Researcher Bias & Materialist Methodology: Kant, Sherif, and McGilChrist state real-world context is required. The Maxim that spirituality is "intangible and beyond the senses" (Miller & Thorensen) is wrong on several levels 1. That is a Definist fal

"When logic and proportion Have fallen sloppy dead And the White Knight is talking backwards" (Jefferson Airplane 1960's White rabbit song) Sr Director Evans of Kaiser Permanente Member Services sent me a written letter - by registered mail no less - stating that my rights to KP services had been suspended for abusive conduct. Director Evans listed my critique of materialist methodology as the number 1 abuse. She quotes from a December 8, 2022 message "I felt that the acceptance of the Definist fallacy and your refusal to acknowledge my rights and beliefs as extremely offensive" I even filed a complaint with the DOJ which was accepted. My position is endorsed by Dr. Koenig, Dr Wong, and Dr Farra, and Stefan Schindler" It is very true that I find the materialist maxim that "spirituality is unreal" very offensive – especially since the materialist argument includes a "loaded term" – making it a freaking fallacy – specifically a Definist Fallacy. Below is a description of the pivotal argument in my (pee4r reviewed) critique of materialist methodology. In a nutshell, the critique centered on the materialist argument that spirituality is "intangible and beyond the senses." The psychologists, William R. Miller and Carl E. Thoresen, state in their article, "Spirituality, religion and health: an emerging field of research": "A philosophical basis for this perspective is materialism, the belief that there is nothing to study because spirituality is intangible and beyond the senses." That the pivotal part of that argument is a fallacy – specifically the "Definist fallacy" because it uses "loaded" terms which prevents any real dialogue or communication. "The Definist Fallacy occurs when someone unfairly defines a term so that a controversial position is made easier to defend. Same as the Persuasive Definition." (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy) " Death" of course is "intangible and beyond the sense" – which would make "Death a figment of your imagination." The materialist argument is a fallacy. As Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist states, "It is not true if the major premise is not true" (p. 795 Logical Fallacies and the Supreme Court..) Intro: Real World Context-Evidence (Kant, McGilChrist, Sherif) – Real World Context-Evidence: 1. Immanuel Kant: "If a concept lacks reference to any object of possible experience…. It "has no meaning and is completely lacking in content" (P.15 Kant's Theory of Symbolism, John D Glenn Jr) 2. Muzafer Sherif, a serous critic of social psychology's methodology emphasizes that real world contexts are important, even if regarded as "messy" compared to controlled lab experiments." Wikipedia 3. Iain McGilchrist argues that "neglect of context is the greatest single disaster which philosophic thinking can incur." Entangled in Abstractions The answer to spirituality – scientifically and spiritually - would be "People!" It is readily apparent that spirituality got entangled in abstractions: "the supernatural-unreal", "powers," "crystal ball vision," "intangible and beyond the senses" (William R. Miller and Carl E. Thoresen) etc. If spirituality is about something it would be about "people." In a nutshell, my argument is that spirituality – and other questions such as Free Will or even social consciousness - have gotten entangled in abstractions Dr Stephen Farra commented: "Good short paper- A lack of belief in "free will" routinely leads to a sense of meaninglessness. despair, and unethical personal behavior. Our paradigms are our way of addressing Reality, but they are Not Reality. As C Peck, Jr. suggests, we are getting lost in our own abstractions!" Yes, spiritual people are people! - not lab rats or disconnected abstractions!