Pardon the length of the link, but I'll be borrowing this book from the library for this summer's reading:-http://catalog.lib.unomaha.edu/search~S0?/X%28Problems%20of%20Knowledge%29&SORT=D/X%28Problems%20of%20Knowledge%29&SORT=D&SUBKEY=%28Problems%20of%20Knowledge%29/1%2C186%2C186%2CB/frameset&FF=X%28Problems%20of%20Knowledge%29&SORT=D&1%2C1%2C-As epistemology categorically encompasses what I view to be the real root of this debate, I think that this would be recommended reading for all parties involved, as it will allow us to clearly delineate the true roots of our differences, which--as I have oft repeated--purely a matter of raw interpretation based upon our (ultimately) deterministic philosophies rather than truly concrete positions. -The book traces the development of skepticism as it pertains to Western epistemology and finally, argues for a philosophical treatment of contextualism as a basis for a system of knowledge-gathering as it isn't dislodged by skepticism. (My main reason for wanting to read it.)

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"