DB> The universal birth process is more like evolution, and a natural life
 DB> process.  And, that we are created not to fulfill the 'will' of God, but
 DB> to fulfill our own destiny, as any mother would wish.
 DB> I think, given what we know of the origin of the universe, and of life,
 DB> that this view is far more coherent with the facts as we see them than
 DB> the patriarchal tryanny of the Judaic/Christian God in his heaven with a
 DB> host of sychophants.  The shamanistic view was not a cosmology organized
 DB> to pander to the sensibilities of a totalitarian government.
   What attracts me to your discussions, Day, is that you inform your
philosophical thought with as accurate historical matter as man has been able
to discern.  You get a bit more exercised about the Judaic/Christian
differentiations in western thought but even there I see you expressing 
erely
in another way the misunderstanding that led the Christian experience to
become derailed into a theological morass.  That probably couldn't be avoided
given the strong impetus that developed the mystery religions in the first
place in an effort to preserve ancient cultures that were being wantonly
destroyed in a series of ecumenic empires.  
     As I grow older I become more and more convinced that history IS the key
to the kind of understanding that inches us toward a bit of truth.  I cannot
see that mankind is any different, essentially, today than it was during the
Stone ages and perhaps earlier.  The only thing I DON'T have a handle on is
the mystery of the advance of technology and especially the way in which it
takes spurts and then actually MARKS THE EPOCH in which we are living.  If
there IS eternal recurrence that philosophers from Aristotle onward have
speculated about we could never know it given our short life spans so history
as anamnesis with some assist from the physical sciences is all we have to
measure the identity of MAN across the millenia.  But there are certainly
literary survivals that reveal a certain sameness in the response of man to
her/his/its environment and to society.  
      If I am anywhere close to the mark then history in the mundane sense of
a PROGRESS is simply not there.  It could be found ONLY in the revelatory
process as it strikes sensitive minds and MAY become available to those not 
o
favored who, nevertheless, do not tune out the reports of the process.
     I listen to your report as earnestly as I listen to Jaspers, Spengler,
Eckhardt, Paul of Tarsus, Plato or Heraclitus and numerous others.  One 
hould
not, IMHO, develop a prejudice as among serious and sensitive thinkers
(vulgarians are readily identifiable) as to where nuggets of truth might
arise.  My own perambulations are not so easily understandable and I'm
painfully aware of that but that, at least, keeps me humble (simile).
Sincerely, 
                                     Frank
                                                                              
                                                       
--- PPoint 2.05
---------------