Don't know if you looked through the second order pragmatism thread, but this is what I was getting at: the difficulty lies in nesting one belief system within a larger belief system. Because they are different, there will be contradictions. How can one be sure that the larger, "true" belief system will win out?
But the trick would involve some of the schizo stuff thats been brought up from time to time, as well as a basic understanding of incompleteness. It should be possible to operate within an inconsistent value system without merely bing ignorant or hypocritical.
Or perhaps the trick would just be the ability to instantaneously distance yourself from your current belief system. If you can do this, you can work out the ifs to the thens, perhaps effectively weaving between a collection of value systems.
It would also be, potentially, non-dialectical, which is hard for me to imagine because I practically live by the dialectical method.