Epistemological confusion is an integral part of the human experience, a perennial problem that faced our Neanderthal ancestors as much as it does neuroscientists and astrophysicists. The quest for knowledge entertains us, excites us, causes us to fight, quarrel, and can even lead to war. Stimulated by an every-present thirst for knowledge, I have come a long way since commencing my own personal quest but questions linger and will probably plague me for the rest of my life. The notion of certainty perplexes me in particular: how can people be sure of what they know, when so often theories and ideas are turned on their heads. Religious belief remains a contentious issue, at the heart of much interpersonal and cultural conflict and therefore epistemological questions related to cosmology, metaphysics, and the existence of a god are all confounding ones. The role of the observer; or the definition of self is another area of substantial confusion for me, especially due to the wide range of theories and viewpoints on the issue.

             Just when I feel ready to throw in the towel and shut off my mind entirely, I encounter readings by such philosophers like Kant or Russell and the journey begins once again. At the root of my confusion, I have discovered a few specific issues that may be problems because of my personality or my personal background or both. These issues include the interface between nihilism and mysticism which I find present in Buddhist philosophy; and the failure of the scientific method to answer overarching questions about human consciousness, spiritual experience, or ultimate causation. At the core of these specific issues lurk broader, more generalized epistemological questions.

             Are epistemological frameworks absolute? Should philosophers be willing to set aside the parameters of their questioning to pursue different lines of thought? For instance, some issues, like the search for knowledge of God, cannot be answered with an empirical framework.