Say that there is a phenomenal field in which all perceptions and conceptions operate, or rather that is consitituted by these and their interactions, and assume of course that 'you' are an emergent of this too. This would be a brief summary of the naturalist position. Is there some sense in which something other than phenomenal is demanded by this picture, say 'being', or the 'observer', or the 'thou'? Well, obviously there is such a demand, you can call it humanism in a broad sense. The more pertinent question is whether it is a 'real' demand, whether it irreducibly points to something beyond the phenomenal, or whether that very 'beyond' is itself just phenomenal, the higher level implicit in it being a sort of perspectival, or even parallax effect. You can think of the proponent of the first alternative as the 'gnostic' and of the second as the 'deconstructionist'. It seems then as if the gnostic can always find its truth concealed within the deconstruction and the deconstructiionist can always find the hidden flaw in the gnostic. How many cycles of this dance can you hold in mind at once? And on which foot do you start?