Oh, I agree that science and art can be brought together.

Then why say that doing so is "difficult" ?

I am perfectly capable of distinguishing between questions of an open and closed type.

One's which seem to you to be open or closed - it's all a matter of perception, as you would say :-)

 I can decide myself whether to answer them or not. For me, it is always an equation of effect: will my input be equalled or exceeded by the output. Selfish, of course. But environmentally friendly.

Fair enough.

The valuable critical faculty that you talk about is not 'let me stop you there, sonny'. The VCF requires that you actually study the material presented - as you so often admonish others to do with your own arguments.

You will notice that I haven't made any judgments so far about the material presented - and your point: "will my input be equalled or exceeded by the output." is relevant when deciding whether to study it.

The open mind asks 'can the answers be pertinent?'

But the open mind does not unquestioningly accept everything, it just doesn't dismiss things out of hand. It's quite consistent with having an open mind to examine things critically, accepting them if they seem valid, rejecting them if they don't. So the suggestions by ARGeezer and you that those of us who raise critical questions should just stay away from this kind of material, would seem to be encouraging us to have closed minds and we could be blamed for refusing to even consider such material. The mere fact that some of us ask questions and make some criticisms of some aspects of the material presented is just the kind of healthy debate which ought to go on here - not just uncritical approval.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.