Hi Chris, thanks for your criticism and bit of praise and I hear you are saddened.

Apparently, you don't appreciate or understand the value of criticism and evidenced speaking out against what is either plain contradictory, wrong, or unhelpful. I did not find anything helpful in Charles's essay worth commenting on, honestly. It is so deeply flawed, and his response as well. I was actually gentle about it.

I have embraced my critical nature and not done away with it in favor of its alleged polarity, the “heart.” I try to use it for good, even calling out harm. When an essay like Charles’s goes viral, it’s time to speak up, because that essay does harm, in my and other “clear thinking” critics’ opinion. And I try to point out that harm; cult dynamics are afoot, and folks get damaged by such gaslighting and manipulation.

Intellectual rigor, which means being skeptical and analytical and critically thinking is just as important as feeling. It is in fact a boon to a rich emotional life; you might appreciate this essay:

https://wakeup-world.com/2014/06/06/re-thinking-love-why-our-hearts-must-also-be-minded/

It is also not lost on me that emotions guide our decisions and beliefs in many cases; so no, I am not mistaken there, as you assume. Coincidentally, this is a major point I am making in my response to Charles's response to this critique. Yet, new ideas and perspectives also help change minds; people have written to me expressing just this, especially those who felt disturbed by "The Coronation" but didn't know why. Cognition (head) and heart (emotion) connect in a two-way street, to some degree, thankfully!

Consider a simple example: you're upset with your partner for not coming home on time, but then you learn (intellectually) it's because her car broke down and was stranded. This knowledge shifts your heart and suddenly you view the situation differently---because knowledge has informed your heart. Similarly, seeing (intellectually) that a line of reasoning is bogus and inaccurate helps shift our feelings/disposition to it, which helps change our views. I offer other example in the essay cited above.

I believe scientists who provide alternate takes on official sources are just largely wrong and therefore discredited.

I also hope it is not lost on you that most of what you share here goes against the very advice you offer me. I don't mind your criticism but I am concerned when someone preaches not to criticize and to uplift . . . as they do the opposite (save for your last bit at the end there, thanks, and yes).

I leave you with the metaphor of a garden: we can't just fertilize it without weeding it and expect a healthy harvest.

Cheers and thanks for responding.