Somehow I got to feel a lot of unease when I read sentences like > Fortunately you don't have to spend all your time with independent-minded people ... Maybe

Somehow I got to feel a lot of unease when I read sentences like > Fortunately you don't have to spend all your time with independent-minded people ... Maybe it's the absurdity to divide people (and here obviously ALL people) simply into two groups and just by structuring them gain some meaning or knowledge. It's really easy and unprofessional: really you could divide society up by uncountable distinctions. But distinctions do not make dialectics or aren't anything but misleading if you're just asserting them. Also the distinctions between conventional and independent are just blurry ones here, only derived by example; not by definition. There is no intellectual sharpness to the argument, right from the start of the "essay" – in that, that it appeals only to the intuition, not to the mind. There are no studies about "independent-minded" or "conventional-minded" people; not in hte sense he is using the term here. Quite the opposite: he is using the terms to appeal to a feeling. In no earnest science, or literature, someone talks so dull and undifferentiated about human beings. Also I wouldn't ever think about a friend of mine, or someone close to me with such cold efficiency that derives from that really simplistic way of handling people and amateur psychology.