Enkrod

I remember you! From a discussion about people being barred from voting for certain criminal offenses.

Your username is very rememberable.

No, but the reason for it is one of safety, not morality:

Every bacteria, virus, fungus or other germ that can contaminate that lab and that meat is already adapted to hurt me, there is no species barrier. Nature generally abhors cannibalism because of this.

Now if you grow it in a lab, that might not be too much of a risk, but once you enter capitalist industrial production there are numerous incentives to cut corners and increase the risk of contamination.

Contamination also exists in factory farming, but at least there, there’s a species barrier and the impact of that cannot be overstated.

Alternatively, you’ll create a swamp of human meat factory farms that use huge amounts of antiviral, antifungal and antibiotic agents and just get soooooo much more effective in training multi-resistant germs, already adapted to human tissue.

Man, I’d love to see her as a beleaguered ruler struggling with questions of morality in a fantasy show. Just imagine seeing her wrestling with life-or-death decisions concerning hundreds if not thousands of her subjects.

This is it, it’s the perfect example of adaptation through sexual selection.

Where are the ten commandmends listed again?

Theistic Satanism, otherwise referred to as religious Satanism, spiritual Satanism, or traditional Satanism,[2] is an umbrella term for religious groups that consider Satan, the Devil, to objectively exist as a deity, supernatural entity, or spiritual being worthy of worship or reverence, whom individuals may contact and convene with, in contrast to the atheistic archetype, metaphor, or symbol found in LaVeyan Satanism.

The Satanic Bible is LaVeyan Satanism and as a product of the 20th century very much more modern than the “traditional Satanism” of de Sade and Huysman in the 19th century.

LaVeyan Satanism is still much more on the “spiritual” side of things than, for example the explicitly atheistic, sceptic and rational Satanic Temple, but both fall under the umbrella of the more modern, non-theistic understanding of Satanism. While a more historical form definetly existed, even if it wasn’t widely practiced.

In Christian Satanism the Devil exists and is being worshipped. This is “classical” or “theist” Satanism where there is a belief in the existence of Satan.

Contrast that with modern atheist Satanism, where the Devil is merely a psychological symbol of rebellion, independence and freedom that serves to trigger theists while also being a representation of revolting against christan authoritarianism and, through the exploitation of rules stemming from theist-political decisionmaking, as a counter to the blatantly unconstitutional abuse of religious freedom laws for the benefit of a single religion.

You want a drink with all that straw, man?

People react differently, sure, some will call out to some higher power even if they don’t believe, if these call-outs are part of their vocabulary. I certainly say “oh god” a lot, even though I’m a very vocal anti-theist and strong atheist. But they do not necessarily beg a higher power to safe them because they actually believe, but because in distress reaching for help is human instinct and our theism infused culture conditions us towards “god” in such situations.

I’m not proud of it, but in distress I did call to god for help. But hey, I was 11 years old and just had my fingers crushed to paste, I was in shock and not thinking and at no point did I actually expect help.

None of that is belief, as soon as peoole regain their senses, they discard it. Just like wounded soldiers on a battlefield don’t actually expect their mothers to show up and safe them, yet still call out to them.

Belief needs conviction and irrational panic behavior tells us nothing about conviction but a lot about ingrained childhood experience and familial as well as societal indoctrination.

That’s a squeegee, they said they use it after every shower but doesn’t help.

Actually tru for every value of yo mama, from xs to xxxxxxxxxl

Not everywhere, mostly that’s a thing in the US (which is a pretty shitty society when it comes to how they treat their ex-cons and consequently to re-offending-rates) or with jobs where the past could have an impact (for example if you are to work in law enforcement)

Exactly, just more (and different) linguistic shift. Woðanaz -> Woden -> Oden -> Odin

The d before n is inherited from the original name Wodans dag (like Tiu’s dag, Thor’s dag and Frey’s dag inherited through the Saxons and Danes from pagan germanic gods)

The rest is just linguistic shift through the centuries of changing language. Like Dag -> Day while for example in German Dag -> Tag.

But the root of the word is still Wodan then old english Weoden then Wedn.

