What you say doesn't matter as much as what the other person hears. If I were the other person, I would probably wonder why you would add epicycles, and kindness would be just one possible explanation.
It's always funny when you say there's a lion across the river, everyone knows there is a lion across the river, and everyone knows everyone is actually speaking about the social reality, because who cares about the lion, anyway.
(Personally, I would be rather intimidated by such a long list of questions at Step 6. I would be thinking something like, question one: why do I think it wasn't just sheer dumb (lack of) luck? And question two, have I had fun?)
In chemical names it's so hard. At least when one is not a chemist. They say "follow the IUPAC recommendations" which in practice means"find someone who knows how to follow them".
What happens to substances in ergot as it is metabolized (by a nonhuman body)? (I think it strange that humans have this strong reaction to e.g. bread made with the infected flour.)
Perhaps the properties of the original LSD as seen in the human body are just a side effect due to some biological role it plays in nature. Do animals have anything like what the humans do, after eating the infected wheat, behaviourally speaking? Perhaps the "feeling" part of it is not important compared to the "acting" part, from the fungus's point of view.
Maybe the chemists had had an inkling before they tasted things. Do the sweeteners smell of something? Maybe a chemist has a stronger sense of smell.
It's mapping a river system to a drop. Just because something is technically possible and topologically feasible doesn't make it a sensible thing to do.
"Love your neighbour" is also not specific. Very many good things aren't. It's ok. You don't have to play chess at all until you discuss interventions.
I kind of agree. And I probably do like a more confrontational approach than you do. (A tangent. I have deliberately put strangers into situations that were really uncomfortable for everybody, within the boundaries of 1) law and 2) common sense. Nobody was there for honest discourse. I was there for the thrill, they were there for the money. It was interesting, though, how we all still respected some lines in the sand without having to name them, like "give a warning for the first offence" or "go for the camera and not for the eyes".)