FM> I also learned in the course of life from then on that Fundamentalism
 FM> was by no means restricted to "Christian" fundamentalism but that the
 FM> trouble was ideology itself - something which, as you have no doubt
 FM> observed still wins me bitter.........
 DM> ..........not bitter! ......more an exploratory opposition!
   I would welcome and APPLAUD an exploratory opposition.  My philosophical
ears are ALWAYS open.  Surely you know by now, David, that I have the highest
regard for open, sincere, honest exploration of differences and will always
respond unless it entails going over ground already covered and where no
further mutual enlightenment is possible.
 FM> It appears to be very difficult for us to accept the lot of man as we
 FM> actually do experience it.  We know ourselves as people have ALWAYS
 FM> known it really to be ONLY a PART of a reality we can symbolize and
 FM> within which we can seek knowledge and wisdom (do science AND
 FM> philosophy).  It is only through the myth that we can deal with that
 FM> larger reality in which we PARTICIPATE with our entire being.
 DM> .........."only through myth" is heavy to lay upon others!
   If you have an alternative means of approaching that large area of reality
that is a mystery I would be the first to wish with great eagerness to hear 
t
David.  Short dictums are not very instructive for me.  I don't really "lay
this upon others" so much as challenging "others" to show me an alternative.
 FM> But then a philosopher must take into account the further question of
 FM> WHY most people can see no further than some ideology or set of
 FM> religious doctrines or why if they become embittered and distrustful of
 FM> same they must then leap to the further doctrine of atheism.
 DM> ...a little unfair to make a general case. Those satisfied with an
 DM> ideology have found what they need ...many follow complex paths  not
 DM> embittered nor distrustful in the way you suggest, nor is it always a
 DM> LEAP to atheism. You tend to oversimplify anecdotals into conclusive
 DM> "knowings". You, yourself,  would not take kindly to being so cast into
 DM> philosophical convenience .....as if, perhaps,  being cast as just a
 DM> "confused agnostic" which I know is not so simple the case.
   On the contrary, David, I think it's a fair philosophical question.  If
people who are determined upon the gnostic path KNOW that there are
alternative directions, yet still cling stubbornly to gnosticism (embracing 
f
doctrine) it is certainly fair to search for a reason.  One answer (actually
Voegelin's somewhat tentative answer, is that there is an immense
psychological gain.  In one great leap the mystery (which, of course, has not
been dispelled at all in reality) appears to have been swept away.  Just as
the ancient gnostics found secrets of systems of movement through the various
levels of the heavens to find the "one true God" beyond all being or the 
ther
gods and thus find a "true identification" so the location through such a
search of some "second reality" yields freedom from the perplexing situation
of the first reality to be lived with nothing more than the uncertainty of
trust and faith.  Certainly we are all lured in that direction as a part of
our experience.  Some of these paths can even lead to premature death which
can in extreme circumstances be viewed as a release.  The lasting and passing
that constitutes reality, however, is not ended thereby, is it?
 DM> The gods do live in the pleasures of the private mind that so wish  them
 DM> welcome, while we are busy at our unknowable ......or useless
 DM> missions............
   If our "missions" or truly unknowable then we can't logically pronounce
them to be "useless" can we?  Remember Plato's warning that those "pleasures
of the private mind" can, in the night of retirement from awareness become 
he
"beast on the rampage" quite visible in the daylight of acted out behavior.
Plato along with countless others down through the centuries have been quite
well aware that the restraints of conscience are by no means guaranteed and
the satisfying to the fullest of the craze for personal desires with no
regard for social consequences can seem doubly attractive if all we truly 
ave
is the MYTH of judgement in some far off summing up which may or may not be
true in the final analysis.  Civilized behavior does, indeed, hang by a thin,
almost invisible (at times) thread.  We surely know THAT quite well.  The
thread can snap and an entire order fall into inhumanity.  I just, this
morning, read George Will's column on the Rape of Nanking which, in the
intervening occurrence of the European holocaust tends to be forgotten.  The
twentieth century may well be remembered historically more for these terrible
lapses than for any islands of order and stability we can achieve in any 
poch
if we are blessed.
Sincerely, 
                                     Frank
                                                                              
                                                       
--- PPoint 2.05
---------------