Ah, understood. My point was that a "New Ager' has violated the practice of embracing whatever morsels of fate that life happens to spew on a platter. His response to life was not an embrace of its meaninglessness or stupidity, but a a rebellion in the convoluted guise of "New Age". I see your point. You see mine? And if two people embrace the same thing, can they not speak about their respective "solipsisms"? You act as though its recursive nature makes it incommunicable and that's false. I cannot, however, communicate the 'qualia' of any one thing to anyone-- experience of any one thing is wholly private with the precise textures of its sensations impossible to capture in language or communicable thought. The practice of "amor fati", however, is as easy to communicate with anyone as describing how you derived such and such function or how you slip off a thong before bathing. And if I agree with the concept?