You have not addressed the fact that intuitions are unreliable and often wrong. That is exactly why the scientific method came about - to break deadlocks between competing people's intuitions and to expose those claiming false intuitions for gain and influence.
What would you propose in lieu of science? A return to theism's "might is right, don't argue"?
True intuition and revelation are remembered. They are soul knowledge so by definition are pure and can be remembered. You are referring to altered states of consciousness, flights of fantasy, and psychological interpretations by the lower parts of our collective human organism.
Science reveals and compares facts. This is a desirable human ability. However the scientific method cannot reveal objective meaning. It is limited to the how of the visible reality but closed to the why and appreciation of objective value.
Stop being hyperbolic. What is objective justice? Obviously justice meted out without bias. Humans do their best but most of us understand human fallibility and that nothing is perfect in this life. The Easterners will refer to karma, cause and affect.
Objective justice is what is taking place in the absence of human beings. If the earth were destroyed tomorrow objective justice would still be taking place within our universe.
Karma as you’ve suggested is an example of objective justice. But what it is and why this objective measure of quality takes place in our universe requires a quality of knowledge only remembered through intuition.
"Forms" looks like a nod towards Plato. You won't be aware of this but I've long been fine with the idea of forms being set by the initial states into which physical things flow (and the related concept of personality archetypes as per Jung - the ideas broadly but not all of the details). The details of the forms, both Plato's and Jung's are, if we are being realistic, just educated guesses. Like the rest of us, they knew something, just not everything.
Seekers of truth by definition are opposed by the majority seeking self justification. A seeker of truth desiring to pursue it intellectually needs a hypothesis which can be verified through efforts at self knowledge. As opposed to the bottom up technique of science the hypothesis which reveals universal meaning and consequently objective human meaning and purpose is top down. It begins with the ineffable ONE as described by Plotinus or the ineffable GOOD described by Plato. They are the source of meaning.
Before a guardian in Plato’s Republic could become a philosopher king they would have proven themselves worthy be becoming free of the normal attachments that deny the experience of truth and how it relates to the GOOD. In modern progressive society attachments to PC definitions of good rule the day so assure the search for meaning can only be a realistic need for a small minority willing to sacrifice their indoctrinated emotional attachments.
Re: your post generally. You think too small, always in anthropomorphic terms. We are part of, and subject to, much larger non-human systems. While our current large colonies now have a broadly transformative effect on the Earth's surface, this situation will change too.
As a contented resident of Plato’s cave you are by definition closed to the larger systems taking place above Plato’s divided line producing the lawful phenomena below the line. Conscious awareness of the vertical difference is the first step to freedom from the pyschological prison of cave life.
The issue again is you are thinking small. Human progress is a continuing fact. Russia, China and India ensure that there will be no retreat into romantic evangelism lead by the US, as hoped by you Pentacostals. The reality is a group of superpowers playing hardball over the reducing bounty of nature. If the US gets lost in an Abrahamic dream world they will continue to be outmanoeuvred and railroaded by the others.
You are describing the cyclical happenings of life on earth. Seekers of truth seek to awaken to what is an obvious absurdity for conscious beings. What is ptogress when humanity turns in circles?
Many are fooled by the broad impressions of media. Humans are not getting more dull, amoral or stupid. Rather, they are separating into those who are progressing in most areas while the larger proportion is being left behind, falling into despair and vapidity. This is what the system wants - dumb obedient people. As a musician you can see the greatly reduced harmonic complexity, physical adroitness required and literacy of modern pop music as compared with the past.
Objective human intelligence is not defined by complexity but rather by sensitivity to the source. Intelligence as it relates to music is experiential recognition of the vibratory relationship between notes in an octave. Intelligence also includes sensitivity to the vibration of a note.
Music has been dulled in the west. There are those in the East who can listen to the quarter tones in music provided by the musician. In modern times we are lucky to find those who can distinguish semi tones. This is a result of scattered complexity and volume attractive for cave life. You call it intelligence and I call it the loss of the ability to experience what music is capable of transmitting for the seeker of truth.
