To me it looks like a mistake was made a long time ago, when profit was something made "Acceptable". I am analytical by nature, but I appreciate art, just in an analytical way, which is just seeing things from a different angle than maybe yourself, you being someone with obviously more instinctive spiritual understanding.

Neither view is more or less valid to me, they are both just views, both equally valuable, and actually both required. There must have been more or less analytical artists in history, to me Da Vinci was highly analytical and this shows in both his art, and his science and engineering, which he was also known for.

To me it looks like we divided analytics from art around the time of the "Enlightenment", and this was all about profit. It was how to maximise the profits made from each discipline, after those began to be defined, categorised, especially the teaching of it - this was commodification of education.

Right now we might say we see commodification of gender and sexuality. All of it looks profit driven to me.

Can you imagine the horror that Da Vinci might have felt, if we'd tried to pigeon-hole him into art, or into science, and maybe even a gender, he would have been extremely spiritually unhappy I think, perhaps even insane.

Personally I think a lot of insanity can be explained by this, the pigeon-holing of folk who really were never meant to be pigeon-holed, maybe never identifying with any particular party politics, folk who really valued being free, unpressured by peers.

John Trudell, descended from indigenous indian roots, characterised our issue as an energy problem, instinctively, based on only a rudimentary, spiritual understanding of energy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctUecTdPEO0

To me using modern System Engineering modeling techniques gained over my life as an Engineer working on many global systems, and with energy patents in my history, he got it all remarkably correct, except for one detail. He even got the solution correct, that the system of humanity interfaced with nature needs an energy infusion.

The detail he got wrong was that the energy infusion can't come from within humans, it has to come from the extraterrestrial source and origin of all energy in the solar system, the sun.

We can't conjure up energy from within, we can only receive it and convert it to various forms including information, which is the data John was referring to.

The energy he identified is being "mined", by actually the inhuman beast in control of us, using us as slaves in permanent energy slavery mode, is energy from the sun, that we extract from the planet as profit, from the planet, which received it from the sun long ago.

The conclusion I hope we come to, is that we will see we need to "Combine forces" once again, as we had them combined in history before the enlightenment, in a way that we all respect the qualities of all other humans, and we all agree what the root problem is, this problem which is resulting in a dying planet, and the majority if not all humans being spiritually unhappy.

Deep down, I think we are unhappy that we are energy slaves, and we basically lie to ourselves to cover this up, and its the lying to ourselves that makes us spiritually unhappy.

How can we be happy, as long as we know, even if only subconsciously, that we have to rob the energy we need to live on from one another, if we are not in a position to rob it instead from the planet, in order to survive, and in order to continue doing that, we are having to lie to ourselves that it isn't causing all the bad things we are seeing, including even the end of all survivability on the planet?