WWB Trainer - Read Story Mode | TouchstoneTruth.com

TST Trainer

3 Random Tidbits

Topic:

Wisdom Builder

Timeless ideas at the intersections of science, philosophy, critical thinking, and history.

MODE:

Speed: 1.00

Wisdom Builder.

3 random tidbits in about 5 minutes.

A Philosophy FAQ.

Subject: Ethics and Equal Justice.

Ethics Lesson: Should Trump go to jail for his crimes?.

Ethically, the question isn’t who someone is, only whether justice treats like cases alike, without fear or privilege.

What matters here is this.

Law only works when it binds everyone—including those who enforce it. If exceptions are made to “protect” the system, the exception itself becomes a greater injustice than the original crime. As Aristotle warned, justice collapses the moment rules are bent in the name of convenience, fear, or power.

Now, the details…

I’m not going to answer that here as I’m perfectly happy letting the courts decide this one. However, let’s explore the ethics of it philosophically.

In the American legal system, there is a saying:

“treat like people alike.”

This principle dates back to Aristotle and his “Nicomachean Ethics.” He argued that distributive justice involves allocating goods and privileges fairly among individuals based on their merits, needs, and contributions. He believed that similar individuals should be treated similarly, and unequal treatment should only be given when there are relevant differences. Trump supporters might argue that his presidency is a relevant difference, while others might disagree.

In the context of the American justice system, distributive justice aims to treat individuals equally under the law, regardless of background, race, gender, or social status. This means no one is above the law.

How does a lack of remorse play into sentencing? Aristotle argued that remorse is crucial in determining punishment. It indicates a willingness to take responsibility and the potential for moral growth, supporting a more lenient punishment. Conversely, a lack of remorse suggests a potential for repeat offenses, warranting more severe punishment. He saw attacking the justice system as an aggravating factor, demonstrating disrespect for the rule of law.

The question isn’t just what the courts decide — it’s what kind of society we want to be. When we treat like people alike, we affirm the idea that justice is blind not to truth, but to privilege.

That Philosophy FAQ,

was first published on TST 2 years ago.

The flashcard inspired by it is this.

Front: What ethical principle means “treat like people alike”?

Back: Distributive justice.

A Science Story.

From History:

Subject: Dinosaur Evolution.

Diplodocid LCA: The Age of Giant Necked Sauropods.

~178 Million Years Ago (+/- 5 million)

The diplodocid story likely began with an earlier shared ancestor we have not yet found by name, reminding us that evolution is often reconstructed from branching clues rather than a single perfect fossil.

What matters here is this.

The Diplodocid LCA helps us think like paleontologists. We may not have the exact animal in hand, but later fossils show that a shared ancestor had to exist. By anchoring that story near the Toarcian crisis, we can follow how science uses clues, timing, and new finds to slowly sharpen the picture.

Now, the details…

If we define the age of giant-necked sauropods as beginning at about 20 meters, or roughly 65 feet, then these giants seem to emerge after the Toarcian environmental crisis around 183 million years ago, and in multiple parts of the world. These giants included diplodocids in North America and mamenchisaurids in China. I think that is a clue worth keeping in mind.

These giants included Diplodocus, Apatosaurus, and Brontosaurus, all members of the diplodocid family. They are best known from western North America, though diplodocid fossils as a broader family have also been found in Europe, Africa, and even Early Cretaceous South America.

When we talk about a Diplodocid LCA, we are talking about a last common ancestor reconstructed from later fossils and family relationships, not a dinosaur we can point to by name. Paleontologists can see that Diplodocus, Apatosaurus, and Brontosaurus belong to the same larger diplodocid family, so they must trace back to an earlier shared ancestor. But the fossil record for early sauropod evolution is patchy, which means this ancestor is better treated as a likely evolutionary stage than as a known skeleton in a museum.

The 10-million-year window here begins with the Toarcian environmental crisis around 183 million years ago, a major episode of warming, carbon-cycle disruption, and ocean deoxygenation. The diplodocid LCA could have lived before that event, but for now this range gives us a meaningful Jurassic landmark as we watch paleontologists refine the story.

Sauropods as a broader group had already evolved well before this window, and the 2018 description of Lingwulong placed an early diplodocoid at about 174 million years ago.

