For ‘epistemological validity’ of training theories (and just about anything), maybe it is helpful to point out that while psychological factors, desires, and emotional needs are uncontrolled factors, there are also reliable sources that can be used for deeper understanding, that Pakewi speaks about, which include:
- Perception (five senses, although this is sometimes prone to error, as the world is not always as it appears to our senses)
- Introspection (the capacity to inspect the ‘inside’ of the mind, so one recognizes the mental state one is in (i.e. thirsty, excited, depressed). Compared to perception, introspection is less fallible
- Memory (the capacity to retain knowledge acquired in the past, withe the careful consideration that one’s memories are not necessarily facts, and there are fine lines between memorial seemings, perceptual seemings, and mere imagination)
- Reason (justifications of this kind are said to be a priori to any kind of experience. Priories can be either facts that do not depend on any experience, or facts that solely depend on reason or analysis)
- Testimony (differs from the above because it isn’t distinguished by having its own cognitive faculty; it does not seem we can acquire knowledge from sources of which the reliability is utterly unknown to us).
This is so absolute and superficial; it’s complete gibberish.