Some quick responses to George's quick responses to my responses. - 1) You still maintain that there are "only a very few" cases involving genuinely unknowable information. I admire your diligence in reading all the books and interviewing all those who make such claims. - 2) You say it is psychiatry not psychology that deals with case histories. Thank you. I wanted to use the term "case histories" in place of your prejudicial "anecdotes" as a basis for study. I still think this is a valid answer to your question about how to proceed. - 3) The nature of love, the impact of music, the origin of ideas. See the new thread. - 4) You say that subjects such as the existence of God, the paranormal, ethics, aesthetics, religion, evolution etc. all depend on a knowledge of chemistry because life and the functioning of brains depends on chemistry. I had pointed out that there was no scientific paradigm for any of these subjects. The fact that chemistry is a factor ("depend on a knowledge of..." seems to me to be going a bit too far) does not mean that there is a scientific paradigm. - 5) Matter is a special form of energy (by which you mean the measurable energy defined by physicists, and not the imaginary "chi"). In view of your reply to BBella, perhaps I could repeat a quote from Wikipedia: "It has been noted that the names 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' serve mainly as an expression of human ignorance, much like the marking of early maps with 'terra incognita'."