Whenever you delve deeply into academia in any subject- especially psychogy- you'll necessarily come across debates and paradoxes around the nature of truth. That is to say epistomolgy- the philosophical nature of truth and knowledge; and ontology- the philosophical nature of existence itself.

You may come across questions including whether the mind is capable of studying itself, whether objective truth exists and if we have a partial, none, or complete access to it. You could come across stances regarding the philosophical and ontological validity of experiencial and subjective knowledge bases.

After all, if you are studying human nature, as a human, can you remove the human from the study? Is it even worth trying?

Or is it possible to remove the subjective aspect of it and retain a level of objectivity that's to a level that is advantageous? Should we mix methods to get the best of both or should we simply stop trying and use subjectivity to our advantage.

At the end of the day these questions in many ways are deceptive and secondary to a primary issue of research vigour. Many arguments in this philosophy and epistomolgy loose their usefulness and only exist within their own bubbles and paradigms.

Arguments of one perspective are formulated to dissect and discredit the perspective of another- loosing touch of reality in some ways and actual research aims. It is these aims that should be grounded in usefulness and kept at the forefront.

Likewise, I think the way that these subjects are taught are quite disengenuine. If you are not well grounded within the subject and haven't also grounded yourself in "first principles"- or foundational assumptions, then you'll end up confused.

Either way my ontology is not very complicated at all.

I say that 'truth exists and reason perceives it. But subjective truth does not neccesitate the correct interpretation of an objective an objective truth'

And as much it's important to ground onesself in evidence based, and evidence informed, knowledge. We must also acknowledging it's limitations.