Discussion: Doppelgänger and Sunstone: No Holds Barred

[doppelgänger]

Is a person's epistemology the "underwear" for their faith?

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by doppelgänger

Is a person's epistemology the "underwear" for their faith?

A person's epistemology would usually be closer to them -- and more revealing -- than their faith, don't you think?

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

A person's epistemology would usually be closer to them -- and more revealing -- than their faith, don't you think?

You might be right, Phil. But since this relates to a no holds barred struggle for the very survival of western civilization, I can only assume that your ignorance is a product of having been dropped on your head as a child.

Perhaps underwear is that space that connects epistemology with belief. It conceals the epistemology that lies behind belief, even from yourself! What say you?

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by doppelgänger

Perhaps underwear is that space that connects epistemology with belief. It conceals the epistemology that lies behind belief, even from yourself! What say you?

It is obvious to me that you have somehow managed to come up with a valid metaphor even despite your early-in-life experience of having your brains addled by colliding head-on with an 18 wheel truck.

However, that tragic accident seems to have blinded you to at least one needed clarification here: If we speak of underwear as the space that connects epistemology with belief, we must be careful to assert that "epistemology" refers to one's actual, living epistemology, and not to one's represented or merely conceived of epistemology. The former is the thing commented on, the thing mapped, the terrain of epistemology. The latter is the commentary, the map of epistemology -- anything we in our wisdom say about our epistemologies.

Surely, we must distinquish between an epistemology and a representation of an epistemology -- in much the same way we can distinquish between a barn and a representation of a barn.

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

However, that tragic accident seems to have blinded you to at least one needed clarification here: If we speak of underwear as the space that connects epistemology with belief, we must be careful to assert that "epistemology" refers to one's actual, living epistemology, and not to one's represented or merely conceived of epistemology. The former is the thing commented on, the thing mapped, the terrain of epistemology. The latter is the commentary, the map of epistemology -- anything we in our wisdom say about our epistemologies.

Surely, we must distinquish between an epistemology and a representation of an epistemology -- in much the same way we can distinquish between a barn and a representation of a barn.

Undoubtedly. And with that détente was reached, and the world moved back from the brink of what only moments before had seemed certain disaster . . .

[Pariah]

Beautiful conversation.
A majority of the questions cropped up in my thinking, but never got put to words.

The one that stuck out was the difference in spirituality between non-theistic sects of philosophy such as deism, pantheism, panentheism, etc.