Reason and Religion 6/7
Having paused our rather dense academia.edu dialogue for several days to give everyone a break, we now resume.
After agreeing with my algebraic definition of language (which consists of signs or objects, strings or syntactically patterned arrangements of objects, syntax or formal patterns instantiated by the strings, and grammar or rules of nonterminal derivation and terminal orthography supporting orderly linguistic evolution) and perhaps even with my factual observation that reality has the same basic ingredients and therefore conforms to the definition, physicist-cum-metaphysician Dennis Polis now seems to reiterate his counterfactual opinion that there is still no sound theory of metaphysics, and that the foundations of science and religion cannot be fruitfully examined until such a theory has been duly provided (ostensibly by him, i.e., Dennis Polis).
Dennis Polis: "Chris, I agree with your sentiments and the general thrust of your argument. I would only say that science and religion do have foundations, but they cannot be adequately examined absent a sound metaphysics."
Chris Langan: Agreed, Dennis. That's why I introduced the only sound metaphysical system decades ago. There's absolutely no getting out of it. That part of the game is over.