If you cannot see how clearly superior Dante's understanding of psychology, ethics, art, literature, economics, and reality is, this is merely evidence that you are unqualified to comment on these or, really, any subject.

Teehee. Giggle. Well, you just dropped a few points in my estimation.

Dante hates argumentum ad populum, but it has a place. On most of the key points, people would probably vote 9 to 1 in favor of my views. That never settles the issue itself, I realize. But to say that it should be obvious to me (or by implication anyone else) is ridiculous. So 90% of people believe something but it should be obvious to them that they're wrong?


some of the sharpest minds in the world at this board

"Laugh out loud" is usually taken metaphorically these days, but that really did make me literally laugh out loud.

Intelligent readers should be able to deduce the rest on their own.

I am quite happy to consider how intelligent readers will view arguments I make in comparison to other key posters here. "Intelligent" isn't so much the issue as "open-minded" or "not beyond the event horizon of the pro-contact black hole of epistemic closure".