I am experiencing what my Dad refers to as “Sophmore Syndrom”.
Sophmore Syndrom is what happens your Sophmore year as a philosophy student, when you become so fed up with different philosophies being put in your head and refuted to by skeptics that you wonder if anyone can possibly know anything.
Problem is, I’m only a Sophmore in high school, and self-educating myself in philosophy.
Anyone else get this?
You can “know” just about anything there is to “know”.
The problem is, can any of it be proven true?
Myself I am having the same problem, and I believe the only way around it is adopt a standard of “most likely true” and conforming that with other arguments either for or against what you accept. You would also have to accept that any communication made between two people, regardless of the medium used, is a form of argumentation. One in which, for these cases, a supposed authority seeks to relay “facts” to you, the thinker.
In addition you will probably have to devote yourself to a copious amount of introspection, from which you might recognize some of your own personally held biases that might sway your opinion when regarding an argument. This is done to further the realization that how you assess the truth of an argument should rest on the strength of that argument in relation to your clear thinking. If you are biased, your thinking cannot be clear, thus some things you will accept as being true might simply result from said bias.
I would also advocate arguing at least two sides of an issue. For it to be an issue at least one party must call something into question. If every human being accepted that God existed, then (as an example) the truth as to whether or not God exists would never be an issue.
From the above given example, I have determined, for myself at least, God may possibly exist, but if he/she/it does, he/she/it does at such a level that we cannot possibly know as “true”. Thus God’s existence will never be able to be fully proven nor denied.
That is just me though.
I should also point out that one of the benefits from approaching truth in this manner is that it allows one to be flexible. If one consistently adapts to what one thinks is the best idea/argument as being closest to the truth, one is not stuck in maintaining the same position. It could be that, at times, you have to defend what you accept as being true, and in this as well, you should evaluate your own arguments and compare them against the negative. From this one may become a more complete thinker.
But do you ever get at the truly truly true truth??
No. But perhaps in tiny little baby steps you help yourself and the rest of humanity get a little closer to that goal.
Welcome Cerebro,
It sounds as if your dad is a pretty smart guy. 
“To teach how to live with uncertainty…is perhaps the chief thing that philosophy can do.” – Bertrand Russell
Best wishes,
Uncle Michael
Well the solution to sophomore syndrome is to become a junior.
LostGuy wrote:
That reminds me of a T-shirt I once saw:
I used to be uncertain, but now I’m not so sure. 
Michael