What is exploiticism?Edit
The word "exploiticism" is derived from "exploitation", but the meaning is somewhat different. Exploiticism is the concept of some values being intrinsic and others instrumental. Asking if someone did something for egoistic or altruistic reasons in cases where both are plausible is a symptom of exploiticism. Exploiticism is all about dividing values into intrinsic and instrumental. It is linked to exploitation by being a justification. See advice of ways to stop justifying and multiple stages of justification poisoning. It is based on the assumption of discrete identities.
What is dogmaticism?Edit
The word "dogmaticism" is derived from "dogmatism" but does not mean exactly the same. Dogmaticism is the belief that irrational assumptions are anyhow inevitable and that rationality can only act within the limits set by irrational factors. It is based on the assumption that some assumption must be exempt from criticism.
Two sides of the same...Edit
Both exploiticism and dogmaticism are based on the assumption of a linear chain of judging things. In the case of exploiticism, it takes the form of assuming the existence of a kernel of value and identity which other, instrumental things merely serve. The selfish gene concept is based on an exploiticist view of value, in this case identifying genes as the kernel of identity. In the case of dogmaticism, it takes the form of assuming that explanations of reality must be based on a core assumption that cannot be tested.
The belief in a kernel of self is refuted in self-organization#Catalytic loop. See also exceptionless regulation. It is also falsified by cases of symbiogenesis such as that with intestinal bacteria, which blurs the whole definition of "self". See also what is self-awareness?. As shown in moderating the Gaia/Medea debate, brain#Rapid evolution exists, so all computationalism makes racist predictions and too many lethal mutations for natural selection to clean up, the whole idea of fixed limits lasting individual lifetimes makes many falsified predictions. And if all rational reasoning had to be based on an irrational fundamental assumption, then the claim that they must would itself be unprovable. And falsification itself implies a predictive-falsificative cycle where nothing forms any linear immunity from correction.