>>39726783Take the parts that serve you, ditch the parts that don't.
What being trad Catholic for years taught me was how to utterly and dogmatically convince myself of anything.
The difference is now I don't pick ideologies for group-adhesion (e.g. "being a Catholic") and now I deliberately pick the ideologies that serve me best in practical and pragmatic terms.
That may seem mercenary to folks accustomed to "ideological purity," but the fact is that their conception of ideological purity was always influenced by the factors around them. Even shit like Rationalism has the vice of papering over the fundamental, epistemological questions about the foundational axioms of their ideology in pursuit of the "ideal form" of rational rhetorical and thinking styles.
Fundamentally, all thought can be reduced to some unprovable axioms. At that point, you need to pick and choose between axioms based on how well they serve you building an ideology on top of them. "How well does this axiom serve me, personally?" is a perfectly valid criterion.
