It would be enjoyable and worthwhile to continue this conversation. You said: seeking to put forth ultimate answers which others should--must?--accept as valid is a waste of time. I can't say I agree with that. Isn't that exactly what logicians and philosophers who use logic attempt to do? I believe that everyone must accept 1+1=2as valid and the syllogisim that starts all men are mortal. It seems what philosophers attempt to do is apply strict logic as far as possible to support their positions and the more logical the more "necessary" that those positions be seen as valid.

You also say regarding the belief or non-belief in materialism: accepting that no belief of anyone can be of any consequence whatsoever to anyone who eschews that belief.

I'm not sure exactly what you are saying, so I can only say I think I disagree. If I understand it right, you are suggesting in some ways that beliefs don't matter too much. Is that right? If so, I couldn't disagree more. One of the main reasons for exploring the issue of physicalism in my series Top-Down is to get at some of the underlying beliefs and values that are foundational to our culture and society. Numerous posts in Science and Philosophy reveal an underlying nihilism and existentialism that has been evident in our Western and global culture for many years. My own thought is that the belief in materialism and physicalism is the basis for what seems to me a sort of desperate malaise. If physicalism isn't in fact true, and if there is indeed "something more" as I suggest in my series that science and philosophy provide justification to believe, it can mean something very significant.

The effort by Brian Greene in Until the End of Time demonstrates clearly what results in terms of the human need for meaning and purpose in a pointless, purposeless and completely random universe.