Still Passionate and Confused

That you and I are on the opposite side of a wall in our philosophical stance and visions of reality is true, yet at least we can amicably reach across that divide and understand each other through the very tool (language) that those early, as Nietzsche said, "clever animals", our ancestors created oh so long ago in their negotiation with the strange and wonderful enviornment within which we all live and have our being; even if as I suggest that 'being' is groundless (for me and the pragmatists); or, as you suggest is both 'objective' and the very 'foundation' of our existence. What I'm suggesting is not that you are wrong, but that we are using two different approaches, two very different vocabularies, to describe our lives, thoughts, desires, and philosophies and that neither has the total truth, that both are human made truths that will in time probably be replaced with even better vocabularies and truths as we begin - with the help of science - to negotiate an understanding of our existence in this universe. Is this such a bad thing? You're view of life is to be commended, it has guided the imaginations of women and men for centuries to build this great civilization within which we all have a chance to discuss and debate such things. My virtual hands reach out in friendship and say... well done, buddy!