grammar

file/philophobia.html

@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ <h2>Not practising philosophy.</h2>
       <p>“Diogenes was acting on a crucial idea in Epicurus, that in order to live wisely it isn't enough just to read a philosophical argument once or twice, we need constant reminders of it, or we'll forget. When we're encouraged to go shopping by bright lights and inviting displays, we're quickly liable to lose sight of our true desires. So we have to counteract the influence of advertising by creating advertisements which say what we really do need, and that's why Diogenes put up his wall [on which the philosophy of Epicurus was inscribed].”&nbsp;<span class="source">[]</span></p>
     </blockquote>
 
-    <p>Due to the excitement of a new life I unconsciously grew to neglect the philosophies within Marcus Aurelius' Meditations and Robin Hard's book on Diogenes. Philosophies that emphasize not being a slave to primeval emotions because these are reactionary, not in our control. What <em>is</em> in our control is the ability to scrutinize these emotions, to acknowledge them as animalistic, simple-minded. In turn the Cynic principles strengthened my resolve in minimalism. To negate desire beyond the necessary and to appreciate every possession to the fullest without being overly attached to it.</p>
+    <p>Due to the excitement of a new life I unconsciously grew to neglect the philosophies within Marcus Aurelius' Meditations and Robin Hard's book on Diogenes. Philosophies that emphasize not being a slave to primeval emotions because these are reactionary, not in our control. What <em>is</em> in our control is the ability to scrutinize these emotions, to acknowledge them as animalistic, simple-minded. In turn the Cynic principles strengthened my resolve in minimalism. To negate desire beyond the necessary and to appreciate every possession to the fullest without being overly attached.</p>
 
     <blockquote>
       <p>“Those who are in thrall to their stomach and sexual organs and sleep he called triple-slaves.” —Diogenes of Sinope (404–323 BC)&nbsp;<span class="source">[]</span></p>
@@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ <h2>Initial infatuation as a requirement.</h2>
     <p>It won't come as a surprise that I have been mad about women. <!-- Not a “fuck boy”&nbsp;<span class="source">[]</span>, but my occasional immaturity especially at younger ages likely hasn't helped to prove the contrary.  -->Which is not necessarily bad as long as the following two rules are adhered. One, communicate expectations. When you don't you're screwing someone, when you do you're having sex. Two, don't talk out of bed. Evaluating your worth by objectifying one for the appraisal of another is pathetic. That being said, experience tells me there is an equal amount of promiscuous men and women. Whether promiscuity is fulfilling is another thing, which leads us to non-monogamy.</p>
 
     <h2>Monogamy versus non-monogamy.</h2>
-    <p>Being on the fence about non-monogamy has influenced my capacity for commitment. Moreover, I dislike traditions, doing things because they're expected to. Yuck. And it's not only me, for non-traditional relationship are on the rise in Belgium&nbsp;<span class="source">[]</span>. Why be on the fence then? Some pros and cons.</p>
+    <p>Being on the fence about non-monogamy has influenced my capacity for commitment. Moreover, I dislike traditions, doing things because they're expected. Yuck. And it's not only me, for non-traditional relationship are on the rise in Belgium&nbsp;<span class="source">[]</span>. Why be on the fence then? Some pros and cons.</p>
 
     <p>✓ The utilitarian argument. The love of many increases the total amount of happiness in the world. Excluding debauchery, how does loving multiple people deteriorate society?</p>