Exactly. That’s what you want to discuss. It had absolutely nothing to do with my post.
You presented what you wanted the discussion to focus on in terms of
‘we need…’
when in fact it is merely what ‘Iambiguous wants’
IOW you are being an objectivist. Instead of taking responsibility for the fact that what you are claiming 'we need, merely has to do with your desires…that is, you frame your desires as a universal need. The word need making it sound objective. The we making it sound universal.
Both the ‘we’ and the ‘need’ are hallucinations. It’s objectivist BS. We don’t need it. You merely want that to be the focus of the discussion.
The experts in Buddhism emphasize practice as the way to ‘get Buddhism’. For others, Iamb’s random grabbing of texts and throwing up his hands in relation to them is nto a good way to learn about anything. At a minimum, most fields would be better approached through texts that are intended to be introductions to the most easy to understand facets of that field. And then there is a added set of issues related to a field that deals with changing fundamental ways of experiencing. Such a field, and there are a number in religion/psychology/spirituality are much better approached via practices of various kinds - were one actually interested - since habits of mind, not just the verbal contents of thoughts, are being changed.