1. It is spelled Dachshund (Dachs-Hund, German, lit. Badger-Dog, as the breed was created to hunt foxes and badgers in their burrows)

2. It is pronounced Dax Hunt (good example by a native german speaker: https://youtu.be/6aveG0N6Jtc?si=mzCsfrVA95VJZggG )

Basically every great and complex work ant colonies are capable of is an emergent property of simple rules that are simple instinct in simple creatures, yet the interplay of lots of individuals following these simple rules begets complex behavior. This is the easiest to grasp example imho.

Flocking birds, schooling fish, hell we can write computer programs where complex behavior emerges from simple rules, Conway’s Game of Life is the best example for how simple the rules can be and how complex the emergent systems.

But emergence is everywhere, the cells of your lungs don’t breathe, but they arrange themselves in a way and are embedded in a system that can exist because lung-cells do arrange the way they do.

Life itself is an emergent property, the atoms that constitute us themselves aren’t alive, they don’t run, breathe or think, all of those are emergent properties from the right collection and arrangement of atoms into molecules into cells into a multicellular organism.

Thinking is no different than running, it is something that happens through the complex interplay of matter but transcends the single building blocks.

A single ant can’t be a colony, a single cell can’t breathe or run and a single neuron can’t think, but if you bring them together in the right amount and arrangement, new properties emerge.

And most importantly, if you disturb that arrangement, if you destroy some of that constituting matter or rearrange it, the emergent properties change or vanish. That it can simply stop to emerge is imho the best prove that it is an emergent property.

“An emergent phenomenon of the way our biological hardware works” is one possible, entirely rational and most importantly sufficient answer. And even if we did not have an answer, that doesn’t mean that there is not an entirely materialistic explanation for the phenomenon, even if we didn’t find the answer yet.

Because we have hundreds of thousands of examples of previously unexplained phenomena being sufficiently and completely explained by purely naturalistic, materialistic causes.

On the other hand we have exactly zero previous examples of a phenomenon being sufficiently explained by anything supernatural.

Since we observe consciousness solely bound to the existence of, reliant on the configuration of and changeable through the change of physical properties of physical matter, we can conclude that it is an emergent property that has arisen like other properties emergent from biological matter through the well known, well defined and observable process of evolution.

Could there be an alternative explanation? Yes!

Is the god-hypothesis in any way an explanation for consciousness? No! In fact it would raise more questions. It is neither sufficient, nor rational. What it is, is a god-of-the-gaps argument, another turtle on the way down.

Margerine under Nutella!

Aye, I used to sail the high seas, the hull of my ship gnarly with viruses, adware and malware from some infectious crackers or key-generators.

Then I had money, and started buying my software and my movies and all was good for a time. Then my media consume shifted to mobile devices, but I had Amazon Prime Video as the only really available video-streaming service around and all was good for a time. Then I added Netflix, as it arrived on my countries market and all was good for a time. Then I added Crunchyroll, Disney+ and Hulu and everything sucked, streaming the shows I wanted to watch was suddenly so expensive, no single streaming service had everything I wanted to watch, so I needed to subscribe to them all, costing an amount of money I would not spend on buying those shows.

Now I have unsubscribed from all but two again, but the market is so fractured, there is barely anything interesting on the services I still go to.

So my eyes keep wandering to that old tricorn, the hook and peg-leg, gathering dust on the wall. I can hear the waves crashing and feel the tide rising in my bones. The moneybags have decided to press us for more and more, their greed means no single harbor, not even two are enough to supply our demands. So there is plenty of bounty to be found on the high seas again, big fat galleons full of content otherwise unreachable or too expensive.

Doncha hear it boys? Davey Jones is singing again, calling us back to the sea, put on your VPN, defy the torrents and right your compasses with a good magnet. We did not choose this life, they made us turn to it.

I have to disagree.

Best example comes to us via the BBC above, during WW2 they never called the Nazis wicked or evil, but they did not and did not need to have Nazi-apologists on air to present a “fair and balanced” view Fox-News style.

As long as you present opinion as opinion and reporting as reporting and refrain from loaded language in your reporting you’re perfectly fine. Could it be better? Yes. But while you might not have arrived at “morally good”, you have clearly left “morally bad”.