[tpaine]

The "debate" has, therefore, to assume the forms of (1) a careful analysis of the noetic structure of existence and (2) an analysis of Second Realities with regard to both their constructs and the motivating structure of existence in untruth. "Debate" in this form is hardly a matter of reasoning ---- bla, bla, bla. -- I agree, - the author frames his argument for 'debate' in terms only he [and the pretensious fools who imagine they understand him], -- can deciper.

BTW, does ANYone know what the "noetic structure of existence" is?

[betty boop]

BTW, does ANYone know what the "noetic structure of existence" is?

tpaine, that is the very thing that Voegelin is endeavoring to demonstrate in this essay. He can't hand it to you on a silver platter, already "cooked to doneness, and predigested for you." You have to do the work -- please read the essay again, with an open mind (and spirit), carefully and attentively. Work through his penetrating analysis for yourself. Great teacher that he was, I strongly doubt that he would want it any other way.

But to give you a possibly helpful shortcut, look at the classical experiential sources of human existential problems that he adumbrates. These insights are as true now as ever, for the essential conditio humana does not change over time. You can take your clues from there.

[gore3000]

BTW, does ANYone know what the "noetic structure of existence" is?

Noetic comes from the Greek word 'nous' which means mind, intellect.