tom, you’re on a big kahuna roll. 
Thanks for making me 
.
While reflecting on this yesterday I realized the word “hypocrisy” is misleading … the word suggests conscious intent.
More accurately stated … “Epicurean Psychological Firewalls … the elephant in the room.”
Reminds me of an experience several years ago … chatting with a Chinese teenage girl … about 16 years old … conversational English training. This young girl was born into privilege yet retained a veneer of humility.
I asked her one day … "Is your world OK … not perfect … yet OK?
She smiled and replied “Yes”
I than asked her … “Is the world OK … not perfect … yet OK?”
With a look that said “Are you crazy” … she replied with an adamant … "NO!
Psychologists tell us our minds simply block from our view the “stuff” that is inconsistent with our personal world view.
Are you referring to what some label the “Journey of Self Discovery”? … ergo “The Road Less Traveled” 
I’ve been on this “less traveled road” … goat trail … for about 25 years … have yet to meet a fellow “traveler”.
OTH … the 43 years I spent travelling the “super highways” the crowds were so dense I couldn’t hear myself think.
Of course, I have no idea what you mean by this.
Epicureans define ‘good’ in a particular way. As a result they choose some things over others. I don’t know how that would qualify as a “psychological firewall”. 
Thank you. I appreciate that.
That calls to mind a question here: What is a good person? albeit I do not want to derail this thread. Is a good person basically someone who strives to be “decent” for the most part?
Anyway, I look forward to you perhaps giving me your views of consciousness at a later date.
What is “decent”?
What is “strives”?
How much is “most part”?
Phyllo,
I am horrified that you are asking Arc about decency as if her interactions do not portray any sense of online etiquette equaling decency.
Be as horrified as you want.
She substituted the word ‘decent’ for the word ‘good’ and said nothing about the word ‘decent’ means to her.
No doubt lots of people will both agree and disagree with her … while having a completely different idea of what the word ‘decent’ means.
Who is good?
Someone who practices the virtues? Why or why not?
Roman virtues :
crystalinks.com/romanvirtues.html
Christian virtues :
So you skirt my reasoning as to Arc’s online conduct representing decency…goodness…
as if it doesn’t exist. How very liberal of you. Like I said, common sense is dead and people who ask such horrifying questions are evidence of that.
Decency and goodness are hard to gauge over the internet. Maybe she sells dalmatian fur jackets to support herself. Who knows?
So you are going with dishonesty? How very liberal.
I wonder why you post such things.
Dishonesty? Liberal? Really?
Do you really wonder? Doubtful. Arc behaves in a decent way online. What she does offline is not evidenced thoroughly, only online. You dispute her decency online?
You have called me dishonest twice in the last two weeks.
You really like to steer in that direction … towards personal ‘traits’. Even when I have tried to move the discussion back to philosophy, you kept it personal.
Even your defense of Arc is based on her personal characteristics rather than the philosophical concepts of ‘goodness’ or ‘decency’.
How ought one to live?
Arc represents an example that you cannot deal with…obviously. Is real life and real people too difficult to compute?
Do you dispute Arc’s decency online?
Strike three.
You just return to the bench then.
What do you care what I do?