I totally understand how philosophies, whether wrong or not, came to be: some random person with an interesting idea wrote it down, taught it to others, and oth

I totally understand how philosophies, whether wrong or not, came to be: some random person with an interesting idea wrote it down, taught it to others, and others liked it enough to keep sharing it or further adapt/adopt it. Through this process, things that have withstood the test of time are probably worth a look, but then with time comes a loss of context and relevance. I mean, I wasn't even saying most/all/many philosophies are dead wrong. It's all about the signal to noise ratio after you've read more than a couple books. You'd be a fool to blindly believe in the process of how ancient wisdom is passed down mostly by a long standing popularity contest. Worse, even good ideas come with "addons" and extra baggage that needs to be thrown out, because ancient elders knew that common people wouldn't understand the core ideas and thus attached "click baity" stuff to ensure the ideas keep passed down over generations. > In fact, I'll bet you it entices you because you'll end up catching yourself saying "hey, I thought of that". Sure, this happens often. I consider this independent validation of my own ideas. Without this independent "verification" process, you're almost taking what you read on faith. (yes, the explanations or justifications they give are often not the real ones...)