'I do deem thinking overall a virtue, I just feel thinking most of the time isn't, but that modesty most of the time is.'
The way you state this confuses me... you call thinking a virtue... but only some of the time... whereas modesty more often is... but... to my way of thinking... modesty holds us back. If Thomas Edison had said "aww, shucks... little old me can't invent a glass bulb that holds light..." yeah... if it wasn't him, somebody else would have... but... if modesty were such a collective virtue, people in general might say "aww, shucks, we people don't need/deserve a light bulb... candles will do just fine, thanks." And where would we be then?
'I believe God is in our selves and that we naturally know all good and right, but the more we think, the more we tend to stray farther from God, and educated impulses .'
I have no desire to start the God debate, but I must say... you pretty much said my point yourself, the only difference is the negative connotation you give to something I see as positive: 'but the more we think, the more we tend to stray farther from God,'
I must also say.... since when are impulses educated. I just spent over $500 on a new computer monitor and some other gadgets today.... it was an impulse... educated? LOL... I'd say not. If i were to apply thought to the situation, I would have acted with more moderation, and saved myself a considerable amount of money. By your logic, impulse is the better way to go... but... impulse leads to the satisfaction of desires... which generally isn't covered by moderation... There are no contradictions... one of us needs to check our premises.
'I meant too "differently" from philosophies of our ancestors based on realizations,'
There is evidence suggesting that ancient Romans and Greeks knew the world was round. That knowledge was lost in the middle ages. Early explorers believed that the world was flat. It is only by rational thought that mankind rediscovered the truth... it is only by rational thought that we overcame irrational beliefs.
'Why do we have to think our way to peace when impulse tends to have better aim?'
We have to think ourselves away form the state that impulse has brought us too. Hitler had the impulse to kill all Jews because of a presonal grudge against them. He also had the impulse to invade russia. those impulses didn't get him very far. Unfortunately, sometimes thinking our way out of a situation includes violence. The Russians thought their way out of an invasion by slashing and burning their crops and letting winter do the rest. I'm sure their impulse would have been to save thier land, their crops and property... but thought overcame impulse, and thought prevailed.
'Thinking intrudes and makes sandblind the eye of wisdom,'
I still can't say I know what you mean by wisdom.
'our outragous lack of abstaining- in substances, in pleasure, in business--'
I see abstinence as foolish in many cases. I will not abstain from pleasure when it presents itself to me- why would I? Why would I intentionally make my life less fun, less enjoyable, than it can be? Keep in mind that I do mean from a logical perspective- logic would have dictated that I keep my $500 today, if I had only $600 in the bank. Fortunately, however, I am in a poistion that I can afford to spend money on gadgets... so logically, it makes sense for me to please myself by doing so. Money in the bank doesn't make me happy. New stuff does.
How can one 'fail to abstain' in business? I just don't get it. What do you mean?
Substances are one thing to which I do hold the code of moderation. Can't disagree with you there.
'Our side of the world should stop wasting time and money on its own pleasure and business of entertainment and advancement that is immodestly out of proportion and give just a bit better distribution of these to the other side of the world'
No it shouldn't. Nobody's happiness or prosperity should ever come at the expense of mine. If I choose to send money or donations to less fortunate people, that is an act of my own volition... I do believe in giving to others, but I believe in it as a primarily selfish action. It makes me feel good to do it. It makes me happy to do it, therefore, I do it. There is mutual gain- a family is fed by my contribution to a food drive, and I am satisfied that I did my part. See what I mean? But nobody should ever be forced into such a social contract, because not all people see the virtue in giving. Not all people want to share. That's fine too.
'that shows needing our help in much areas,'
What do they do to deserve our help? What's in it for us?
'instead of just putting hand in and paying attention to them it seems only when menacing war and massacres stand out.'
This is true, and it irritates me to no end. Tossing alms to keep the less fortunate quiet about their plight is wrong, in my opinion. Logic and thought dictate that one would find the root of the problem and remedy it. Laziness and fear on the part of governments leads to 'keep it down' behavior.
'No billionaire, or millionaire person or even corporation should exist while there are impoverished ill people and countries in this world. No celebrity or sport should get more attention.'
So, nobody of merit should exist while people who are unable to feed and clothe themselves exist? No prosperity while the poor exist? Better to have the entire world starving than only part? Demanding that people fall down to the lowest denominator gives no guarentee that others will rise for a common good. Instead, it digresses into a common squallor, where each man pleads his need, and no man is willing to disclose his ability, because he knows he will be faced with the burden of feeding another man's family while his own goes without. Who feeds the world then, with all ability eradicated?
'My problem is that Iím not so sure whether the nomadic barely-survival lifestyle isnít one that a large number of people actually yearn for.'
In theory. Throw people out in the wilderness for two hours, like you said. See how much more they appreciate big business after that.
For the most part, we're in agreement here... You are basically saying that people yearn for a nomadic lifestlye but can't let go of 'real' life. I'm saying that people express a desire for social systems that will, ultimately, reduce a society to that level of squallor. They want it indirectly, without realizing exactly what it is that they want.
I am writing graffiti on your body
I am drawing the story of how hard we tried