You expect me to address people how they should be addressed, if they were what they should be.

I believe I should address people based on what they are like, and bring them towards what they should be.

There are many, many people who do not know the significance of reason, or who have come to accept that following their emotions is the natural approach to life. This doesn’t mean that they cannot reason, but it certainly doesn’t mean that they will take the value of reason for granted. You would have to make a case for reason, and point out the flaws of following one’s emotions, for them to realise that their beliefs are wrong. Whether they wish to acknowledge this or not is up to them.

I don’t think you quite appreciate that the mess we’re living in is real, and that people are suffering its consequences. But this doesn’t mean that all misguided souls are doomed for eternity. They can still be guided towards reason and truth, but we have to acknowledge where they are, how much damage was done to their thinking, and what needs to be presented to them in order for them to understand the flaws in their thinking.

If you are talking to someone over fourteen years of age, you should not have to explain why ’subjectivism is irrational and why irrationality is a bad thing.’ If the person’s life hasn’t already made that abundantly clear, what new evidence are you hoping to present, Haider? And if the person couldn’t come to these elementary decisions on their own, what gives you confidence that they are going to even take your argument into consideration? Indeed, what gives you confidence that they will even UNDERSTAND reason, if irrationality is their mode of operation?

If you aren’t getting paid, you have to learn to cut the losses. It’s like your that sect of Buddhists who think bringing others to enlightenment is now their responsibility since they have reached it.

How I write a draft and an outline is the thinking process that goes on behind the scenes. The whole writing experience helps me to better myself and my ideas. Bringing my knowledge to my attention helps serve as an important reminder.

The fact that I wish to involve others in my personal development isn’t a dichotomy.

There is a way in which you can tackle subjectivism and ignorance. You can’t just say: “Look, you’re being subjective,” or “you’re being ignorant.” In my opinion, you have to prove why subjectivism is irrational and why irrationality is a bad thing. You need to let others know what they are being ignorant about, and offer them the knowledge they need to acquire. If it is something that they were not aware of, they will conclude for themselves that they were ignorant of it.

Subjectivism and ignorance should *never* serve as a basis for an argument, unless you wish to demonstrate how the argument would collapse.

To ‘bring them to the university level,’ you do not have to condemn them for how they currently think, but you must indeed condemn the way they currently think. The acceptance of objective reality leaves no room for a ‘big tent’ of ideas. Either you cut through people’s subjective-based arguments, or you will not see them cease. The same forms of irrationality will simply re-appear in further discussions. Why not heed this problem off at the start? Sometimes teaching is not holding one’s hand, but slapping him in the face. Those who understand will not shrink from it, or resent you for it. Even an oak tree was once a sapling, who had to face the elements of Nature naked and alone. This is the progression of all thing that are to be great and mighty, whether it be a tree or a mind.

‘My job isn’t to highlight how ignorant people are, but to present them with what they can benefit from..’ I wonder what could benefit one more, other than having his ignorance highlighted?

First of all, congratulations on launching your site. I just registered in the forum, and hope to visit it more often.

As for the level of my writings, there are two issues involved: 1) the purpose of the writing, 2) the audience to which it is addressed.

In this post, my purpose isn’t to argue in defense of free-will, but to encourage the readers to *experience* making decisions in the direction they wish to lead their lives in. It’s not intended to be analytical. The greatest changes in our lives can come about, not by learning something new, or understanding what we already know, but by *applying* what we know. Yes, we know we have free-will, but why do we make it so hard to exercise our free will to make the right choices? How can we make the most use of our ability to choose?

An article can be a simple reminder of what we know, and this can have a positive affect on those who are reminded, and those who remind (who remind themselves of what they know and what they value).

As for the audience, I wouldn’t say I’m frustrated by someone’s level of intelligence. Not when writing, anyway. I accept that there are many people who are currently thinking on a second grade level, but have the capacity to deal with university-level issues. For me to bring them to the university-level, I can’t begin with university-level work, or condemn them for how they currently think. If I wish to be an influence in their lives, I should take their present way of thinking into consideration, and work our way up.

I wouldn’t say I’m appealing to people’s ignorance, but I accept that not everyone thinks on the same level. My job isn’t to highlight how ignorant people are, but to present them with what they can benefit from, given their existing knowledge and capacity.