I have debated Chomsky for example on Hume. I aced the course in Philosophy at the university and even I have corrected an IQ test on a philosophical test question. I can go there, but please not here and not now. Because for one reason is I am a reductionist and will pour energy into sieving the generative essence which consumes much effort, especially when we are referring to the wide open abstractions of philosophy.
(The fitness, as it pertains to the debate of color, of the blind is that of the non-Postmodern Epicurean as it pertains to the debate of ontologyillusory [i.e., non-veridical])
The wealth required by nature is limited and is easy to procure; but the wealth required by vain ideals extends to infinity.
Thou shalt take no interest of thy brother, interest of money, interest of victuals, interest of anything that can be lent upon interest: of a foreigner thou mayest take interest, but of thy brother thou shalt not take interest; that Jehovah thy God may bless thee in all the business of thy hand in the land whither thou goest to possess it.
Economy is the controlled implosion of conceived value, via the infinite blueshift of idle want, within a social Schwarzschild wormhole that terminates with one's person.
He who is not satisfied with a little, is satisfied with nothing.
All gain should seem infinitesimal relative to the More of boundless wanta
demigod.