This conversation is futile because you're obviously a braindead empiricist and materialist, totally irrational, totally lacking in reason and logic, to the point where Hume of all people is who you advocate for.

>Needed some comedy to brighten up the disappointment.

Why are you disappointed? Is it because you have no fucking clue what Truth is, what noumenal reality is, since you have rejected reason itself, rejected the greatest genius in human history (Leibniz), and rejected ontological mathematics -- without even understanding the first thing about it, naturally. How absurd and irrational is that?

Only a Mandarin empiricist and Ortega mediocrity would behave the way you do.

>Ortega wrote, “But the present-day writer, when he takes his pen in hand to treat a subject which he has studied deeply, has to bear in mind that the average reader, who has never concerned himself with this subject, if he reads does so with the view, not of learning something from the writer, but rather, of pronouncing judgment on him when he is not in agreement with the commonplaces that the said reader carries in his head.”

https://www.amazon.com/Mandarin-Effect-Crisis-Meaning-ebook/dp/B07VHTRDTJ

Yes, existence is fundamentally imbued with purpose, and dialectical evolution -- it is 'built in' to each mathematical Leibnizian monad. The PSR, expressed mathematically as Euler's Formula (and with Occam's Razor as an obvious corollary) governs all the objective, a priori, mathematical laws of the universe. All of ontological mathematics stems from the PSR, as does all of "physics" (which is just a fallacious sensory interpretation of the underlying mathematics).

https://www.amazon.com/Last-Man-Knew-Everything-Book-ebook/dp/B008LHYVX6

The PSR is a "bold assertion"? Objective reason is a bold assertion? Well, you can reject the PSR all you want, but that means ipso facto that you have chosen to be irrational, which means that there's no point you advancing any kind of rational argument, is there? You can't use reason to argue against reason. That would be absurd.

>"Atheism is a strange, irrational cult. Here’s a simple challenge to all atheists. Rationally prove that eternal minds do not exist. Rationally prove that immaterial singularities do not exist. Rationally prove that Fourier frequency domains do not exist. If you are an atheist and you cannot do so then you are just another hopeless, irrational person of faith that rules out rationalist conclusions because they do not conform to your irrational belief system. You are another of the idiots that reads tea leaves rather than using reason and logic. You imagine that you have some rational comprehension of ultimate reality even though you reject the Principle of Sufficient Reason and Occam’s razor. How irrational is that?
>
>The object that is beyond the ability of the atheist to understand is the eternal mathematical singularity. This object rationally refutes atheism, but atheists are too stupid to realize it. They have staked their entire worldview on the non-existence of singularities, and they are 100% wrong. The PSR rationally proves the existence of mathematical singularities and there is nothing rational that any atheist can do to refute the PSR. The only weapon they have to use against it is their irrational faith in a universe where things allegedly happen for no reason, purposelessly, randomly, and subject to an uncertainty principle.
>
>This is the sort of drivel they believe is “rational”. Any attempt to argue against the PSR is of course inherently and automatically irrational. The task of trying to use reason to defeat reason is the ultimate self-defeating and self-contradicting undertaking.
>
>Atheists belong to the bizarre cult of non-thinkers that imagine they are rational even though they dismiss the PSR as nonsense and thus accept the Principle of No Sufficient Reason. They belong to the forces of irrationalism that oppose the PSR.
>
>You cannot use reason to attack the PSR. You can use reason only to defend it. Atheists are no friends of reason and logic. Their central concept of reality is empiricist, not rationalist. Their central activity is empirical observation, not rational consideration of the consequences of the eternal PSR. They are mired in the temporal and contingent and reject the eternal and necessary. They despise the a priori and accept only the a posteriori." - Dr. Thomas Stark, Castalia: The Citadel of Reason (The Truth Series Book 7)

https://www.amazon.com/Castalia-Citadel-Reason-Truth-Book-ebook/dp/B079KP9Y9M

Learn about reason and the PSR:

https://www.amazon.com/Causation-Principle-Sufficient-Reason-Book-ebook/dp/B00P89UES6

Learn about ontological mathematics:

https://www.amazon.com/Ontological-Mathematics-Curious-Introduction-Thinking-ebook/dp/B07TNRK7MK

Maybe when you've studied and learned something (i.e. Truth, reason, ontological mathematics) rather than 'dismissing it without a second thought' (the exact effect Ortega predicted!), and when you no longer reject the PSR (by which you out yourself as a totally irrational empiricist), then I can actually take you seriously.

1. The [Pythagorean Illuminati] (http://pythagoreanilluminati.com/index.html) believe in a philosophy that is very similar to CTMU (at least in intent, if not actual detail). Therefore, what they find most interesting would probably be interesting to you as well.
   
   
   From The Last Man Who Knew Everything by Mike Hockney:
   
   
   >The Illuminati periodically debate which the most important subject of all is. The consensus order is typically:
   
   >
   
2. Mathematics
   
3. Philosophy
   
4. Science
   
5. Religion
   
6. Psychology
   
7. Politics
   
8. Economics
   
9. Sociology
   
10. History
    
11. Art
    
    >
    Some wish to give far higher importance to art. Some think religion should be at the top. The most zealous arguments concern whether philosophy should swap places with mathematics and assume top position. The advocates of this position say that philosophy is the subject that asks the critical questions. Although mathematics gives all of the answers to the mysteries of existence, it would never have done so if the philosophers hadn’t paved the way by asking the all-important questions.
    >
    Hockney, Mike (2012-07-14). The Last Man Who Knew Everything (The God Series Book 3) (Kindle Locations 2602-2621). Hyperreality Books. Kindle Edition.
    

    
    

    
    
    

12. Take an easy major (or skip school entirely) so you have time to become an autodidact, like Chris Langan himself.