RE: How to trust Knowledge | Part 1.
So I've got this table,
It all started with,
"Dubito ergo Cogito ergo Sum".
I doubt (my perception is not 100% accurate due to Hume's infinite regression problem (the problem of induction), my perception cannot verify itself).
And doubt is direct and verifiable, undeniable, un-doubtable, logically-necessary evidence of a functioning mind of some undetermined, undeterminable, size/shape/scope (per Godel's incompleteness theorems, a system cannot fully know (contain all knowledge of) itself).
Therefore,
Some Sum-total of my mind, along with and including any conceivable integral prerequisites and necessary incidental aspects (beyond my epistemological limits) EXISTS with 100% certainty as a fundamental, foundational logical-necessity (NOUMENON).
I guess that's just a description of the wood I built the thing out of...
Please let me know if you see any problems.