The Value of Knowing: Myth or Reality? The Epistemic Value Question w/ Dr. Jonathan Fuqua 

This is a great and intellectually satisfying conversation. Thanks Pat for initiating this. Dr. Fuqua is a very articulate and clear thinker and thank you for allowing him to discuss his paper without much interruption. While some aspects of his paper flies over my head, I love the mental struggle of trying to understand his argument because as you've helpfully said in another video, to grow as a thinker, one needs to be open to, endure and eventually surpass the mental struggle of understanding a certain idea or argument.

Regarding the Knowledge vs Understanding debate. This is yet another example of why it's amazing being Catholic. We're given the answer (in this case we have the 7 gifts of the Holy Spirit, of which Knowledge and Understanding are two different gifts), and we just have to figure out how to explain it. It's always easier to work backwards from the answer than have to invent it whole cloth.

Thanks to Dr. Fuqua for the great discussion! Here are some of the resources mentioned in this episode. Dr. Fuqua's Academia page: conception.academia.edu/JonathanFuqua Handbook of Religious Epistemology: amzn.to/46yzLWC Faith and Reason: amzn.to/3GyHjhP Cheers, everyone!

This is a good eye opener for me. Having affinity to Neoplatonic epistemology lately, I think proper functionalism can be incorporated into it. Because under Neoplatonic epistemology, we have knowledge only when universal forms are grasped and that happens when the rational part of our soul is properly connected to the immaterial intellect and through which universal forms in the Intellect are grasped properly. And this requires our cognitive faculties, both our sensory apparatus (sensory organs, and its neural connections with brain), and intellectual apparatus (how sensory impulses from sensory organs are properly processed in our cerebral cortex) are properly developed and functioning. I have been an externalist anyway when I started studying epistemology, being attracted to reliabilism of Alvin Goldman (i.e a belief will account to knowledge only if it is acquired through reliable belief forming processes), but now I can combine with other aspect of externalism, i.e. with a unique understanding of proper functionalism to have a more complete view of epistemology and in line with Neoplatonic epistemology.

Thank you for the conversation. The question is really interesting to analyze. I have a question maybe a little bit related: can you recommend some books explaining and criticizing/refuting nominalism?

Can you do a video on episteme, pistis, gnosis and the relationship between the three?

Comment for traction.