Alan Nigel Marshall wrote, in part

> since SETI practitioners cast Western science (and, more so, Western
> mathematics) as the universal language(s) despite their context-
> dependency and historical contingency.

We all agree that the form and choice of content of currently practiced
science, including mathematics, is culturally influenced.  But like
"effective" salesman, the pomo's and litcrit's try to continue their
rapid fire habituation spiel in such a way that we move from agreeing,
impatiently, with the obvious to saying yes to the nonsensical.

If, as claimed, the adepts have been able to achive out-of-box
experiences and recognize that a particular claimed mathematical truth
[a truth, not a model] is a cultural chimera, than they should state so
explicitly.

Even before Kant, scientists have recognized that the central
epsitemological problem is that a dog can't learn quantum mechanics
[celestial mechanics, QED, etc].  Less coyly stated, our concept of
reality is determined and limited by our wiring.  But that is a problem
for neurobiologists not re-born 19th century Romantics and
Naturphilosophie.  Let's face it, Goethe was a great poet, but his
physics sucked.

The more I hear the Critical Method claims, often whispered but always
denied when confronted, that airplanes are held up with bullshit, the
more sympathy I have for the guys who burned Giordano Bruno for
hermeticism.