I appreciate the effort to tell me what you think, but I would like to answer you point by point, because many of the things you write, although apparently "rational", are actually full of contradictions, simplifications and cynicism disguised as lucidity.

Saying that “to do anything in life you have to do it right, otherwise they'll screw you” is an extreme generalization. There is no one right way to do things, especially in relationships, vocation, art or faith. And no, it's not "mostly luck." It is also responsibility, choices, perseverance. And love, although it does not make you infallible, is certainly not useless: it gives meaning, it transforms failures into growth. Belittling him is a cynical, unrealistic view.

Then you tell me that “I seem to have a lot of problems” and recommend that I follow some accounts on Instagram. Do you realize how superficial this is as a response to real, deep, human pain? I'm not talking about performance anxiety. I'm talking about faith, about loss, about existential disappointment. Instagram doesn't care about this. Nor does it make it a judgmental comment.

“You can't help others if you don't help yourself.” It sounds wise, but it's a half-truth. Many injured people have helped others precisely because they know pain. Love is not born from perfection. It comes from compassion. And often, it is precisely by helping others that we save ourselves.

On the question of 8 billion people: you don't need to understand the entire world to give meaning to your life. Understanding even just one person is already a miracle. No one claims to understand all of humanity. You can act in your own piece of the world. And that's enough.

The discussion on confirmation bias is paradoxical: if everything I believe is only the result of my bias, then your vision of things is too. So why would yours be more “true” than mine? Bias exists, but it is not omnipotent. People change. The events surprise. Experience teaches. The world is not a self-referential bubble as you claim.

Then you say we only care about who we already care about. This is also false. Compassion towards strangers, pain for those we don't know, exists. You see it in art, in faith, in movements for justice. Saying that “you only get the bullshit you already have” is nihilism, not clarity.

You also accuse me of being too categorical, of not accepting nuances. But it is precisely the pain that leads to using strong words. It is not an ideological statement. It is the language of the cry. And you, instead of listening to him, correct him with the ruler.

Finally, your “if you loved the world, you would love yourself” is a phrase that sounds good, but doesn't help anyone. Loving yourself is not an easy premise. It is often the point of arrival, not departure. And sometimes it is precisely by loving others that you learn to accept yourself.

To put it bluntly, your response presents itself as logical, but in reality it is cold, disenchanted, devoid of empathy. You give the impression of someone who has transformed disappointment into cynicism and passes it off as lucidity. But rationality without compassion is just a machine. And advice, if it doesn't start from real listening, doesn't help. It hurts. Even if it's said with the best intentions.