In article <3645EA86.A5731A97 at clickshop.com>, Seth Russell <sethruss at clickshop.com> wrote:
>Ryan Holm wrote:
>>> [snip] ... but who says we can't learn from exploring beyond the
>> limits of materialism, even if we don't know what is beyond
>> materialism..
>>I think that the biggest problem here is that word "materialism" and whether
>that word is making any real distinction that is important. So that I read
>your question: "Who says we can't learn from exploring beyond the limits of
>chiggyness?" Now please don't give me a definition of "materialism" based on
>the historical development of the idea - we would just get hopelessly mired
>in words. My contention would be that not only does this word mean totally
>different things to different people, but it is not clear whether it means
>anything very particular to anyone. Guck! Do we need such a word?
Depends on what you got in your mind.
