The Correction Trilemma: A Diagnostic Heuristic for Trade-offs in Epistemic Systems

Epistemic systems—distributed configurations of human agents, algorithms, data infrastructures, and institutions that collectively generate, filter, and revise knowledge claims—exhibit persistent tensions among three capacities: registration (the entry of counterevidence into the formal record), traceability (the ability to locate errors to their specific sources), and receptivity (the capacity to sustain heterodox claims and implement corrective actions). This paper introduces the Correction Trilemma as a diagnostic heuristic for identifying such tensions and guiding institutional reflection. Under realistic constraints—bounded rationality, finite resources, and functional interdependence—efforts to strengthen any two of these capacities often impose costs on the third. The term "trilemma" is used to denote this recurring pattern of trade offs, not an impossibility theorem. The framework provides a conceptual vocabulary and three pathological patterns (Corrective Chaos, Elite Dogmatism, Analytical Paralysis) that help diagnose which dimension is systematically sacrificed. We illustrate the heuristic through case studies drawn from psychology's replication crisis, AI based medical diagnosis, and climate modeling intercomparisons (CMIP), showing how trade offs can be managed but not eliminated. The framework is offered as a complement to existing philosophical and metascience work—a common language for analyzing correction dynamics, anticipating unintended consequences of reforms, and designing more self aware epistemic systems.