Phi for All

It's the kind of misplaced compassion that makes you feel better but makes life difficult for a bunch of others. There are plenty of examples these days. I've been behind drivers who actually stopped in the middle of the street to let another car enter traffic from a side street. They think they're being compassionate by saving one other driver a wait, ignoring that they're making the twenty cars behind them wait instead.

Overthinking it?! I'm thinking killing and robbing you would have major repercussions for me, and change my life for the worse. Even if I could justify the act to myself somehow, I would be still be forever changed by it. I lose sleep over far less. If I'd killed you before you could blow up a bus full of school kids, I know I'd still have nightmares about it as long as I lived. If I couldn't justify it to myself, how do I escape the law? This really isn't an emotional or empathetic matter, it's a matter of wanting freedom to do as I please over incarceration with a bunch of felons. If you're only afraid of doing something that might land you in jail instead of reasoning that crime is wrong, doesn't that mean you might do something illegal if you thought you wouldn't get caught? If you suddenly feel more empathetic against me than for me, or a stronger emotion grabs hold of you, should my family be prepared to carry on without me? I disagree that the whole don't-eat-animals thing is about empathy. And it isn't about over-thinking either, it's about under-thinking and over-emoting.

Like most things, I think it varies between people. Some people can do maths like they're speaking a native language, and many science subjects become easier or more fully understood for people who are fluent in advanced mathematics. Affinity is a fantastic human trait, and we've developed a sort of mysticism about it. For the most part though, study and hard work will get you to the same place. And if you've put in that kind of effort, it's likely you'll go far with it. We all know someone who has a seemingly natural ability they take for granted, something we'd all cut off a toe to be that good at, but they do nothing with it (Gah! I can't draw but have a friend who's amazing, but only doodles). Perhaps developed skills have more advantage over natural gifts than we commonly think.

! Moderator Note Moved from Science News to Speculations, due to the non-mainstream and non-published content. Please read the special rules for this section, and be prepared to answer questions as part of a normal science discussion.

! Moderator Note This is the wrong attitude for our site. The volume of physics you've forgotten is part of the problem here, along with the idea that we're your personal science sandbox where you can crap and not bother trying to clean up after yourself. We're interested in discussion here, not wild-ass guesswork preached at us from someone who thinks being above the rules is the "tough" POV, and people who follow the rules are wimps. Nobody but you is taking any of this personally. You've been asked to explain parts of your idea by people who are trying to participate. Answer them or the thread gets closed. Simple rules.

In Frank Herbert's Dune world, they were called litanies and they were used to focus the mind on a single task, or remove unwanted emotions for a clearer perspective. I suppose that's the science fiction behind recitation of mantras.

! Moderator Note If questions aren't being taken into consideration, and you just keep repeating that you're right, we call that soapboxing, and it's against the rules. This is a science discussion forum, not a blog or a position paper. The preaching must end now or the thread will be closed.

I choose to believe he's done with emotional appeals against eating meat, and also wants to change the way he looks at murder. In my delusion, critical thinking triumphed against guilt and fear.

Remember that we're the ones who cared enough to differentiate between civilization and "the wild". It's what we do instead of chasing down our prey and eating them alive. That's what they do in "the wild", but we came up with something more civilized. I understand why you have to make it a moral judgement, but you're forgetting the moral judgement we've already made, that we'll treat domesticated animals with as much decency as we can in exchange for their support of our civilization, and the plentiful food and safety from constant predation it brings. Forget about people without access to supermarkets (although it's wrong to not talk about them but still use this argument). What you're doing is taking the the most important trait humans selected for, intelligence, and saying we have to stop using it in this instance. We can't catch prey in our claws, our teeth and jaws aren't designed to grip and hold, we don't have fur or venom or flight. We almost didn't make it as a species, but eventually our brains caught up with us and we figured out how to make up for most of what we lacked. Our intelligence let's you question the validity of these practices as well, and make no mistake, questioning them is a big part of vigilance in making sure humane practices are followed. You simply don't make anything more than emotional arguments, and I would need a rational reason to change my diet so radically. You've chosen to invest the word butcher with horror and guilt-ridden, perverse implications that animal husbandry is suddenly no longer the brilliant idea it was to begin with, and that any killing of animals is suddenly wrong. When I use the word butcher, it's after the respect for the animal has been demonstrated, and its life has been taken humanely. When I use the word butcher, it's with regard to the person who feels the same way I do about being grateful to domesticated animals who share the safety and prosperity of our civilization and give their lives as pets, or as food, or as fiber farms, or as beasts of burden, or as guardians of our families. I can't believe you don't think there are rational reasons not to kill a human, or to take their money without permission. This basically says to me, "The minute my empathy for you wavers, you're a dead man, and I'll be richer."

