You’ll wonder why this free money doesn’t incur a debt, but it absolutely does-- but it is to her child. She is willing to incur any debt to him, even an infinite one, because she loves him. Wait, that’s the part you doubt?

And so this “laziness” is the logical first step of exactly what you desire. You want to be selected for doing nothing. You don't want to do better in calculus because then you will become a calculator and you will be responsible for calculating. You must not commit to any definite path in case the Sphinx is down another. It's also why you're still

She pursues enjoyment in order to be satisfied; she pursues what she wants in order to avoid anxiety. Those are two very different force vectors with different magnitudes and directions, you should draw them out every time you make a decision of your own and see which of them is driving your purchases.

But sign or not sign, the discussion alone is sufficient to give the audience the fantasy of a world of limited emotional dependency where something greater than them is supervising. That power is being negotiated between them is the gimmick: the fantasy's wish is that no power could ever be negotiated between the two of them, it safely exists

We could argue these points, I guess, but it would be an argument in which you are trying to assert as good what you enjoy vs. trying to learn to enjoy what’s good. We are never going to agree on anything, including lunch. Try this, or don’t.

it is the state alone that can never benefit from the plain and open way, anyone who does try to serve it openly will be more suspected of serving himself, and so the state will not get the benefit. If this logic makes sense, then you should wonder if it didn't make sense to Socrates as well. It did, he didn't care, he had had enough.

Worse, now that psychology is no longer satisfying, that Mentor becomes less individualized and more socialized, it can’t be a personal relationship since the point isn’t to teach you anything but to invite you to the adventure, so it has to be an idealized entity, a corporation, a hierarchy, an authority. “I just want a seat at the table.” You can

Meanwhile you can't enjoy anything as much as the hypothetical audience thinks she did-- you certainly can’t enjoy her that much.

We want the corporate power to be even stronger, because it alone ensures a kind of world with rules, dress codes, appropriate behavior-- not just safety, but a place, a purpose, a title. Good enough, so long as we retain the public(izable) freedom to express ourselves sexually, which, not ironically, now requires restraints.