How many Americans struggle to afford to live?

leading you to understand things

I don’t understand anything. Therefore I have no ideology.

You have failed to show that it is an ideology. You have explained that you disagree with it, but that’s not the same thing.

It’s an empirical fact that living beings don’t like being hurt. Therefore, it avoiding hurt is good. That’s not an ideology, it’s reasoning based on observable facts. An ideological position would be “we need to hurt living beings to further our interests”. The ideological position involves those interests.

Seeing all living beings as equal (e.g. in terms of prioritising not harming them, just as I would prefer not to be harmed or to harm myself) is about not having an interest, and therefore is clearly not ideological. It’s also objectively true, because in terms of cosmological time, the consequences of all living beings become equal.

Will me being infantile stop humans from hurting each other? If not, why would I be motivated to change?

Will me growing up (to stop being infantile) get in the way of my refraining from hurting others? If yes, why would I be motivated to change?

In my infantile state, I can clearly see that - even in a complex world - harming other living beings is wrong. I don’t like being harmed, so why would they like being harmed?

Maybe you need ideology to simplify the world. But that doesn’t mean that I require it. That’s part of the complex world you assert we live in, yes?

It is an objective fact that a harmful act harms someone. That one observer likes that outcome does not alter the objective moral weight of the act. Harmful acts are objectively wrong, regardless of preference.

From a basic empirical observation of the effects of harm, one can arrive at a moral system based on objective reasoning. In this way, ideology can be avoided.

Two different people can disagree on whether a table is a table: this does not alter objective fact.

The idea that objectivity requires a God figure would seem to me to be Berkeleyan idealism.

There is no inherent objective truth to these value questions.

I disagree. These values are based on objective observations.

I’m a simple person. I take people at their word, until it doesn’t work, and then I hate them.

I, too, take Trump at his word, which is how I know he’s sexually interested in his own daughter.

I’m autistic.

The dictionary definition.

I’m open to trying a non-Capitalist system, but I’m pretty sure hierarchical bullshit will happen and the majority will end up being exploited.

Whether anyone else is open to it before humans extinguish themselves, I don’t know.

I’m not a fan of ideology.

The root problem is human ideology. I do not know if we can have humans without ideology.

Make people stupid, make people fat, they spend more money, can’t argue with that.

World gets obese, world gets dumb, at least we made money, oh no we’re being burned to death by the sun.

Aside from the big brother distopian nightmare this proposal enables

A car knowing when I left a child in the backseat? Basically the same as my thoughts being censored by Big Brother.

It’s my right and my freedom to let people I am responsible for die in a heatwave!

You can’t fix human arrogance.

I can exercise my critical abilities by blocking this bot! Bye!

The Line will the people, from the Place of Lies to the Land of Plenty. The Line does not deviate.