JB> Just in case you missed -some- of what Frank advocates falls into dogma.
 JB> In particular, his dogma, assumption, that man doesn't have the ABILITIY
 JB> to preceive REALITY.
   John, I very much dislike being starkly and deliberately misrepresented.  

can GUARANTEE YOU that I have NEVER, EVER said any such thing - NEVER!!!
   I HAVE said (and it makes all the difference in the world, so listen VERY
carefully:  Man, as a PART of the reality in which he exists cannot KNOW THE
FULL STRUCTURE OF REALITY.  Why is that so difficult to understand.  Our
ineluctable position within reality is as a part of it.  Our perceptions can
only BE within that limited range.  This doesn't mean we can know NOTHING of
reality because we experience it of necessity.  We cannot, however, give an
account of reality as though we were an observer standing or sitting 
omewhere
ABOVE OR BEYOND OR OUTSIDE of reality with that reality as an OBJECT.  
   I make a determined effort not to take the words you guys use and twist
them into MY PERCEPTION of what I THINK you said.  Debate loses all sense 
hen
one cannot be assured that his thoughts will not be changed into something
entirely the opposite from what he expressed, do you not agree?
   Our perception of REALITY, however, is certainly limited.  As Voegelin
phrases it, man is NOT a "self-contained spectator"  he is an actor "playing 

role in the drama of being and, through the brute fact of his existence,
committed to playing it without knowing knowing what it is.... The role of
existence must be played in uncertainty of its meaning as an adventure of
decision on the edge of necessity and freedom." (_Order and History_, Vol I,
page 1).
Sincerely, 
                                     Frank
                                                                              
                                                       
--- PPoint 2.05
---------------