I also came up with an argument that, to the best of my knowledge, has not been made. It is about distinction between valued and non-valued dualities.

The non-valued dualities are ones made from the standpoint of reality: Dualities such as man and woman, nature and civilization, business and labor. These dualities are not related to moral judgment. This means that both are capable of right, wrong, indifferent or a mix. In these dualities, both sides can be right and wrong. The correct approach to dealing with non-valued dualities is to maximize their positive potentials and minimize their negative potentials. In these, neither is good and neither is bad; both are capable of both.

The valued dualities are ones made from the standpoint of moral judgment: Dualities such as good and evil or health and sickness. In these dualities, one side is good and the other is bad. The correct approach to these dualities is to maximize the good side and minimize the bad side.

Confusing one for the other is one of the worst intellectual errors that one can make. It results in such errors as thinking men to be good and women to be evil, or labor is good and business is evil, or private sector is good and government is evil; or else thinking that good and evil are of equal value. In both cases a great wrong is done. In the first scenario, the wrong consists of enabling any action - including severely wrong action - on the part of one side, while oppressing the other side even in its capacity to produce good results. In the second scnearion, the wrong consists of supporting things that are wrong and deeming them equal to things that are good. Once again, in both cases a great wrong is done. Good and evil are not equal or anything close to being equal. As for men and women, they are in fact equal – both in the capacity to do right and the capacity to do wrong.

The valued dualities and non-valued dualities are not created equal. In one situation, both sides are capable of both evil and good. In the other situation, one side is good and the other is bad, period.

So in dealing with valued dualities, the solution is to maximize one and minimize the other. And in dealing with non-valued dualities, the solution is to maximize the positive outcomes of each and their interaction while minimizing the negatives of each.

I do not believe that this argument has been made, and it needs to be. This will clear up a lot of confusion that many people have on many subjects.

From "My Autobiography"
https://www.amazon.com.au/My-Autobiography-Ilya-Shambat-ebook/dp/B09XV3LDNX/

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 12:02:33 AM UTC-4, fake Will Dockery forged:
> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 10:17:15 PM UTC-4, ibsh...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> > I also came up with an argument that, to the best of my knowledge, has not been made. It is about distinction between valued and non-valued dualities.
> >
> > The non-valued dualities are ones made from the standpoint of reality: Dualities such as man and woman, nature and civilization, business and labor. These dualities are not related to moral judgment. This means that both are capable of right, wrong, indifferent or a mix. In these dualities, both sides can be right and wrong. The correct approach to dealing with non-valued dualities is to maximize their positive potentials and minimize their negative potentials. In these, neither is good and neither is bad; both are capable of both.
> >
> > The valued dualities are ones made from the standpoint of moral judgment: Dualities such as good and evil or health and sickness. In these dualities, one side is good and the other is bad. The correct approach to these dualities is to maximize the good side and minimize the bad side.
> >
> > Confusing one for the other is one of the worst intellectual errors that one can make. It results in such errors as thinking men to be good and women to be evil, or labor is good and business is evil, or private sector is good and government is evil; or else thinking that good and evil are of equal value. In both cases a great wrong is done. In the first scenario, the wrong consists of enabling any action - including severely wrong action - on the part of one side, while oppressing the other side even in its capacity to produce good results. In the second scnearion, the wrong consists of supporting things that are wrong and deeming them equal to things that are good. Once again, in both cases a great wrong is done. Good and evil are not equal or anything close to being equal. As for men and women, they are in fact equal – both in the capacity to do right and the capacity to do wrong.
> >
> > The valued dualities and non-valued dualities are not created equal. In one situation, both sides are capable of both evil and good. In the other situation, one side is good and the other is bad, period.
> >
> > So in dealing with valued dualities, the solution is to maximize one and minimize the other. And in dealing with non-valued dualities, the solution is to maximize the positive outcomes of each and their interaction while minimizing the negatives of each.
> >
> > I do not believe that this argument has been made, and it needs to be. This will clear up a lot of confusion that many people have on many subjects.
> >
> > From "My Autobiography"
> > https://www.amazon.com.au/My-Autobiography-Ilya-Shambat-ebook/dp/B09XV3LDNX/
> I'm not sure what this is all about but you nailed it once again.

Forgery ^^^^^^^^^^^^^