and it really is a "wheel", because all of these ideas generally have a context in which they are valid. as i said before, religion is superior to instinct when describing a circumstance that one must rise above instinct. and rationality superior to religion, when one must rise above belief. and so on, up the chain. this is also true down the chain, when one must choose the correct part of the self to be in the present. should you react to your wife or children, who need love, with just a form of platonic reason? if they are not coming to you with a need for strength and wisdom, that's probably a dry choice. they might just want you to be human. and so too must these rationalists be human when they recognize the value of believing in a value vs always calculating the utility of an action. and similarly, these religious people fail to recognize the value of sheer emotion, which is below even "the word" of religion. in that emotion, you have a great source of power and inspiration, as well as beauty. ultimately, i think what individualists come to recognize is that viewpoints on how a society should be ran are aesthetic choices to an extent. society does not actually have to be any particular way, so you can't come to some absolute proof for anything without assumptions about value, which you should limit in power and apply to context of the situation. (4/6)
United States