I would like to start a topic on the notion of verifying epistemologies.
quote:
Straggler in Message 468:
... an epystemology that is known to be able to demonstrate itself as reliable...
This is the comment that spurred my desire to discuss this, but this being off-topic in that thread, I decided to start a new one.
In response to the notion of there being such a thing as a demonstrably reliable epistemology I maintain that it is impossible to verify an epistemology, where verification consists of evidence external to the epistemology that supports its claimsprimarily the claims being that 'X is true, i.e., real, by virtue of being knowable', where X may be anything from a particular thing to an entire class of things with or without a common feature. I deny the possibility of such evidence, and believe that the best any epistemology can achieve is internal consistency, but never verification.
Lacking the ability to verify an epistemology, I find it incredible to claim one to be demonstrably reliable, as demonstrable reliability is inherently a reliability which can be backed by external evidence (that is, verified), with reliability merely being the notion of believing in the veracity of something. Furthermore, an epistemology is inherently incapable of proving its reliability of its own means, as per the nature of an epistemology.
So, how is it that an epistemology can demonstrate itself as reliable? Is it possible to verify an epistemology?
Jon
I am leaning toward Coffee House, but the Admins know best, so I put the topic here on the chance that there may be a more suitable forum
Check out the Purple Quill!
™ Version 4.2