from the Newest-Entrée-at-Milliways?-Long-Pig-Bacon? dept.
'Soylent' Dawkins? Atheist mulls 'taboo against cannibalism' ending as lab-grown meat improves
What if human meat is grown? Could we overcome our taboo against cannibalism?"
- @RichardDawkins - 6:15 AM - 3 Mar 2018
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/969939225180364805
https://archive.fo/kSmgi
"Lab-grown 'clean' meat could be on sale by end of 2018, says producer"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/clean-meat-lab-grown-available-restaurants-2018-global-warming-greenhouse-emissions-a8236676.html
"'Soylent' Dawkins? Atheist mulls 'taboo against cannibalism' ending as lab-grown meat improves"
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/6/richard-dawkins-mulls-taboo-against-cannibalism-en/
and:
https://www.nationalreview.com/blog/corner/richard-dawkins-eating-human-meat-cannibalism-taboo/
Related Stories
Don't listen to Big Cattle — lab-grown meat should still be called "meat"
Lab-grown meat is on its way, and the government is trying to figure out how to regulate it. This week, the US House of Representatives [pdf] released a draft spending bill that proposes that the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulate lab-grown meat and figure out how it should be labeled — which is a contentious topic since Big Cattle doesn't want it to be called "meat." Regulation is important, and there's plenty more to learn, but the USDA shouldn't be the only one regulating. And when the product comes to market, yes, it should be called "meat."
Traditional meat, of course, comes from animals that are raised and slaughtered. Lab-grown meat (also called "in-vitro meat," "cultured meat," or "clean meat") is made from animal stem cells grown in a lab. But because the stem cells are typically fed with a serum derived from the blood of calf fetuses, the product uses animal products and isn't vegan. Still, the pitch for lab-grown meat is that it saves animals and also helps the environment because lab-grown meat doesn't take much land or energy to grow. Plus, lab-grown meat doesn't directly create methane emissions, while methane emissions from cows accounted for 16 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2015.
Because of the way that government agencies work, it hasn't even been clear who should regulate lab meat. The USDA traditionally regulates meat, while the US Food and Drug Administration regulates food safety and additives. The proposal that the USDA be in charge of regulation is in line with what the [pdf] National Cattlemen's Beef Association wanted, but some lab-meat advocates fear that USDA will be biased against them in favor of traditional meat. If the USDA will be regulating lab meat, it should at least collaborate with the FDA. There are no slaughterhouses for the USDA to inspect anyway, and the FDA has already been regulating food technology, like the genetically engineered salmon it approved. It makes the most sense for the two to work together.
Previously: U.S. Cattlemen's Association Wants an Official Definition of "Meat"
Related: Lab-Grown Chicken (and Duck) Could be on the Menu in 4 Years
Cargill, Bill Gates, Richard Branson Backed Memphis Meats Expects Meat From Cells in Stores by 2021
'Soylent' Dawkins? Atheist Mulls 'Taboo Against Cannibalism' Ending as Lab-Grown Meat Improves
Impossible CEO says it can make a meat 'unlike anything that you've had before'
Plant-based meat products are bigger than ever, with the fast-food industry, grocery stores, and upscale restaurants coming on board. A recent Nielsen report found that plant-based meat alternative purchases went up 279.8 percent last week after Americans were instructed to stay home during the novel coronavirus pandemic.
Impossible Foods, a company that develops plant-based meat products, says its mission is to someday replace the incumbent meat industry entirely, stating that, from a mission standpoint, a sale only has value if it comes at the expense of the sale of an animal-derived product.
But what if plant-based meat wasn't just a substitute for an already-existing marketplace, and instead, it started to make meat that has never existed?
On this week's Vergecast podcast, Impossible Foods CEO Patrick Brown talks to Verge editor-in-chief Nilay Patel about how this impossible meat could be a possibility in the future, even if it doesn't make sense for the company right now.
https://dilbert.com/strip/1992-04-08
Previously: Impossible Burger Lands in Some California Grocery Stores
Burger King Grilled by Vegan Over Impossible Burger "Meat Contamination"
Related: 'Soylent' Dawkins? Atheist Mulls 'Taboo Against Cannibalism' Ending as Lab-Grown Meat Improves
Meatless "Beyond Burgers" Come to Fast Food Restaurants
Swedish Behavioral Scientist Suggests Eating Humans to 'Save the Planet'
Discriminating Diets Of Meat-Eating Dinosaurs
Meat Industry PR Campaign Bashes Plant-Based Meat Alternatives
Unilever Pushing for Plant-Based Meat
Judge Serves Up Sizzling Rebuke of Arkansas' Anti-Veggie-Meat Labeling Law
Lab-grown meat is supposed to be inevitable. The science tells a different story.
