Besides the circle of practical epistemological interests are closely adjoined with questions of gnosiology, or the theory of knowledge.
In history of epistemology there are two main schools concerning what makes the main means of knowledge. Rationalism allocates this role to reason. The empiricism allocates this role to experience, feelings strengthened by tools. For rationalists a paradigm of knowledge is the mathematics and logic where the necessary truth is made by intuition or conclusion. For empiricists a paradigm of knowledge is natural science
But for both directions of epistemology the central question is the question, whether we can trust that way of knowledge which they prefer. The skeptical arguments show, that we cannot accept everything simply, without checking. So, the answer to the skeptical call represents one of the ways of epistemological understanding.
In the epistemological sense Hume was an empiricist for whom only two kinds of knowledge (science) existed. The first kind is based on the experience (finally on sensual perception), the second - on the rules of interrelation of concepts established on the agreement (according to empiricism interpretations, such knowledge is inherent for mathematics and logic). We cannot have any knowledge besides these two kinds. We not know the things which are not given to us in experience.This empiricistic epistemology leads to the results, important not only for theology and ethics, but also for the understanding of experimental sciences. From this point of view, in natural sciences there is no certain undoubtful kernel. Further we shall see that Kant paid much attention to this item and tried to deny it.