"help us all experience fascination and gratitude for the world we are in. To notice the miracle of existence, embrace whatever surrounds us, and respond with grace and wisdom to all that arises"
> rationality continually countered my search for love
Have you heard of Stefan Molyneux's rational definition of love: our automatic emotional response to virtue?
> our daily experience consist of a series of inexplicable phenomena that we need only observe and respond to in an ongoing flow, rather than try to pin down as certain or worse, fight against as wrong.
Wdym? For example Ross Ulbricht is locked away in a cement cage, probably under solitary confinement - that is *objectively* wrong/evil, surely we're all certain of that? Katherine Forrest is the *objectively evil* judge who chose to sentence him to over *two lifetimes* in this cage, beyond what the similarly evil prosecutors demanded. (Remember, Ross never hurt a single person. There are allegations, never proven in court, that he threatened to hurt an evil guy, who turned out to be a corrupt state agent who was sentenced to jail for a few years.)
> Yet the evidence for our beliefs in [...] right and wrong, [...] suggests anything but truth.
You need to read up on Stefan Molyneux's Universally Preferable Behavior or Hans Hermann Hoppe's Argumentation Ethics or Stephan Kinsella's Estoppel ... this stuff isn't evidence-based, it's logic. There is an "objective" universal answer to this timeless question. And it's not hard. And you probably already knew it, in your own words :p. All three are basically paraphrasing the same idea.
> they themselves, are perfect.
Katherine Forrest is not perfect. She deserves very very serious punishment for the hurt she has ... endorsed. I guess she isn't literally the person committing the kidnapping/confinement, but she definitely supports it.
Your observations are very interesting. I'm looking forward to reading your book... Really..
"help us all experience fascination and gratitude for the world we are in. To notice the miracle of existence, embrace whatever surrounds us, and respond with grace and wisdom to all that arises"
that's so beautiful 🥰🥹
> rationality continually countered my search for love
Have you heard of Stefan Molyneux's rational definition of love: our automatic emotional response to virtue?
> our daily experience consist of a series of inexplicable phenomena that we need only observe and respond to in an ongoing flow, rather than try to pin down as certain or worse, fight against as wrong.
Wdym? For example Ross Ulbricht is locked away in a cement cage, probably under solitary confinement - that is *objectively* wrong/evil, surely we're all certain of that? Katherine Forrest is the *objectively evil* judge who chose to sentence him to over *two lifetimes* in this cage, beyond what the similarly evil prosecutors demanded. (Remember, Ross never hurt a single person. There are allegations, never proven in court, that he threatened to hurt an evil guy, who turned out to be a corrupt state agent who was sentenced to jail for a few years.)
> Yet the evidence for our beliefs in [...] right and wrong, [...] suggests anything but truth.
You need to read up on Stefan Molyneux's Universally Preferable Behavior or Hans Hermann Hoppe's Argumentation Ethics or Stephan Kinsella's Estoppel ... this stuff isn't evidence-based, it's logic. There is an "objective" universal answer to this timeless question. And it's not hard. And you probably already knew it, in your own words :p. All three are basically paraphrasing the same idea.
> they themselves, are perfect.
Katherine Forrest is not perfect. She deserves very very serious punishment for the hurt she has ... endorsed. I guess she isn't literally the person committing the kidnapping/confinement, but she definitely supports it.