Here's the problem with philosophical discussion, though - if you just discuss things in the abstract you'll be limited on where you can go and who you can learn from. We're already going in circles here

No. You start with the abstract and drill down. We're going in circles because you don't want to drill.

I'm happy to have those conversations with you even though I could just tell you to start with Plato and Descartes.

If you're telling me to go read Plato and Descartes, then no, you don't want to have a discussion. What you're saying is "I'm right. I don't value your thoughts. Go read these guys to see why I'm right. Conversations with you aren't worth it."

Because the arguments you are making? They're the kind of positions you take because you haven't lived them

Personal stuff edited out Honestly? If it wasn't for my wife and loving friends? I'd be one of those "deaths of despair" statistics you read about in the morning news and then tut tut to yourself about how the world is so cruel.

I don't need to read Dostoevsky, because my life might as well be one of his novels.

I want a conversation because these are concepts I care about. You want me to validate your worldview. So now there's no conversation, not because I'm mad at you, but because we can't agree on the conditions as to how this conversation should take place.