Re: [Fwd: Re: constructs, science and religion]

Gary Blanchard (
Sat, 15 Jun 1996 21:34:11 -0700

Dear Lois-

>You wrote:
> Do you really want to dichotomize our knowledge between science and
> Where does metaphysics fit in? Or phenomenology and existentialism? I
> think we need more categories. Any suggestions?
> ..Lois

Lois, I don't view the matter as having anything at all to do with what I
want. I view it as a matter of trying to determine 'what's so,' in some
kind of way that can be validated. For example: gravity. It isn't
about what I want; it's about that gravity IS. If I want my life to
work, I need to organize it around that apparent facticity. Sure, it
could stop working tomorrow. But I'll deal with that new facticity when
it arrives.

That's my response. I think it's terribly straightforward and mundane.
Am I missing something? Do you know of significant cases of claims
about reality that do not, at bottom, fit into the demonstrable -not
demonstrable situation? I am open to learning...I hope. But I need more
than questions, claims, presuppositions, metaphors, postulates,
corollaries, and faith statements. I need evidence. Proof. Otherwise,
we are in a hopelessly subjective situation, and everything is relative.

Please, hold off on questions for a moment and commit to your own
assessment of this matter. Take a stand, please...what do you think is
the way it is, and what do you have to back it up?

Thanks. I'm looking forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Gary