By Ajit Krishna Dasa (Denmark)
The accusation that presuppositionalism confuses ontology (what exists) with epistemology (how we know what exists) stems from a misunderstanding of the relationship between these two concepts. Presuppositionalists, especially from a Vaisnava perspective, would argue that this relationship is not a confusion but a necessary interconnection. Let’s break it down:
Ontology and Epistemology Are Inseparable
Presuppositionalism emphasizes that knowledge (epistemology) doesn’t arise in a vacuum; it requires an underlying reality (ontology) to make sense. In Vaisnavism, Krishna’s existence isn’t just a metaphysical claim—it’s the essential foundation for all knowledge. Without Krishna, the tools of epistemology—logic, perception, and inference—become ungrounded and arbitrary.
The Bhagavad-gita (15.15) declares, “I am seated in everyone’s heart, and from Me come remembrance, knowledge, and forgetfulness.” This verse illustrates that Krishna’s ontological position directly underpins epistemological processes. Knowledge exists because Krishna, as the supreme knower, sustains and reveals it.
The Myth of Epistemological Neutrality
Critics often assume that epistemology can operate independently of any metaphysical commitments. Presuppositionalists reject this assumption. Every worldview—whether atheistic, materialistic, or theistic—has presuppositions about reality that shape how knowledge is understood and justified.
From a Vaisnava standpoint, to deny Krishna as the ultimate reality while pursuing coherent knowledge is like trying to breathe while denying the existence of air. The very act of knowing presupposes Krishna’s existence as the source of knowledge, truth, and intelligibility.
Ontology Grounds Epistemology
To put it simply, epistemology requires an ontological foundation. Just as the operation of a machine depends on its design, the process of knowing depends on the existence of an ultimate, unchanging reality that ensures the consistency of truth, logic, and cognition. Without this foundation, knowledge collapses.
In a naturalistic worldview, there’s no sufficient basis for trusting that our senses, logic, or reason lead to truth—they’re just random products of evolution. But in Vaisnavism, Krishna’s eternal, conscious nature (sat-cit-ananda) provides a firm foundation. Knowledge is not arbitrary; it reflects Krishna’s omniscient will.
Is It Circular? Yes, but So Is Everything
Critics often accuse presuppositionalism of circular reasoning: using Krishna to justify the knowledge of Krishna. However, presuppositionalists point out that all worldviews rely on some form of circularity when defending their ultimate authority. A materialist assumes the validity of reason to defend reason. A theist assumes the validity of revelation to defend revelation.
This kind of “circle” isn’t arbitrary; it’s transcendental. The question isn’t whether circularity exists—it’s whether the foundation can account for the tools of knowledge themselves. In Vaisnavism, Krishna is both the source and sustainer of all knowledge. Srila Prabhupada often emphasized that scripture (sastra) is the ultimate pramana (means of knowing), self-evident in its authority because it emanates directly from the ultimate knower, Krishna.
Turning the Question Back
The critic who accuses presuppositionalists of confusing ontology and epistemology must first justify their own epistemological assumptions. On what basis do they trust their reasoning, perception, or logic? If these tools are reliable, what is the ontological foundation that guarantees their trustworthiness?
From a Vaisnava perspective, without Krishna, the critic has no coherent answer. The reliability of the intellect and the meaningfulness of logic are inexplicable in an atheistic framework. By contrast, Krishna’s existence as the supreme knower provides a seamless connection between what exists (ontology) and how we know it (epistemology).
Conclusion
The accusation that presuppositionalism conflates ontology and epistemology misunderstands the presuppositionalist’s core point: these two concepts are not separate realms. Ontology grounds and makes epistemology possible. In the Vaisnava tradition, Krishna is the source of both reality and knowledge. Without acknowledging this connection, critics are left with an epistemology that hangs in the air, unmoored and unjustified.
Ajit Krishna Dasa 
Leave a comment