There are people who organise the contest, winners, losers, and people who benefit from the contest taking place.

Outside of mathematics and logic, there are common sense truths, such as that it is snowing that normal observers, in a specified context can agree on, subject to vagueness considerations, and theoretical truths, such as that snow is crystallised water vapour, and maybe in-between truths.

The Epicureans denied that the gods had created the world and also denied that they played any role in it.

I have to say that some philosophers such as the late Bernard Williams, and I would include myself in this group, would say that tranquillity is overrated as the goal of life.

I don't see how being a faster runner, or a better mathematician makes you 'deserve' access to a better life, or more influence on policy, in the absence of a social decision to play that game in the way it's proposed to be organised for some set of benefits.

'Contract' succeeded 'status' as the basic organising principle in modern political vs. ancient society.

We have to gamble, and sometimes lose as George Ainslie argues; this keeps the appetite for life sharp.