Well, I can listen no longer, so it's time to participate. I am a clinical psychologist, and a long. long time sufferer of hearing something called 'science' which is not. For me the issue is at some point, no matter how intriguing, no matter how brillant sounding, no matter how articulate and no matter how well reasoned an expert, a person sounds, you must finally come up against some standard of proof, otherwise you face a bottomless pit and an ever burgeoning mountain of theories and books and articles all held up with a foundation of toothpicks-- certainly the state of psychoanalysis and the reliance on 'case studies', but increasingly every other theory of psychotherapy takes on the same look. But whether we talk about that "craft" or not, the issues are the same in the areas talked about in this forum. The talking and the musing while very rewarding and mellifluous sounding on the one hand, becomes endless on the other. When Stephen Hawking or his fellow theoreticians muse about the cosmos, there is always the offering of confirming or disconfirming hypotheses some where down the road.