Yet, statistical record achievements are being surpassed in every area - tech, productivity, sport, the arts. Heck, there are damn three year-olds on YouTube doing things that this musician of many decades can't manage That's evolution via artificial selection in action. One more old fart outclassed by a brilliant next generation - by only in part. Most will just be drones - The Proles. At this stage most people are still smart (many "boats have been lifted"), with only a smallish dumb rump. Alas, I think the ranks of stupid (eg. flat Earth, young Earth creationism, unquestioning belief in popular media) will grow as public education continues to be rationalised. I once expected broad progression of humanity, now I see an increasing split between two major classes.
Technique is one thing and meaning is another. AI improves technique but what of meaning? Scott Hughes for example made the mistake of offering a book called the Fourth Age to discuss. But the site and its mods have eliminated all those who could question the value of AI from an esoteric perspective so there is no way to question AI. Philosophy has been eliminated from philosophy sites dominated by secularism and are content to remain that way.. This has become the norm in secular institutions. Secularism must struggle to eliminate the vertical esoteric awareness of human being that can appreciate the value of a person consciously uniting above and below in their psych and allowing the third dimension of thought to provide its value from a non-corrupted emotional awareness.
Basically, we are breeding small stables of rapidly advancing übermeschen and large fields of drones who are subject to them. George Carlin's famous education rant describes the situation more clearly and succinctly than any else I've seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILQepXUhJ98
. If much of the population are under-informed then this has serious implications for democracy, which has been looking increasingly imperilled of late.
You are describing how a cancer reproduces and finally kills the host in accordance with how it has been programmed by nature.
The seeking of personal balance, however, is (or can be) entirely unrelated to any of this. That's just a matter of taking time out to be still and looking within - anyone can do it. In that there is no class divide - all people are capable of goodness (barring the very most damaged).
Suppose Suzy Shmidlap reads three books on meditation and decides to save the world by preaching meditation. Of course without instruction all that will happen will be the experience of imagination. People are capable of being still but who becomes capable of it without falling into self justifying imagination?
Your trouble is you do not respect how the human condition exists in you and are powerless to confront it, to consciously witness it without interpretation. It is unpleasant but essential for the seeker of truth.
What's hope got to do with it? I just think it's better yo use our judgement today than to rely unbendingly on the guesswork of 2,000 year-old Abrahamic notions. It's been tried before, eg. the Dark Ages, the Inquisition. Dominant theism was a disaster, even worse than today's confused and overpopulated mayhem.
I don't see any "solutions" to the world's problems. What I see is humans reaching a point where Mother Nature royally whoops our behinds. I am guessing that the brutalisation of that process will have some chastening effects on the minds of those who escape. The lessons should last at least a generation or two before they are largely forgotten and short-sighted dodginess returns
Life on earth moves in mechanical cycles as explained in Ecclesiastes 3. As long as we remain as we ARE, regardless of what we think we are doing, all will resolve in what preserves the cycle. It is nature’s way
The point I'm labouring over here is that global cultural change is very slow and some backwards steps are inevitable, either locally or globally. To the perspective of a human lifespan, it might look as if things are going backwards or that nothing ever changes, but that is a perspective effect. Remember, only half a billion years ago the greatest complexity and highest intelligence on the planet (aside from the planet in total itself) were found in trilobites.
The global culture will reach its potential in Plato's cave when the God of the Great Beast becomes lord. You seem to think that the Great Beast is the ultimate evolution for humanity. I maintain that as an absurd creation it must fall and how it falls will not be a pretty picture.
There are many millions of years yet to run in this race. Humanity is simply another step on the road to an unknown destination. That is why it's so important to maintain a sense of humour - we are very little and there's an awful lot we don't know and will never know.
A person falling off of a roof is making progress toward the ground but the question is if it is desired progress.
Humor and willingness to laugh at ourselves is a sure sign of the beginning of understanding. Knowing what to take seriously is real wisdom but who has it in these times where ad homs rule the day and ridiculing others seems far more satisfying in the cause of self justification?
Understanding the relationship between principles and pragmatism is real wisdom but again who is capable of it from an objective rather than a subjective perspective?