Problems in Philosophy are epistemic not ontological!

There has always been an emphasis on the ontological differences of things in reality and an attempt at relieving these tensions by some ontological theory. For instance, Plato found that reality was ontologically Forms limited by the senses that only see shadows. Descartes found that reality was made ontologically of two distinct things. Materialists find that only matter exists ontologically and idealists only the mental. What if they are all wrong? Maybe it is an epistemic problem. I propose the model of an art gallery. We are pictures on the walls and we see things either too far away, as homogeneous, causally predictable events (as in materialism) or too close and see only smudges of paint with no pattern (the imagination, mind and idealism). Maybe we are missing a third way of seeing things. Just as Hope and Faith are the most common, what of Love. Maybe we have to be not too close, not too far. Maybe like Goldilocks, it has to be just right HOW we perceive reality. Maybe we shouldn't try to define reality ontologically, but reevaluate our epistemic limitations of reality and suggest a third way of seeing things. Perhaps this third way is what St. Paul spoke of as seeing in a mirror darkly (as in this life) but we would see things fully, in the next life.