While this was very interesting reading, imho the bigger issue is how to address the people who believe, explicitly or implicitly, that there are NO limits on human cognition, who are constantly unsatisfied if not annoyed when someone says "it's quite possible that x is beyond human cognition." They distort discourse by dismissing the mysterian possibility out of hand. It seems few serious thinkers would join them. It'd be great if the thinking community could argue there are SOME merits to mysterianism, rather than trying to pin down the specific merits. It should be made clear to people that the probability that there must be some limits on cognition is significantly more than zero percent.