>Most philosophers would object to speaking about "actionable" anything.
I concur. They miss the connection between forest and trees.
>Certainty sure is a commodity. Or humans would love it to be anyway.
>As far as I can tell peace of mind comes after you accept that certainty is an unattainable goal. Death and taxes.
I'm a little sad you didn't say "you humans" - missed opportunity.
Certainty is an unattainable goal as it's normally understood because the line between the immediate/local/personal/contingent and Actuality is deeply understood by almost everyone, perhaps even especially philosophers. (
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... y_X2Kbneo/) Absolute certainty is only available in very proscribed circumstances to those of us with an intimate acquaintance with logic. Actionable certainty is available to anyone with common sense, which is a low-resolution, practical application of logic (and as such, can be mis-applied to deleterious effect like any tool).
There is a bit in The Whole Story about how words that reference the transcendent (perfect certainty for example) are only placeholders. This is why certain Enough is the answer to epistemology, and metaphysics - even the most elemental objects of our metaphorical understanding of the material universe, "things", are subject to "according to purpose".
The fact that facts or things are contingent does not mean they are arbitrary. "Certain enough" is always what certain means, just like "nothing" always means the lack of something specific. Actionability, the purpose of certainty, is relative to the three basic contingencies - salience, perspective, and priority. Simple priorities don't require much certainty. If something is extremely salient to you, logic is the furthest thing from part of your equation. If your perspective disallows admittance of certain facts that seem inevitable to others, what creates actionable certainty for you will be very different than for them.
You can be Certain that this understanding of certainty answers the most philosophical questions possible because it's logically necessary. The proof otherwise would be to find any other example of a story (in the larger sense) or definition of certainty (for example) that answers more philosophical questions than these.
