However, though naturally one agrees, the region of determination, of bounding things as a field is bound by stream and hillside, is still extended to humans. Without this, what should one do, in order to make a means for getting to what matters most in what is at issue collectively in the conversation, which is founded on such statements?
This is nowhere demonstrated. How could it be, considering one doesn’t know what reality means? What could it be founded on but what seems to be? In order to speak of reality on needs a determination. The mighty Richard Feynman says, rigour in science is the number of decimal places in the measurement. Ergo, reality in decimal places. That is an example of saying what reality means. And, it does mean. So, reality too is this meaning you place under those ever observed frowning clouds of error.
Exacto! Pure Platonism. One is in-between. However, for Plato, there is the seeking of reality. What justifies this seeking to deceive oneself?
This is all only possible because the reach of the idea of time extends to human beings. What you say fills in the needs of a being already in that uncanny region.
Humans live in time. Science as math done in the mind is teleological, but functional as Science under a theory of science. I.e., the test relies on meaning, that provided by daily life which happens in time, but as scientific result, it is given in maths which take no causal inflection whatsoever. This is confused by the popular way of speaking about science as dealing with “instrumental cause”, which is rather like the issue of scientists being unable to distinguish between scientific results, and expert opinions (given by scientists) about diverse subject matter.