Why does one need it to be aesthetically tinged? Another approach is virtue epistemology, where we count as true that which trusted sources and processes say is true. That is, the drug dog who has been right in the past is one we listen to in the future. The scientific project that makes predictions that turn out to be accurate is the one we listen to.
> That is, the drug dog who has been right in the past is one we listen to in the future
If we're in a situation where we get good data about what's right, we can just do science and it doesn't really matter what authorities or dogs think.
The place where you need non-scientific epistemologies is when you don't have good feedback data.
And sometimes even when there is data, bad predictors can mutually self reinforce. Racist cops arrest more black kids, more black kids get convicted, that proves racist cops are good predictors of criminality. It's not true, but the data says it's true.
It's equivalent to a scientist doing many studies and only publishing the ones that are positive. The stats only work for independent measures but nothing is independent especially when you are using predictions to make policy.
Scientism is good for making better predictions, but it won't tell you how to live. You could be a utilitarian and declare that you will live to the end of maximizing your utility (however you define that) but the problem with utilitarianism is that omniscience is elusive.
That means that there are certain things which aren't answerable, at least not easily or precisely. But that isn't a problem with the epistemology you adopt: some things are going to be hard or impossible to know no matter how you define knowing.
Or, "how to live" isn't an epistemological question. So demanding that an epistemology accept aesthetic standards to accommodate concerns about how to live is confused.
It's not an aesthetic judgment, though. Aesthetics has to do with beauty. Epistemology has to do with defining knowledge and knowability. The commenter I responded to says we need the one for the other, but hasn't offered any justification.
