The extirpation of desires is not an immediately and universally attractive state to strive for. Even if there are ultimately no selves, even if all suffers, withdrawal of care may seem an uninspiring ideal to adopt in the light of that – and what else could ‘detachment’ be than this? What else does the Buddha mean, when he exhorts us to give up all forms of clinging? If suffering is rooted in desire, attachment and aversion, so that we must ‘cut off’ these roots if we are to end suffering, then it may seem that the game isn't worth the candle – or that the life one is left with (dispassionate, detached, desireless) is just the best of a bad job.

Nor, even if recognizing non-self goes together with the diminution of desires, is it particularly plausible psychologically that we could simply review a reductive mereological argument and thereby leave off desiring, even if we believe the argument sound, and review it clear-headedly many times, so that we are utterly convinced of it.