De-ontological Coherence

De-ontological coherence is not just a convenient tools when facing criticisms from certain theologians and/or metaphysicists who try to frame your statements as something total in situation where you have made certain positive assertions about certain word, such as "rationality". It is somehow bionic, of valid facts, of proper alternative leeways and flexibility, of limitations of both presentation and representation, of forensics &/ real statistically correctness and of neopragmatic survivalism and de-ontological wholism. Neopragmatism would be exalted to the same status as Bible and Qur'an to fundamentalists or Also sprach Zarathustra to Nazi, if it is not de-ontologized. The latter was a clear instance of misinterpreting a literature.

Those expect totality rather than partial validity r more often than not fall short of perfectionism they required from the others. Thus de-ontological coherence is situational and complex. Just like one neopragmatism can be different from the others. And, the ultimate criteria r of sustainability, of justice, of fuzzy logic, of neo-naturalistic freedom, of antitrust and of "wholistic"(process, application, protecting the weak etc.) systems and results.

De-ontologism, which is distinguished from deontology, itself is not total. It rejects only universal metaphysics. Those field metaphysics like foundations of mathematics r still viable.