Why is it people think animal husbandry is worse "treatment" for a being than being hunted down and eaten alive in the wild? Why are you invoking the way we "treat" other beings when no other animal is held to that accountability? Could it be because of our higher intelligence? If so, then why is being smart enough to figure out a humane system for keeping multiple species viable such a bad thing? You guys have to resort to misleading vividness like "happy with butchering your fellow beings" in order to find an emotional appeal, obviously because the rational appeals for veganism just aren't there.

I remember reading an article that claimed the difference between the revenue the Russian government took in during Putin's time and what they spent was staggering, and it's most likely Putin retained most of it. I don't think he wants notoriety if it might damage his puppeteering work.

I think he became an expert in extremist capitalism while working under communism, and I think he's probably twice as rich as Bill Gates. I also think he's trying to get richer, like so many at that level who mix the powers of wealth and government. Oh, and he wants to lead Russia for life.

What if I agree to go against evolution, and start chasing down my meat again, and eat it while it's still alive, like many omnivores do? Would that be more "natural", and less offensive to vegans? After all, it's what animals encounter in the wild.

Dimensions aren't what you think they are. Length, width, height, the x, y, z axes of a coordinate system that, together with time, allows us to measure where something is. Black holes don't have infinite mass. The mass is still there, but the volume of the matter has shrunk to almost nothing.

Not sure you could ever be able to see the bigger-on-the-inside effect from the doorway, but I can easily imagine a Tardis that's up against a (seemingly) solid wall, and you need to step in and open a second door to access the main space.

4. Mock those who can't seem to stand on their own two feet because your foot is on their throat.

It's like the Democrats are becoming more like Republicans in that they only give lip service to the needs of the poor, and the Republicans are becoming more like 17th century royalists. Let them eat cake and save up for doctor's visits.

No, it's a PDF, so it should be safe to open if I attach it here. 760.full.pdf

And this is where the delusion starts. Libraries don't exist. Streets and highways aren't built with public money. Small business loans aren't available from the government. Nothing was given to you, except what progressives made sure you got, what they felt ALL the People deserved. Nobody works as hard as those who hate loafers, and anybody that isn't in your position MUST be a loafer, right? People like you are the biggest hypocrites on the planet, and like I said before, it's your POV that keeps us in the dark. The kind of world you want isn't sustainable, so in essence you're damning your own children to suffer because you were too afraid of brown people, or poor people, or poor brown people.

We gave you relevant information, and then you seem to have redefined what relevant means.

No. Most likely, when the irritant signals the release of histamines, the initial quick intake of air removes the irritant (sucks it in), and the signal goes away. Sneeze aborted. It involves several muscles groups and systems, so it seems like there is plenty of time for something to interfere. Btw, did you see that the Wiki article mentions bright light as a possible irritant?

Insulin signals the cells to produce their own cholesterol instead of using the blood delivery system. It causes the kidneys to retain salt (and a corresponding amount of water). Insulin causes artery walls to thicken, raising blood pressure and external temperature.

We had a great concept going, this coming together of various nationalities to stand with each other against tyranny and the oppression of those with heavy advantage in wealth, power, and ownership. We took the immigrants from lots of places and we made a united society. Then people like you started ignoring the fact that any civilization MUST take steps to avoid the inevitable disease that comes from high density human habitation. It's all OK for you though, because you were born into advantage others didn't have. You're acting JUST like the oppressors we fought so hard against. You thumb your nose at those who can't afford what you can, and blame them for all the troubles your uncaring, messed up, fear-mongering GOP batshit craziness has foisted upon this society over your lifetime. The focus on criminals instead of reasons for crime, the idiotic pissing all over the rights of women and minorities, and unfeeling jealous attitude Republicans like you have about the health of the plethora of people you despise, these all need to stop as soon as possible. Just like the jerk who bitches about traffic while weaving in and out and causing most of it, you are the problem. You are the problem. You are the problem.

! Moderator Note The OP needs to pick from a few of the many questions being asked and answer them. I see a LOT of defensiveness, but little actual defense of the idea. Support your idea by addressing the concerns of those you're discussing this idea with. Didn't you come here instead of anywhere else to be challenged with great questions? If not, perhaps you shouldn't be here, or this thread should be closed. Don't bother responding to this note. Respond instead to Mordred's thrice-asked question above.

! Moderator Note Religious post split to here. It's against the rules to post supernatural explanations in mainstream science sections. We have specific sections for a reason. Responses to this note or to non-mainstream tangents will be Trashed.