Much to think about..
I'm not sure I'm qualified to determine what is "knowledge" or "truth" for others, much less myself..
Many people base their concept of truth on false beliefs purporting to be truth..
Many accept the authority of those claiming to have knowledge of the truth..
I have to go with my personal life experience, what I have learned, those whose opinions I respect, all of which is subjective..
Even though I am sure that what I perceive to be real may in fact be false, or totally beyond my ability to percieve, or my comprehension.
Dammach, this very fact is the age-old start of inquiry into how we know and whether what we know is really there.
And if I understand StJaques, he says that because of this possibility of untruth, we need a systematic correlation for validity.
There are two basic kinds of correlations for validity and both like to be called true:
(a) order (part to the whole or series to an end) of items within a set among other sets.And now I have to go on an errand, but more later. It is enough to say that most of the "isms" are when a certain set from (a) is raised to (b).
(b) order (part to the whole or series to an end) of items to an absolute singular reference point.