the debate over accomodationism is a bit artificial: the issues are larger than ‘two sides in debate’. The issue is more a Kantian reserve toward what we call the ‘spiritual’ and about which we cannot achieve correct knowledge but which we can’t also dismiss as fiction. Here the debate of ‘god’ is confusing: that’s the hardest question, perhaps an insoluble one. But there is a vast domain of the spiritual which is a mixed ‘material/spiritual’ boundary. And this blends into the realm of consciousness because higher states of consciousness and enlightenment are clearly both within nature and yet characteristically an aspect of what we call ‘spiritual’. In a way this way why the Samkhya yogis invented their ‘spiritual materialism’, to make it clear that the ‘boundary’ is just as well rewritten as a unity, make it all ‘material’.