Epistemology is what the boards of our house are made of. What is outside our house is noumenon.
Metaphysics is what we stuff into the cracks between the boards in order to keep warm.
Ontology is how we arrange the furniture.
Quanta (science) is a sub-category of qualia (metaphysics).
One of the fundamental problems I've identified is that most people tend to conflate the terms "real" and "important", when, in-fact, they are mutually exclusive.
Freedom and equality are inversely proportional.
It is important to maintain a constant awareness of and vigilant respect of our epistemological limits.
Common Ground Discovered -
"NTURTTGgTS" = "Noumenon, The Ultimate Reality, The Truth, [G]god, The Source"
"The comprehensiveness requirement simply requires you analyze the "main" arguments, of which there are usually 2 to 5 in a debate." - https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/864?page=4&post_number=79
Connect, Contribute, Cope, Cook (CCCC) - http://www.robertlustig.com/4cs/
Cognitive repair manual
(IFF) free-will is proportional to intelligence (animals have less, humans have more)
(AND) free-will is proportional to moral culpability (without free-will there is no moral culpability)
(THEN) intelligence is proportional to moral culpability.
Please feel free to modify any of the above statements to better fit your "moral intuition".
If you are making an ontological argument for Deism, you are no better off than you were before all of your "reasoning".
All you need to say is, "The Big Bang" = god(s).
The real trick is bridging the unfathomable gap between Deism and any particular religious (dogmatic) tradition.
Rational Morality - https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/974?page=8&post_number=177
Your moral culpability is based on your ability to be aware of how your actions affect others (YATBAOHYAAO).
Who has the best god? The answer is here - https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3v5yui
How to Quantify "moral-culpability" - https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/993?page=1&post_number=19
An unfalsifiable hypothesis is not strengthened by arbitrarily eliminating imaginary alternatives.
Please challenge my axioms and or point out a specific logical error and or provide a counter-factual.
Also, because the definition of truth requires fact and the definition of fact requires indisputability, only what is universally indisputable (empirically and scientifically verifiable phenomena and logical necessities) can be identified as TRUE.
Everything else is pure imagination.
Action without belief is blind. Belief without action is lame. Belief without reason is insanity. Reason without belief is pure.