Yes, I typed the wrong word, but, wow. World of words is even better. It perfectly encapsulates your modus operandi, which you occasionally defend as the only one left to you because of your lack of mobility, even though that excuse is patently false. They would come to you. Practices can be engaged in, often, where you are with phone call or other guidance. You could check off many items on that list. You could start to go through them. You could ADD other approaches, a little bit, to what you have now, without stopping your so far failing approach that has no scientific backing.
Yet you keep using a method that has not worked, based only on words, rather than try things that have some scientific backing, that involve encounters with others, physical practices, participation without words, or with both words and action.
You expect to learn and change via and only via words on a screen. Learning not by doing, not via engagement, not by practices, but through a world of words only, in a process that that has not made any changes in a decade in, for example, your F&F.
Perfect, even better, thank you for the term. It fits you to a T.
You do understand that integrity includes being able to admit specific errors.
Tossing in, occasionally, that you might be wrong, in the abstract, is facile compared to actually being able to own up to your own specific BS in an interaction.
But you keep using that solely word-based modus for learning and change, while at the same time accusing others of being in a world of words, Mr Only Words On A Screen.
(and yes, duh, we are only words on a screen here, but the world of words is not the limit to how we learn and change)
Your criticisms fit your posts and approach much better than anyone else’s posts and approach.
And you tell people with actual experience of the things you only know through words on a screen (or in judgements people you met once thirty years ago) about THEIR world of words. Sink calling the bathtub white. Wait. Sink calling the multicolored tiles white.
(your summation of the benefits of Buddhism is, by the way, a very poor one)