Any “is” statement can be demoted to an “ought” statement simply by disagreeing with it.
To declare our creation complete is to condemn ourselves to be Prisoners and kill the Philosophers that challenge our reality.
Is this what [is] referencing here? Who knows, who cares. […] Importantly, we know it cannot ever be appealed to as “genuinely known”.
No axiomatic system is both complete or consistent. This has some major repercussions on governance.
We try to avoid being in situations where our choices are limited. This happens in one of two ways: gaining power or committing to impotence.
Regardless of what is “true”, finding the situation in which the least people suffer is the optimal decision.
Much of our interaction with society isn’t thought about through risk, but how we expect it to work and how we fill the gaps.
Without contrast, paradise is a prison.
If there is no common ground to be found within a discussion, you may as well be screaming into the void.
“All deserve to explore
What might give them purpose”