Sam writes:
>Skepticism is good. I don't really disagree much here but you seem to be
>confusing ontological questions (what exists) with epistemological ones
(how we
>can know what exists). The objectivity of truth and the attempts to know
it are
>different claims. The latter will be more open to influence from external
>factors than the former. Truth can be understood a number of ways, through
>convergence, self-evidence and empirical confirmation to name a few.
of course this is a claim you make. how we think we know is conceptually related to what we think exists. epistemology and ontology are inextricably intertwined. yes, it's a claim and i will defend it. i've typed this before, but maybe tomorrow morning i'll bake up another rant.
kelley "And all you can do is more heavy revolvers."