Yeah I sort of agree with you, anything more I can think of is really in the realms of how we look at comparing art to each other, and trying to quantify excellent, good or the like by how well they show the human experience or whatever other metrics there are. I'd agree there is nothing wrong with seeing the mouse on the moon and others interpreting something the pile of rocks didn't mean to be, otherwise there really wouldn't be beauty or the like. I just think a lot of the debate gets a little lost when people try to discuss their subjective opinions on good based on their subjective view of the rocks rather than a more objective view that is more accessible for others to understand and interact with. And then that's like getting into pyschology and how people react to shit on the internet or whatever lol, but I think mice are cute.

I've heard the animation and art for Evangelion is more of driving force on how Evangelion has been such a classic, and not so much on the philosophy, though admittedly I haven't watched Eva, and have only read critical reviews and the like. But especially for the anime scene and the time, the way they animated stuff was very well done and artsy for lack of better word, apparently borrowing a lot from traditional movie techniques and effects when its all animated, and not shot from a camera lens. And then all the imagery and stuff looks cool af too, even if it may or may not have some deeper meaning or not.

All my views on Eva are basically a summary of this really cool essay I read that dealt more in the art stuff from a good writer/reviewer. It's the first essay I found that wasn't a fan/casual review, and it helped clear up a lot of stuff about Evangelion that gets debated for me. https://alexsheremet.com/neon-genesis-evangelion-place-animation/

Hmmm, I can't claim to be too knowledgeable on the topic, but I'll try. Epistemology in this discussion about christian motifs in evangelion is about interpreting how we interpret an art piece ourselves, sort of? From what I know of art, it starts from a perspective, or their view of other people's perspectives, and tries to express that through some medium through various elements. And then how clear it is or isn't is up to author to let the reader reflect whatever perspective they have on the art as they choose. Personally from what I think I hear others say of the christian and other religious stuff in evangelion is them extrapolating every other thing related to a cross when there isn't anything else really in the story about christianity, and if I were to apply that to other things, you'd get lost in the reeds real quickly examining lines and circles, but that's my perspective. idk

art is not the same thing as philosophy, though a lot of art has ideas from philosophy.

Is the first ancestral race supposed to be philosophy? As a quick google search, it's just a creation myth about how that universe came to be right? Not like a Camus character that involves ideas of absurdism that he also wrote essays on separately?

Laws and stuff are different, isn't this article just using a debate about laws to talk about some basic philosophy or the like.