Epistemology 1 - Introduction

I want to start a series of articles on epistemology. Everyone should/can write a note, a thought, one line maybe to contribute to this. I really have no plans for this, and no idea what topics will be covered, how those topics will fit or not fit together, or how long the series will be. I do know, however, that epistemology is to me at this moment the most overarchingly important question I face.

First, what is epistemology?

The word "epistemology" has two distinct meanings:

• As an academic study (an inquiry): Epistemology is the study of the method by which we acquire knowledge, the study of the rubric by which we evaluate all of life, the study of the question, “what is true about going about finding what is true?”
• As a pragmatic method (a conclusion): Epistemology is the useful method by which one approaches truth claims. This side of the definition includes ownership of epistemology, and not just study.
  

Definitions other people came up with:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/epistemology

When I took Dr. Cushman’s philosophy class last year at Northland, epistemology was presented by lecture and textbook as one branch of the tree of philosophy. The branches were: God, Man, Metaphysics, Purpose (teleology), Ethics, and Epistemology. Presented thus, we may learn to approach epistemology as one of six (or more) “ultimate questions.” This isn’t quite right. Epistemology is not like the other categories in one main way: whereas the other categories are primarily contentual, epistemology is methodological. The other categories emphasize what content you believe about them specifically, while epistemology emphasizes what method you use universally. Put another way, the other categories present the question, “what do you believe?” while epistemology presents the question, “how do you believe?” If the other categories are destinations, epistemology is a road.
From this I conclude that epistemology is more indicative of, more responsible for, more…pertaining to the composition of a person’s character (beliefs, attitudes, convictions, etc.) than any other topic of study, bar none. It is the philosophy of philosophy; it is the ultimate question - how do you know?

Reasons why epistemology is the ultimate question:

1. One cannot believe something academically without using an epistemology of some form (regardless of latency).
2. One cannot believe something religiously without using an epistemology.
3. One cannot act involuntarily (for example, lose control of emotions) without using an epistemology.
4. One cannot observe something without using an epistemology.
5. One cannot argue any point without using an epistemology.
6. One cannot reach any conclusion at all without using an epistemology.

Does it seem to you right now that I am straining a little on this point? That I very much want to demonstrate the supremacy of epistemology, and am willing to exaggerate a bit to prove my point? You may object, “How, if epistemology is so important to life, do not 7 out of 10 people know what it is?” A very good point that gives us an important observation. If we talk about epistemology in the sterile, scrubbed-up words of academia, yes, it is irrelevant to life. Who even thinks about epistemology? That’s the point – no one. Epistemology defines our lives so thoroughly that we cannot see it; it is so responsible that we do not consider it responsible at all. Philosophers sound the strangest when they describe the most obvious things. Obvious things sound strange when described. The word “epistemology” fails to register with us because it describes something so close to us that we never noticed it before. The question, “why do you believe that?” sounds horrifyingly obvious to us when we hear it because, certainly we must have a reason, but we just don’t know what it is. How did we never ask ourselves that?

Ok, well let’s ask ourselves.

When approaching the topic of epistemology, we meet immediately, immediately, with an impasse. Epistemology asks, “how do we go about believing?” And right now we’re asking, “how do we go about epistemology?” So it seems we need an epistemology for epistemology. Then we need a third epistemology. And so on. If my six propositions above are correct, then we cannot even budge our toes onto the subject until we have figured it out completely.

So, how shall we progress? Thoughts?