@Viridescent 2.0 Viridescent, for as much as I love your posts for how well researched, written and interesting they are, it is their excellence that is this thread's downfall. When one such as you makes many thoughts about a subject in their mind, and then proceeds to explore said topic to such depths as you do, it can't help but discourage people, due to setting the bar of entry into the topic so high, since anything anyone else writes would pale in comparison.
Naturally, it may be weird to criticise the excellence of your posts, but I truly think that is the reason behind the lack of activity on this post.
This all harkens back to the fact that people, in general, don't read, nor study philosophy in depth, but merely know pop-philosophy, ie. summarizations of the thoughts made by famous philosophers, and even that is made from a western-centric point of view. People could easily describe the various thoughts made by people such as of Nietzsche, Camus, Satre and perhaps a few others, through some of their quotes and thoughts that permeate our culture. But due to not actually having studied them, we wouldn't be able to discuss their views, nor how they've made them. I along with most others on this forums merely have periphery knowledge of the great works of philosophy, and have hardly read much of them, so this goes back to my main point: Few on here have a good enough understanding of philosophy to be able to properly discuss it at the level you do. (Perhaps this could be a topic of discussion, Why philosophy is not acknowledged as a topic worth of study by the general public).
So I have to ask you Viridescent, what type of response do you want from us? To agree with you? Perhaps to ask you questions so that you can answer them? Or is it to actually take a stance on a topic and try to argue against you?
Because at this point, this topic has devolved into your personal blog of sorts, which I'm perfectly fine with since your entries are great. But perhaps you wanted something else from the topic?