My reading comprehension has been on the fritz these days but I notice you use a lot of words derived from some sort of theism. You use 'evil' a lot. Just an observation.
Dad Dick 2999 wrote:So you know that feeling when your inability to swim in treacly ambiguity corrodes your most privately, deeply held sense of self and purpose?
I do know that feeling but in my case I was ready to let that part of me go anyway. Personally, my brain has folded, unfolded, re-folded, both, neither, and BOTH AND NEITHER so many times over the past few years that priorities change, how I hold myself and how I see the world / cosmos continues to evolve and devolve and re-evolve again and again.
The way I view it is if that part is 'corroding' then maybe it wasn't that strong in the first place.
I had a TV Series I wanted to make for a long time about non-linear time that was about similar ideas. It was basically about worm-holes being portals to parallel universes. The main character was seeking 'perfection' but he learns that since he is from a 'non-perfect' universe, every universe he subsequently enters in the duration of the story will be 'corroded' and thus 'non-perfect' ergo chasing a said 'perfection' was futile (this was in the grander concept of 'a chase' literal and metaphorical).
Dad Dick 2999 wrote:Trying to reconcile any sense of right/wrong moral/evil or any non-binary continua…this is why academics make such terrible human beings. The only way to make philosophical progress is to divorce meaning from experience—a ‘control’ for the ‘experiment.’
1. Regarding the first sentence, strongly disagree. I'm going to cite Jordan Peterson and Bret Weinstein as modern examples of academics that stood up for their sense of self in the face of adversity.
2. Regarding the second sentence, I also disagree, as I think the inverse is also applicable. Instead of 'divorce' I would say 'apply' "meaning" to an experience. It's sort of like an ontological synthesis.
Lastly, and I apologize if I am hung up about this, per your use of these terms 'moral' + 'ethical', and I have said this before to one of your posts [so excuse me for sounding redundant], once you start using terms like that it will always boil down to your particular brand of ethical relativism on that particular day.
This isn't meant as an attack or anything. We're having fun. This is fun for us.