Comment by guerrilla

> I don’t think it’s just (or even particularly) bad axioms, I think it’s that people tend to build up “logical” conclusions where they think each step is a watertight necessity that follows inevitably from its antecedents, but actually each step is a little bit leaky, leading to runaway growth in false confidence.

This is what you get when you naively re-invent philosophy from the ground up while ignoring literally 2500 years of actual debugging of such arguments by the smartest people who ever lived.

You can't diverge from and improve on what everyone else did AND be almost entirely ignorant of it, let alone have no training whatsoever in it. This extreme arrogance I would say is the root of the problem.