No worries, it was good stuff Royce. I think being at peace with yourself and the world isn't necessarily just a first world privilege, for all but the most extreme cases it becomes a question of possibly deep importance. Krishnamurti talks about this in the dialogue I linked in his thread - can people escape conditioning?
You mention philosophy seeming like another language - I actually wonder if everyone is capable of dealing with the kind of discussions we have. And on the flip side, what if our cognitive faculties are actually limited? Maybe our qualia are duller, for example.
I also wonder if discussion becomes an addiction and leads to people just complaining about the world around them in a snake-eating-tail situation...which leads us to what knowledge is worth evangelizing? Or is it more action that matters, as the spreading of supposedly important knowledge might simply be a selfish excuse to exercise and exorcise our bitterness?
(I guess knowledge relating to doing should be separated from simply evangelizing of paradigms here.)
Especially if our supposed knowledge is only a series of "bets", as Robert Anton Wilson says in
Creative Agnosticism:
...When I speak of The “Real” Universe being created by self-hypnosis, I do not intend anything else but psychological literalness. In the hypnotized state, the existential “reality” around us is edited out and we go away to a kind of “Real” Universe created by the hypnotist. The reason that it is usually easy to induce hypnosis in humans is that we have a kind of “consciousness” that easily drifts away into such “Real” Universes rather than deal with existential muddle and doubt. Everybody tends to drift away in that fashion several times in an ordinary conversation, editing sound out at the ear like Bruner’s cat. As Colin Wilson points out, when we look at our watch, forget the time, and have to look again, it is because we have drifted off into a “Real” Universe again. We visit them all the time, but especially when existential concerns are painful or stressful.
Every “Real” Universe is easy to understand, because it is much simpler than the existential continuum. Theists, Nazis, Flat Earthers, etc. can explain their “Real” Universes as quickly as any Fundamentalist Materialist explains his, because of this simplicity of the edited object as contrasted with the complexity of the sensory-sensual continuum in which we live when awake (unhypnotized).
Being hypnotized by a “Real” Universe, we become more and more detached from the existential continuum, and are annoyed when it interferes with us...
I wanted to pop in and mention that IIRC there is an entire tradition of Greek skeptics so the Trilemma does not make any appeal to authority, rather it's the philosophical position that is being referred to.
Delvagus actually did a whole thing about this kind of skepticism on Bakker's blog, will try to hunt it down.