Splashy headlines have long overshadowed inconvenient truths about biology and economics. Now, extensive new research suggests the industry may be on a billion-dollar crash course with reality.
[...] [In March], the Good Food Institute (GFI), a nonprofit that represents the alternative protein industry, published a techno-economic analysis (TEA) that projected the future costs of producing a kilogram of cell-cultured meat. Prepared independently for GFI by the research consulting firm CE Delft, and using proprietary data provided under NDA by 15 private companies, the document showed how addressing a series of technical and economic barriers could lower the production price from over $10,000 per pound today to about $2.50 per pound over the next nine years—an astonishing 4,000-fold reduction.
In the press push that followed, GFI claimed victory. "New studies show cultivated meat can have massive environmental benefits and be cost-competitive by 2030," it trumpeted, suggesting that a new era of cheap, accessible cultured protein is rapidly approaching. The finding is critical for GFI and its allies. If private, philanthropic, and public sector investors are going to put money into cell-cultured meat, costs need to come down quickly. Most of us have a limited appetite for 50-dollar lab-grown chicken nuggets.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Arik on Saturday March 10 2018, @03:05AM (8 children)
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 3, Funny) by ilPapa on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:12AM (6 children)
Nah, I just don't dig on no swine. that's all.
https://youtu.be/ZA_Tl1kvlQU [youtu.be]
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:23AM
Fredrikson was having the time of his life. When they begged, he chuckled. When they screamed, he cracked up. When they spasmed, he chortled. When they became silence itself, he cackled. What's more, Fredrikson was able to cause all of these things to happen with stunning regularity; it was like his own personal comedy show! He laughed and he laughed and he laughed, and the more he laughed, the larger the pile of garbage became. Or was it a pile of women's corpses? What's the difference?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Arik on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:50AM (4 children)
'No I ain't Jewish I just don't dig on swine that's all."
It's a historical fact that when cannibals are forced to find an alternative meat for their traditional dishes, they choose pork.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1, Troll) by ilPapa on Saturday March 10 2018, @05:44AM (3 children)
I'm not sure anyone here outside of law enforcement wants to know how you know that.
What the fuck is "stereotypically ebonic"? Is that something you and your friends at Stormfront have come up with?
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Arik on Saturday March 10 2018, @05:58AM (1 child)
https://www.wdl.org/en/item/10096/
"What the fuck is "stereotypically ebonic"?"
In simple words, "acting black." In this case, the original line was altered to sound "more black" than the eminently black actor in question managed to delivery it. Very strange.
"Is that something you and your friends at Stormfront have come up with?"
Just in case you're actually retarded, I'll let you in on this thing, the Stormfront folks aren't particularly fond of my type.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1, Troll) by ilPapa on Saturday March 10 2018, @08:00PM
They'll tolerate you to the extent that you advance their favorite stereotypes. For people who need attention so badly that they post Soylent comments in courier, that may be acceptance enough.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:05AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @05:52AM
> Y'all eat pork right?
Especially long pig, when in season.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Saturday March 10 2018, @03:11AM (4 children)
This was pointed out years ago by people on and off of here.
Human, penguin, mammoth, dodo, whatever. If you can get a hold of the DNA, you have a chance of making cultured meat out of it.
In fact, you don't necessarily need a DNA sample. Once we have the ability use a digital genome to synthesize human cells, a publicly available genome could be downloaded and used to start meat production. Craig Ventburger, anyone?
The National Review writer is an anti-fun Christian loser.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:50AM (2 children)
Okay. But I (still) draw the line at lips and assholes.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday March 10 2018, @07:38AM (1 child)
Yum, human calamari [slate.com].
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @01:03AM
Why calamari and not just point out that sausage casings are sometimes made with icky animal parts?
If somebody wants to avoid ick ick ick at finding out how their food is made, they should become a vegetarian. Then when they find out where milk comes from, they'll become a vegan.