The lineage leading to that shared ancestor reaches back into the broader sauropodomorph story. The first sauropodomorphs began as earlier, more primitive relatives, and true sauropods emerged in the Early Jurassic. So the Diplodocid LCA was not the beginning of giant-necked dinosaurs, but one later branching point within a much older trend toward large-bodied, four-legged, long-necked plant eaters.

From that shared ancestor, later branches spread into the classic giant-necked forms people know best. One branch led toward the slimmer Diplodocus. Another led toward the heavier Apatosaurus and its slimmer cousin, Brontosaurus. Diplodocoids as a whole extended from the Middle Jurassic into the Early Late Cretaceous. By the time of the K–Pg extinction 66 million years ago, however, the classic diplodocid giants were gone, while other sauropod lines outside Diplodocidae, especially titanosaurs, carried the broader sauropod story to the end of the dinosaur age.

That Science Story,

was first published on TST 1 month ago.

The flashcard inspired by it is this.

Front: What sauropod family includes Diplodocus, Apatosaurus, and Brontosaurus?

Back: Diplodocidae family, or diplodocids..

A Critical Thinking Story.

From History:

Subject: Belief.

The Dawn of Empirical Spirituality.

Reference Date: 2200 CE (+/- 50 years)

The Dawn of Empirical Spirituality imagines a future where religion better distinguishes truth from belief. Spiritual traditions may endure by honoring meaning, morality, and the unknowable while yielding empirical claims to science.

In short.

In The Dawn of Empirical Spirituality, the point is not that religion disappears, but that it matures. A wiser future may sort ideas more clearly: empirical claims answer to reality, rational ideas answer to coherence, and spiritual stories continue shaping meaning, identity, hope, and moral life with greater humility.

Now, the details…

By the year 2200, the major world religions will have more fully integrated empirical observation into their doctrines, acknowledging the importance of scientific understanding in exploring the mysteries of existence. This shift will mark a profound transformation in religious thought, where spiritual narratives are updated in response to major scientific discoveries. This new era of empirical spirituality would treat the unknown not merely as a gap to be filled by faith alone, but as an invitation to explore through both scientific inquiry and spiritual contemplation. Religions will increasingly focus on harmonizing empirical evidence with spiritual belief, leading to a more reflective and unified approach to understanding existence.

Analysis: The reference date of 2200 CE is chosen based on current trends in the dialogue between science and religion. Over the past century, there has been a growing movement within many religious communities to reconcile scientific discoveries with spiritual belief. For instance, some traditions have already adapted to modern cosmology, evolution, and environmental science rather than simply resisting them. If that trajectory continues, it is reasonable to expect deeper integration over the next two centuries, especially as scientific knowledge expands and global communication continues to expose traditions to one another. This would not mean the end of spiritual stories, but a growing willingness to distinguish between empirical claims about the material world and deeper narratives about meaning, value, and the unknowable.

From a TST point of view, such a shift would not make religion “scientific,” per se, nor would it erase the personal and cultural role of spiritual belief. Instead, it would mark a clearer sorting of ideas. Empirical claims would increasingly be tested against the material world. Rational spiritual ideas would be judged by coherence and compatibility with what we know. And the deeper stories of faith exploring the currently unknown and unknowable would be lifted. The clarity that comes from untangling what we know from what we do not will allow more people to explore. Religion as a whole will remain doing what it has always done best: helping people frame meaning, identity, morality, suffering, and hope. All from within integrated belief systems that respect our clearest observations and stand alongside competing stories without fear or favor.

In that sense, the future may belong not to the collapse of religion, but to a more honest form of spirituality. One that honors belief without confusing it with truth, and that accepts pragmatic humility toward stories of the unknown and unknowable. If so, the great religious traditions of the future may endure not by resisting science, but by learning to live beside it more clearly, more humbly, and more wisely.

That Critical Thinking Story,

was first published on TST 2 years ago.

The flashcard inspired by it is this.

Front: Treating usefulness or practical consequence as an important test of ideas.

Back: Pragmatism..

The end. Refresh for another set.

TST Trainer
(c) 2025-2026 TouchstoneTruth.
Writing and coding by Michael Alan Prestwood.