Did you understand every sentence in the book, "In It Together"? If not, what part did you first not understand?

[Surabhi Rani]

First of all, let me bring this fact to your knowledge that I could at least sense the meanings of almost every word in the book. I had no confusion about the ideas that the book conveyed. However, could you please expand on the following sentence on page no.134 'Neither the lion nor the antelope is evil as one chases the other, whether the lion eats a bloody meal or starves as he is denied by a fast antelope?' I find the above sentence relatable and want to be sure about it's meaning.

[Davy Ifedigbo]

Initially, the heading of the publication left me bewildered. I pondered upon the precise conflict that could potentially unify every individual, given that certain individuals appear to experience no conflicts whatsoever. My comprehension improved upon completing the reading material.

[Sonia Gonzalez]

The book was written in simple and clear language, but what I love about philosophy books is that (most of the time) you cannot ask the author to explain it; you need to discuss it and interpret it with yourself or someone else. I might not have understood every sentence the way it was intended to, but I loved how I interpreted it and its impact on me. Maybe if I were to ask for an explanation, it would have a different impact, and that is not necessarily something bad, but it would not have been mine.

[jesse_voyamba]

Hi Scott,

This part of the book in page 61 got me a bit confused. You said, "Temporal selfishness or temporal psychopathy is when one lacks empathy for their so-called past or future selves, or treats them as such, meaning unkindly, especially in terms of how one treats their future self, simply due to the mechanics of Newtonian time." I am curious to know how one can have empathy for their future selves. Does it mean planning well to avoid harming our future selves? I want to know.