First off, I would like to make it clear that I'm not implying I discovered some secret knowledge about the problems mentioned in the title that has alluded other philosophers for the past 2000+ years. I'm merely asking if a problem that I see is recognized as a genuine problem if I'm misguided. Because it seems the more research I do, no one even raises the concern.
Anyway, here's my question: From the philosophical pondering I've done, it seems that fascinating, epistemological, and related issues like the Problem of the Criterion and the Munchausen Trilemma concerning theories or justification are really hard to answer, at least in a satisfactory manner. Why? Because to even begun answering the issues, you have to assume you have a solution.
For the Problem of the Criterion, you have to assume you have knowledge that logical principals work in order to argue for a certain view, when whether or not we have knowledge of logical principals is under question. How else would you even begin offering an argument against skepticism? A similar paradoxical issues can be raised when trying to answer the Munchausen Trilemma.
Please note careful what I'm asking here. I'm not asking whether a particular answer to the issues mention above is correct. I don't mind researching answers myself, that I can do. My problem arises when in the process of doing this research, it strikes me as pretty weird that it seems no one in the literature acknowledges how were suppose to even begin debating solutions, without assuming we have an answer.
Of course, my problem could simply be my ignorance. Maybe someone has raised this concern and at least has acknowledged it or tried to address it. Maybe my concern is misplaced and I don't understand something. Either way, I would be grateful if someone could answer my question.