Epistemology is validatable. "To never know" is just ignorance. (that is not meaning "unpolite", but the lack of knowledge or ability to realise). If a phenomena exists, then it has to have been created, a result of causes or conditions or conceptualised thinking. All words, all numbers, are exactly that, the result of conceptualised thought. Whether they have more than one meaning, or have evolved from their original meaning, again, could and should be validated as to where, when and why. To think, is a process that requires more than one sense. To think requires a whole set of senses and causes and conditions that lead to the substance and tools that enables you to "think". It is not an automatic achievement, but a learnt process.
-------------------------------------------------- From: "einseele" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 2:10 PM To: "Epistemology" <[email protected]> Subject: [epistemology 10607] Re: Is there a moderator for this group? > > And who is going to tell us what is or is not epistemology, and how > incomprehensible that something is > Would that person be you. I'm curious about "rid ourselves of..." > > Well, you never know (to never know is well within epistemology, I > think) > > > > On 7 jun, 18:13, michalchik <[email protected]> wrote: >> I was wondering if this group would function better if we rid >> ourselves of some of the stuff that is clearly not epistemology or >> that is totally incomprehensible to any but the author. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
