> But you may know the move: when a project or career no longer survives a basic question, you respond by making it more elaborate.

When I'm defending a political position and it's going so badly that I have to add epicycles, I know I'm on the wrong track. But if I go back to first principles and develop a simpler internally consistent argument, it is usually insanely extremist to modern sensibilities.

Turns out that human morality and logical consistency are usually strangers.