At this point, it would be simple to explain away everything that has been said in terms of evolutionary psychology, or basic human emotion. Such a project would also be somewhat futile, because we have already said that what a man reports after he returns from direct contact with the inexpressible is only a pale and partial description. Thus, you may refute what I say about my intuition, but it means little, but you have only refuted what I said, and I never said what I really meant. Thus, you have defeated a shadow but the reality that casts the shadow is still standing, although I cannot tell you where, you can only see it for yourself. The point of telling you about the shadow was to suggest the reality and significance of the object—not to demonstrate it conclusively. Only those who put too much faith in their ability to express the ineffable are bothered when their formulations are found to be incomplete and therefore insufficient from the point of view of ‘proof’ or conclusive demonstration. Those who understand the nature of what it is they wish to talk about also know that their ‘arguments’ are weak before they even present them.