Thanks for the read and the deep philosophical dive.

I may not fully understand the terms 'ontology' or 'epistemology' as you are using them here, but let me address this.

Ontologically I am saying there are at least three different forms of 'data': objective, subjective, and social (intersubjective).

Epistomologically I am saying there are at least three tests or valuations of each form of data. Objective data can be 'true' or not. Subjective data can be 'beautiful' or not. ( Do I have an emotional reaction to it?) Social data test is it 'good' or not (for society and people).

The problem that I only hint at here are people who use one system to 'prove' another one. They use science to prove something is beautiful. Or they use social good to prove something is true. Or because something is beautiful they try to prove it is good. I call this 'flattening' one form of knowledge into another. In Modernity all forms of data have been flattened into science and proved to be 'true'. Social science in particular is guilty of this. Postmodernism takes social good, and makes it the gauge of what is true.

I'm saying we must 'unpack' these systems to get at real knowledge and use it correctly.