Actually, that is why most direct magicians discard ritual (not that you do, but the majority of direct magicians do so for such reasons).
I'm sure many of them do, but I don't know if I'd say most. Without some kind of statistical evidence (which we are not likely to get, for obvious reasons), I think the word "most" is too strong. Keep in mind that psionics counts as direct magic if we use the broad definition I gave. You may in fact be right, but we don't really know that for sure. Yes, I know I'm nitpicking here
When I mentioned these people, it wasn't so much as to challenge direct magic, but to oppose the popular opinion of direct magic that ritual is not as useful.
That may be so, but the entire post itself did come off as a challenge to the direct magic paradigm. I'm sure there are direct magicians that say ritual is not useful, but I believe this will occur less in the future (hopefully). Now of course, the direct systems I have seen do not by any means constitute all of the systems around, but the 2 systems I have seen that have actually made significant progress, that are accessible worldwide (i.e. internet) and therefore will reach a large number of existing and potential magicians, do not argue against the usefulness
of ritual, only against the necessity
of ritual. Hopefully, as more people see the success of these systems and look into what they have to say, the belief among direct magicians that ritual is not useful will become less prevalent.
And again, I'm speaking in the context of the definition I gave. Any applications of your arguments against other definitions are outside the scope of my posts in this thread.
This is somewhat of a tangent, but I'd like to point out that not all direct methods use the energy of the caster alone. Non-ritual simply means without ritual, nothing more and nothing less.