Central Questions...

Estudia: Now, what is the central question of epistemology?

Philo: The central question is what is the meaning of is.

Estudia: Hahhaha.... very funny but I know that’s not it. Seriously, what is it?

Philo: What is knowledge and how do we acquire it? That is the central question.

Estudia: What is knowledge? I know that you want me to be objective, so when I perceive objects, I do it automatically, but when I form concepts, I must know something about the objects. I had to grasp it perceptually and I had to integrate it into my conceptual faculty by an active process. This measurement omission approach which I chose or learned or whatever. That is knowledge isn’t it?

Philo: Yes, but the important point to remember is that your concepts must conform to reality. Your knowledge is the grasp of that object. In order to grasp it you had to use your abstracting and integrating capabilities, and that is not automatic like your perceptual abilities; hence it is not automatically correct either. So you need a method of thinking that will allow you to remain connected to reality.

Estudia: Isn’t the measurement omission process inherent in my conceptual faculty? Isn’t that how you said our consciousness works?

Philo: Yes, but we want to identify a way to guide our minds in the aspects of concept formation that are under our control.

Estudia: Do we need a method of cognition for important things like the meaning of our lives? We aren’t automatically right and so our conclusions about what method to think with will be in error. How can we ever know truth if we aren’t automatically right?

Philo: Ah, my little one, you have articulated the skeptics’ arguments perfectly. If you were religious, you would have come to the conclusion that we need to just turn our minds over to God. He is always right, not us mere humans. But you see it is for this very reason that we must define a method of thinking. We are fallible and we must have a method to guide our thinking. It is both necessary to know reality and it is possible. That is the purpose of epistemology.

Estudia: Hummm... well, whatever method you come up with, it has to take into account the facts of reality which are external to us, and the way our minds work. You said that consciousness is a faculty―the faculty of perceiving that which exists; and, since it is something, it has identity, and has a certain way of working.

Philo: That’s right, and the mind must act according to its nature. This is what it means to be objective. You have a theory of concepts down now. And you know how to form them. So if you wish to be objective you must adhere to reality by following certain rules. You have to use some method that is based on facts and is appropriate to your way of thinking. You see, existents themselves are not objective; they just are what they are. It is you mind, the way you think, that is objective or nonobjective.

Estudia: I like to think of myself as being objective. I always try to focus on reality, but that does take some resolve as lots of people do not. What other choice do we have? Nothing else makes sense does it?

Philo: No, nothing else makes sense, but there are two other choices. One is to look for a shortcut, to stare out, or inward, or upward, and wait for something to be revealed to you.

Estudia: By God?

Philo: Or, by your subconscious, or by the ether, or intuition or extrasensory perception or whatever.

Estudia: What’s the other choice?

Philo: To just give up. Ignore reality and turn inward. Create your own internal universe, or the universe as created by a group of individuals. To be pragmatic and know that there is no truth and whatever works for you is what is right.

Estudia: So, if objectivity requires a method of thinking, what is it?

Philo: Ha... nice try, again. Next time. I’ll see you later.