why do i see epistemology barely getting any attention on this board? would it not make sense to make a serious study of it BEFORE reading ANYTHING WHATSOEVER (whether scientific, philosophical, literary) with the purpose of gaining knowledge? furthermore, given the common obsession with the spookbuster among litizens + the slighty autistic (since: analytic) enterprise of the study of epistemology you'd expect to see a serious interest in epistemological matters. are most of yall dilettantes who dont really care about knowing after all?
>read entire OP looking for some mention of concrete topic in epistemology to talk about
>nothing
>>8832681
i primarily wondered why the only sane way to start ANY intellectual enterprise isnt acknowledged. if theres a branch of phil that should be taught from the youngest ages, it's this. hit me up with a epistemological topic and we'll turn this into a central
>>8832677
>thought criminal detected
Epistemology is taboo in polite society these days. How can one properly fathom its depths, when a rational posture to assume for the initiation of its evaluation, solipsism (OP pic related), has become a byword for aberrational behavior, and an insult to be lobbed preemptively at perceived foes, in spheres both private and public?
>>8832872
read the op and stop shouting you unparalleled autistic dunce.