.

The binary verdict honors the LNC by refusing to average incompatible ontologies, thus refuting dialectical reasoning.

2.3.3 Role of the Domain Index

Once the gate establishes ontological status, the Domain Index measures degree and pattern of alignment or misalignment within five practical spheres (Metaphysics, Ethics, Political Form, Language, Consequences). Its 0-to-100 continuum serves three purposes absent from the gate:

Granular Diagnosis – This describes where reform may be possible (a realist bill with linguistic drift that could be cleaned up, for example).
Comparative Tracking – Allows longitudinal or cross-artifact comparisons even among gate-failures.
Educational Clarity – Shows students and policymakers which facets of realism are most frequently eroded.

A gate-fail artifact may score 9 or 99, but the binary label stands; the index merely quantifies how it errs, not whether it is realist.

3 Demonstration Evaluations (Sentinel Detail Included)

3.1 United States Constitution (1787/1789)

Sentinel	Pass / Fail	Evidence & Commentary
S1	Pass	The Preamble’s reference to “a more perfect union” presupposes an objective common good; the Declaration (incorporated by reference in founding debates) cites “laws of nature and of nature’s God.”
S2	Pass	The Bill of Rights treats speech, assembly, and self-defense as inherent to human nature—no clause suggests these capacities are state-bestowed or fluid.
S3	Pass	Amendment IX (“The enumeration of certain rights… shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”) acknowledges pre-political rights.
S4	Pass	“Right,” “liberty,” and “person” match classical definitions; no term is re-defined by statute.
S5	Pass	Tenth Amendment reserves undelegated powers to states or to the people; sovereignty rises bottom-up.

R-Gate: 1 (Realist-Conformant)

Domain	Score	Key Rationale
Metaphysics	5	Ontological realism implicit.
Ethics	5	Natural-right theory explicit.
Political Form	4	Commerce Clause softens subsidiarity.
Language Integrity	5	No semantic drift in core terms.
Consequences	5	Historical liberty/prosperity evidence.

Composite Detail Index: 96

3.2 Federal Reserve Act (Pub. L. 63-43, 1913)

Sentinel	Pass / Fail	Evidence & Commentary
S1	Fail	Legislative findings treat currency as an elastic instrument to be “managed,” detaching value from intrinsic properties (gold or goods) and rooting it in policy consensus.
S2	Fail	By empowering the Board to expand or contract purchasing power, the Act subordinates universal human need for a stable measure to technocratic preference, implying plastic economic anthropology.
S3	Fail	Good monetary order becomes whatever the Federal Open Market Committee deems beneficial for aggregate outcomes—utility replaces natural-law justice (e.g., inviolability of honest weights and measures).
S4	Fail	The statute re-defines “reserve,” “dollar,” and “credit”; each can fluctuate without reference to fixed substance.
S5	Fail	Authority originates not in local constituencies but in a central board appointed by the President and insulated from direct democratic recall, overruling state banking autonomy.

R-Gate: 0 (Constructivist)

Domain	Score	Key Rationale
Metaphysics	0	Nominalist view of economic value.
Ethics	1	Accepts distributive inflationary transfers.
Political Form	1	Centralized, unelected power.
Language Integrity	0	Systemic semantic drift.
Consequences	1	Historical inflation, boom–bust cycles.

Composite Detail Index: 12

4 Conclusion

ARES demonstrates how each sentinel safeguards a distinct layer of metaphysical integrity. Even when a policy topic appears purely technical, each question exposes whether its assumptions align with or subvert objective reality. This is why the Constitution clears every sentinel and earns a near-perfect domain score, whereas the Federal Reserve Act fails all sentinels, revealing deep metaphysical and ethical departures from reality. In an era where epistemic constructs often eclipse reality, ARES offers Americans a disciplined method to re-center civic deliberation on the first principles of realist philosophy.

References

Aristotle. (1984). The complete works of Aristotle (J. Barnes, Ed.; Rev. Oxford trans.). Princeton University Press.

Aquinas, T. (1948). Summa Theologica (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). Benziger Brothers. (Original work published 1265–1274)

Madison, J., Hamilton, A., & Jay, J. (1787–1789). The Constitution of the United States.

United States Congress. (1913). Federal Reserve Act, Pub. L. 63-43, 38 Stat. 251.