Facepalm inducing stupidity from people who have never seen a farm in their life.
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Saturday March 10 2018, @08:26PM
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday March 10 2018, @03:12AM (22 children)
*In theory,* there would be nothing wrong with this so long as 1) no nerve tissue were involved and 2) it was proven that there was no risk of prion disease from consuming purely flesh meat.
However, the question still remains: why the fuck? Seriously, why the fuck would anyone want to eat human meat at all? I seem to remember a story written about this premise exactly a long time ago, I think it was called "Ambrosia."
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Saturday March 10 2018, @03:27AM (10 children)
Cannibalism isn't exactly uncommon in the animal world. Technology could allow us to come full circle.
Ok, why really? First, for the amusement of Altered Carbon-style future trillionaires/quadrillionaires. Second, for the actual cannibal fetishists [theguardian.com] that are among us. I expect their ranks would... swell if the lab-grown/cultured human meat option becomes available, since there would be not need to be any death and suffering involved, and legal issues are either resolved or avoided (nobody to tattle on you if you grow and eat your own human meat). Third, academic study. We could emulate what it's like to be trapped on a ship and eating your crew mates. Fuck it, we'll hand out a PhD or two for that.
None of these reasons are very compelling for most people, but there would certainly be some individuals who would be into this.
What Does Human Flesh Taste Like? | Secrets of Everything | Brit Lab [youtube.com]
Always Sunny - Human Meat [youtube.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Troll) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:11AM
The old ones don't get to enjoy their golden years
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:15AM (4 children)
If you read the article you linked to, you'll learn that at least for this cannibal, the killing part was an integral part of his fantasy, so lab-grown human meat would certainly not have satisfied him.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday March 10 2018, @07:24AM (3 children)
Key words being "this cannibal" and "fantasy". They could play pretend, but with human meat. I linked that case to show that cannibalism is still happening these days, making headlines, despite an abundance of calories, and because in that case, the cannibal apparently only killed the "victim" because it was consensual. For every one extreme "ethical" cannibal that wants to end someone else's life, there are probably a larger number of others who would settle for eating a non-criminal amount of someone else's flesh, and even more who would readily jump at the opportunity to try lab-grown human flesh. And of course, some plain folks would try lab-grown human meat just so they could say they did.
We could say there are opportunistic, homicidal, situational, etc. cannibals. Is lab-grown human flesh a gateway to cannibalistic murder? Or a way to control the urge the kill? Why can't cannibals just eat some raw pork instead of lab-grown human meat to get their jollies off? Maybe because even though they would know the experience is synthetic and without a victim, just knowing the flesh has an authentic taste and is genetically human can fulfill the desire for the "forbidden fruit".
And you can apply everything above to "vampires" as well. I can see it now: an entrepreneurial biohacker creates a synthetic "True Blood" that can be safely imbibed by sanguinarians [wikipedia.org] without giving them AIDS or something, and sells it for a tidy profit. I'm thinking $250 a pint. Beats peddling kombucha or cold-brewed coffee, as long as you can reach enough customers on etsy or patreon.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:25PM (2 children)
It still happens, but why would this be any different from rape? Anybody who would make use of the pretend version already is. Humans probably taste like pork or chicken, but there's not very many folks out there willing to say and few are willing to try.
There are folks that do enjoy role playing rape, it's a very different situation. Same goes for people that are willing to pretend to be eating people, there's no reason to use meat that's got human DNA as you're probably not going to be able to tell the difference without a DNA test.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:46PM (1 child)
Like a placebo effect, except that knowing it's real could make it more effective in satisfying the fetish.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @09:25PM
No. Some people just need to be locked up.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:53AM
Is that what the kids are calling it these days? A "rank"?
I can't keep up.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @10:50AM
Oh I great, now I am just waiting the movement against systematic oppression of cannibals in our society.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @02:06PM (1 child)
Cannibalism in nature means exposing oneself to the full array of pathogens afflicting the one you eat; none of "we're different species!" protection whatsoever. The danger outweighs the gain except in the direst of circumstances (a probable early death from disease is still preferable to a certain immediate one from hunger).
With the disease factor excised, meat is just meat.
But having said that, once the novelty factor wears off, there is absolutely no reason synth-human meat would sell well on taste alone. The evolutional pressure has been all for DISpreferring same-species meat.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:28PM
In general, eating animals that eat other animals leads to that sort of problem. When it's humans it's even worse because humans generally have the same diseases that other humans can get. Plus, there's the issue of our agreement that if I kill you for food, I can reasonably expect that you won't either.
