Thanks for your contributions to my thread and I will continue reading and thinking as deeply as I can.

I think that you make an important point about blindspots. One model which I am aware of is Johari' s model , which involves various aspects of which we may be conscious of certain aspects about ourselves, and how feedback can increase our own knowledge about ourselves . I think self knowledge and awareness are an important aspect as a starting point for further and deeper knowledge of everything else. Indeed, our own blindspots, and understanding of them, may be an essential part of finding greater depth of knowledge. — Jack Cummins

Yeah, I agree with all of this. If you want self-knowledge, talk to lots of other people. Even the meaning of the words we use doesn't belong to us. The boundary between us and others is a legal fiction, one might say. The boundary between self and world is a useful evolving convention, and so on.

I think that the use of intuition alongside rationality is complex in the mapping of the widest perspective of our knowledge. In building of our models, I am inclined to believe that what is most important is incorporating the widest possible perspective rather focusing on specific facts, in order to build up a picture which is intricate and not based on the specific focus in a way which involves a narrowing of vision, or tunnel perspective. It may involve zooming in and out of specific ways of thinking and being able to juxtapose various ways of framing questions and answers. — Jack Cummins

You seem to be referring to the role of intuition or imagination on the genesis of theories. I have no argument with that, Science is also a creative activity that involves what Peirce referred to as abductive reasoning. I think intuition is closely allied with imagination; we imagine possibilities and we have an intuitive feel for the plausibility of those imagined possibilities. In science we then try to figure out what we would observe if what we feel are the more plausible possibilities we have imagined were in accordance with how things are. When it comes to metaphysical imaginings such prediction and observation is not possible.

There is a scientist that already calculated that we can't know reality (using evolutionary game theory): https://youtu.be/oYp5XuGYqqY

I would as well say that our narcicism ensures that we can't handle information well even if it is easily available.

In the metaphysics section I suggested that mind rather destroys information (or realities in a kind of multiverse) than create truth. (see: "Münchhausen's infinity as evidence for immortality")

Thanks for your reply and I do believe that you may be right that mind destroys information. There are so many complex questions which involve aspects of metaphysics. Personally, my own experience is one which ranges from thinking about in all different fields, ranging from anthropology to parapsychology. I believe that we know so much, but there is so much which we do not know fully.

I think that your reply about talking to others is interesting because it raises the question of how much is about self knowledge, and how much is about negotiating meanings of shared knowledge. We could ask how do we work out the basis for working out the most objective and ultimately 'true' basis of knowledge within the subjective and cultural contexts., This is probably is a complex mixture of hermeneutics and epistemology, and lies at the crux of developing accurate and meaningful philosophy perspectives. I do believe that it does involve imagination, rather than simply the understanding of causes within theoretical ways of seeing knowledge.

I definitely believe that intuition has an important role in our construction of knowledge, as well as the widest scope of imagination for being able to explore the basis for what is central for human exploration, including the values central to our whole framework of empirical investigations and interpretation of the findings. I have read some writing by Pierce, which shows that the pragmatic basis of understanding is central in the way we understand and develop specific aspects, and I found his thoughts on religious aspects of knowledge particularly interesting. I think that there are so many possibilities...