Dear James,

This is a very interesting subject where my ignorance is infinite from the philosophical viewpoint, but which is evolving very quickly in practice. Let me to introduce a subject that I have followed with interest only as a chess player.

Since that in 1997 the program Deep Blue could win to Gary Kasparov, nowadays it seems that the artificial intelligence has made a great advance. The other program DeepMind even didn't need to store a great library and it can learn by itself presenting new strategies which were neglected by humans since the old times of the history of the chess game. I think that these kind of evolutions are going to increase the epistemology field our mental behaviour even much more than it was made other sciences because it is putting us in front of "something" thinking in a real very different form

It tells us that human mind is constantly involved in an unended quest striving towards new spheres of knowledge and experience searching for better ways to understand the world. In this process, its main goal and perhaps its principal job is to decipher ,discover and fabricate different generalizations in the absence of concrete proof.

The need for knowledge is an essential part of human development and thereby mind. Hunter gathers in the distant past sought for reasons for animal behaviour in order to hunt successfully, and that knowledge was fed down the generations and recorded, and that has been the process since with ceilings provided by environments or contact between groups. Thereby, absolutely essential facet of the human mind.

Epistemology tells us that the human mind utilizes some or all of these to achieve knowledge: perception, sensation, intuition, reason (deduction, induction, abduction) — perhaps even faith as some religious believers claim. The mind or brain is a thoroughly epistemic engine. Its downside is the metapathology that can result from too much self-awareness. Sometimes the examined life is not worth living either.

Epistemology reveals that the human mind is continually in a process of becoming.

I think I want to put science somewhere in the middle of mind and epistemology, because experimental science can tell us what the practical limits of human perception and judgement are. We know that the human perception system takes short cuts to representation of objects in the world around us (filling in gaps and making sense of physically impossible situations), and that there are likely distinct modes of judgment (see Kahneman's work). Such considerations are central to a theory of knowledge, since most theories of knowledge start from perceptions, and try to make sense of human judgement.

The study of artificial and biological neural networks can shed light on how we make judgments too, in that we could compare human judgment with judgements made by different artificial neural architectures, and put forward hypotheses about the way that human judgement works.

All that said, epistemology might be an abstraction of the details of how humans, other animals or machines make judgements, and might be the steps common to all cognition. To take a basic empiricist epistemology, sensations impinge on the senses, and the distinctive parts of the sensations can be classified as ideas, which can then be arranged into a hierarchy of increasing abstraction. The steps are formation of ideas (concepts) from perception, generalisation and instantiation of those ideas. We could say that we need a sensation to concept mapping (function), and rules of generalisation (abstraction) and instantiation (application). This is similar to the lambda calculus in computation theory.

The mind is not a final structure, but is constantly formed

The fact that epistemology emerges only in certain societies (it was not developed in every society we know) as a reflection about high-level abstract reflections, gives a lot to think. In my view, it tells us that the mind develops its structures, in part, by organizing knowledge available in order to extend both understanding and competences to act.

Dear James F. Peters ,

Epistemology ( theory of knowledge) is one of the main theories in our life. In particular, its relationship with our mind. I am not a specialist in this domain, but I think you are trying to make some mathematical model that may describe the human mind activities. The main problem with this issue is that epistemology is a combination of physical and nonphysical components. I mean the following: To gain knowledge, one needs to do many physical actions using his\her senses and then kept it in our minds at a place in our mind, called memory. BUT knowledge itself is not a physical quantity!! So, how one can make a real model that interprets such mystery facts, where physical (neurons) carries nonphysical (knowledge) into a place (mind) that full of ambiguities. In my opinion, it is a tough task. Any progress in this field may be accepted as psychological, philosophical, spiritual, etc.  Do you think that it is possible to create a mathematical model that describe such immaterial actions? Where logic and proofs are dominant to gain the property " Mathematical".

Wish you and your team good results

Best regards

Epitemology make the human mind systematic. This is needed by millennilal humans, millennial human thinking.

Its interesting to know and learn ! I am curious to know more !

One of the most important topics that is being discussed today is epistemology. This field is one of the most important fields of philosophy in the twentieth century and has grown more than any other fields.

In the definition of epistemology we can say that it is part of the philosophy in which they deal with science, belief, cognition and conditions, and epistemology is a theory about these concepts.

But let's look at it from another angle:

What we experience is full of perceptual qualities that are real, unambiguous and undeniable for each of us. But at the same time, the problem is that all of these perceptual qualities pass through our minds.

We do not have access to each other's mind content.

And We will never know whether the green color or the smell of flowers for others is what we perceive.

The sounds, smells and senses of touch and thoughts and worries and pleasures and emotions. These mental experiences somehow make everything that is our identity and existence.

The brain is essentially a parallel processing system, and there is no single place for decisions to be made, according to British psychologist Susan Blackmore. That "the brain is the commander of the organs" is not the correct interpretation,

What is called "consciousness", and with the advent of modern science, is still one of the great mysteries of science.

Now the question arises

What's in our brain cells that make us feel conscious?