Seeing (if not falling) Thru the Cracks

Dear Dialecticians and Colleagues Across
the Curriculum.
 
Seeing Through The Cracks
 
Consider:
 
The legitimacy of Irrationality on the one hand.
The legitimacy of Rationality on the other hand.
 
And do the 2 Just Get Along?, or would you
say it’s more like the sound of one hand
clapping?  Which hand?.
 
Consider:
 
 
 
Is this dance an effort to be “at one” with the whole?
 
             If so: call it religion.
 
Is this dance an effort to make the rain come, damnit!
         
            If so: call it magic and  superstition;
            call it Santa-Claus- petitioning.
            or call it fundamentalist "science" looking to
            establish & regulate because & affects.
 
Do you see the distinction?
From rituals of Praise &  Worship reduced
to  purposive aims & goals, assessment &
evaluation:  rites & rituals of request and
manipulation.
 
This distinction is worth putting in play and  arguing.
Let is stand (reductively)  for the Whole of Chap V.
 
Gregory Bateson: Angels Fear: Toward an
Epistemology of the Sacred. ’ pg 64.
 
“My task is to explore whether there is a sane
 and valid  place for “religion” somewhere
 between these two nightmares of nonsense
(positivistic science / romantic  supernaturalism)
 
Whether, if neither muddle-headedness nor
 hypocrisy is  necessary to religion, there might
be found in knowledge, and in art, the basis t
support an affirmation of the sacred  that would
celebrate natural unity.
 
Would such a religion offer a new kind of unity?
 And could it breed a new and badly need humility.”

Dialectic (liberal art) : 

1)  Polarize and Turn up the Opposition.
2)  Put IT in PLAY.
3)  Let No Team Win.
4)  Anticipate Emerging Values & Phenomena
      Revelation & Small Apocalypse's

Always: for the sake of argument.

xxxooo, Sam