Re: virus: The One or the Many? (was: META)

Brett Lane Robertson (
Sat, 01 Nov 1997 00:27:15 -0500

At 09:08 PM 10/31/97 -0500, you wrote:
>>I think Descartes (and certainly Berkeley) would agree that to doubt is to
>>be soulless and godless and without recourse to truth.
>Well, two out of three ain't bad.
>And I ain't treating you like anything. I'm just jabberin'. Yes, I am a
>skeptic, metaphysically. (Whatever that means....) To my mind, that is a
>true recourse. To be soulless and godless, like I said, ain't bad. In
>fact, it's only human.
> Wade T. Smith


I've used phenomenological arguments to return to a "phenomenology of soul",
you might say (as Hegel used phenomenology to reveal "spirit" as an
objective phenomenon...though spirit was a loss of self-same in favor of
self-other and external--or pragmatic--social reality; a phenomenology of
soul is a deeper look into the process of phenomenology and uncovers a
"self-same" component which must be used to propose self-same in the first
case). Also, I've used a pragmatic argument which, in effect uses
pragmatism upon the idea of pragmatism returning the essence of unity to the
discipline of science.

I'm not posting this to explain these arguments, only to propose that being
a "skeptic, metaphysically" is a very advanced developmental position,
metaphysically...but I have confidence that eventually all "soulless and
godless" people, scientists included, will progress in understanding to the
point where emptiness and void hold no sway (as well as negation and
dependent arisings).

Yes, it IS only human, Wade. No, it is not terminal.



"We'll cross out that bridge when we come back to it later."