The Extent Of Absolute Certainty

For years, it frustrated me that people in general either deny that absolute certainty is possible with regard to anything or deny that it is possible regarding anything other than logical axioms and the existence of one's own consciousness.  The extent of absolute certainty is far greater than this.  It encompasses more than mere axioms and base consciousness, though the boundaries are very rigid.

There are many things that I know with absolute certainty besides the fact that logical axioms (truth exists, contradictions are impossible, a thing is what it is, etc.) are true and that I exist as a conscious mind.  I also know that logic exists independent of both my mind and all other things.  Likewise, I know that I am presently contacting physical matter, meaning that I have a body that my mind inhabits.  I know that I have a memory replete with specific recollections.  I know that the present moment exists.  I know that space exists necessarily in the absence of matter.  The list of other miscellaneous truths that I know with absolute certainty continues onward, containing many articles of knowledge that often go overlooked or even totally undiscovered by the majority.

Even if I know nothing about a subject except what the subject itself is (for instance, I know that astrophysics is astrophysics even if I know nothing of astrophysics theories or ideas), I still know something about the matter.  It is impossible to have absolutely no knowledge about something at all: since logic governs everything, one can always at least know that something is what it is and that there are no contradictions between what is true about something and what is true of other things.

Anything that can be established with logic--via the self-verifying nature of axioms or via sound deduction--is knowable with absolute certainty, even if all that this amounts to in some cases is knowing that logic governs an issue or knowing what follows from a premise although the premise itself is completely unverifiable.  For instance, I can know that C follows from B and that B follows from A, but have no way of actually proving A because, although A does not contain a contradiction, it cannot be proven.

The common saying "I have no idea what that is" is only valid if used as colloquial hyperbole that is not meant to be rational or philosophically honest.  This is only one of multiple examples of how language can impair philosophical knowledge.  Linguistic norms can obscure truths, even obvious ones, from public awareness.  After all, it is easier for people to accept the way that common language describes reality than it is for them to challenge or undermine those norms.  Those who do challenge them will find that absolute certainty is not limited to a miniscule part of epistemology.

It is this fact alone that allows any knowledge at all to be obtained about things besides axioms and consciousness.  Without at least knowing what a discipline other than basic metaphysics. epistemology, or phenomenology is, there would be no such thing as a foundation to build upon.  Without a foundation of absolute certainty, there is not even a basis for striving to understand perceptions and probabilities.  Without a basis for understanding perceptions and probabilities, there is no reason to even try to venture outside of matters that can be established strictly through logic and introspection.