Talk:theory of knowledge

RFD
This seems to be a fairly straightforward construction, does it have idiomaticity in philosophy? The quotes on the page do not make it clear by my reading. Is this theory of everything, theory of evolution or theory of medicine? - TheDaveRoss 13:41, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you mean to RfD it? DCDuring TALK 17:02, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure. - TheDaveRoss 17:14, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm with DR on this one. Doesn't look idiomatic. You can have a theory of + any noun really (some aren't attested of course). Renard Migrant (talk) 19:41, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete -- if you follow the link to Epistomology, you can see that the philosophical questions poised make this look very SOP.
 * Delete. DCDuring TALK 01:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. FWIW, there's an course called "Theory of Knowledge" (capitalization optional). Whether or not it's citable as a dictionary-worthy term is open to debate. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 06:29, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, I did English literature at school, which is a course title, but it refers to literature that's English. Being used as a course title is a separate issue to being idiomatic. Renard Migrant (talk) 16:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I would like to keep it but I cannot find a really good argument. I hoped theory of knowledge would be a more common synonym of epistemology, but alas, per, epistemology is much more common in the 2nd part of the 20th century. I might also point out theory of knowledge is one of the few main branches of philosophy, but that is also a fairly weak argument. The entry shows the term theory of knowledge is used at all; if it is deleted, the only term denoting the referent present in the dictionary is going to be epistemology. I do think the entry does no harm and makes Wiktionary slightly better off, but it probably does not meet CFI and I do not find the grounds for overriding CFI in this case strong enough to post a boldfaced keep. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:19, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

It seems that "theory of knowledge" is a somewhat interesting philosophic concept: it gets 450,000 hits in BGC. Perhaps thousands of books and academic studies have been written of it. --Hekaheka (talk) 18:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * RFD failed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 03:51, 18 March 2016 (UTC)