Considering that the only way to know what man meat tastes like is to actually eat somebody, I fail to see how creating lab grown human meat for consumption makes any sense outside of a philosophical puzzle. I can see it being made for medicinal reasons like replacing damaged tissue, but for consumption I don't see why people would want to eat it badly enough to pay the production costs on what's likely at best a niche interest.
(Score: 1) by cocaine overdose on Saturday March 10 2018, @03:42AM
I agree, human lean muscle is pretty awful tasting -- just like most "lean" meats. The only way I'd eat this is if they find a way to grow adipose tissue as well, so I'm not stuck chewing on the equivalent of a raw artichoke. Now human brain, what a dangerous delicacy. Risk of prions are highest here, but so is that delicious fat. As for non-cerebrum nervous tissue, there's really no risk involved. I'm even told, after it's been strung out and cleaned, it tastes like corn. Can't say I'm a fan, but to each his own.
Else, there's nothing that really puts you as close to nature as eating your fellow man. Cain did it, and look at him. Pork can't compete, although it's a close second in taste. There's just something special about knowing you're eating something that has lived a complex life full of strife. One where extensive resources have been put into raising and making sure it gets the best out of life. Unlike beef, yuck. It all tastes the same when it's cooked. "Medium rare really gets the fatty flavor out." The only thing that needs to get out is you! Steak "enthusiasts" are about as able to differentiate Kobe from ground, as wine "aficionados" are with a 1945 Mouton Rothschild and a 2018 Franzia Chardonnay! Go raw or go home. Blue, if you're a stickler for "sanitation." Pro tip from a man that's never had parasites, don't eat out of a dumpster and make sure your butcher is amish or some other straight-shooting ethnicity. He'll be about as fluid in holding a conversation as Stephen Hawking with a harmonica down his throat, but he'll get you meat that's good.
And if you're really on the Schizophrenic spectrum, get yourself some Pyrantel from the local pharmacy and chug that badboy monthly.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 10 2018, @03:47AM (1 child)
Because, of course, we are omnivores. We eat everything that doesn't eat us first.
Personally, I have no desire to eat human flesh. But, I'm aware that most people are quite happy existing as a LCD - or lowest common denominator. They make that obvious in their choice of music, preferred inebriating drinks, and other choices. Seen any Kardashian trash lately?
I suppose that lab-grown human flesh will hit the market - and people with scruples will just have to tolerate it. The LCD's may well prefer that human flesh to real meat. It may replace beef at McDonald's. Get ready for it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @01:17AM
What? Why? What is wrong with you?
There's no beef at McDonald's, so how could it be replaced with anything?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Gaaark on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:12AM
I'm just here because I wanted to watch the latest Tarantino dvd.
He was a fine young cannibal.
“You’re my wife, Roy! You’re my wife!”
Hints...hinting at hints.
;)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:14AM
Number two is easily taken care of. Simply make it freely available and use the sick fuckers who buy it as a clinical trial. It's not like their healthcare information can't be easily monitored now that all our health data is hooked to the Internet.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by c0lo on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:29AM (1 child)
Was it though? I remember they find prions in sheep muscle back in the day.
Let me see... Ok, here it is [sciencemag.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by dwilson on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:00PM
Whether it was proven or not, he never implied either way.
- D
(Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:53AM
*In theory* there's no problem with pork consumption, as long as 1) the meat is processed and inspected rigorously, and 2) the pig farms are located in remote areas far from human habitation.
"However, the question still remains: why the fuck?"
Because many people think it tastes good, and far fewer are concerned with anything past that.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by legont on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:59AM (2 children)
It should be good from a pure nutrient point of view as it could have exactly the right balance of everything.
It's bad because of the highest probability of bio contamination.
Overall, I believe that bugs ate cannibals and that's why there are relatively few of them in nature.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 4, Funny) by takyon on Saturday March 10 2018, @05:03AM (1 child)
Have you seen the average American?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @11:00AM
Yes, they're a proper Atkins diet galore!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:13AM
Read "Food of the Gods":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Food_of_the_Gods_(short_story) [wikipedia.org]
https://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=41586 [eveonline.com]
(Score: 1, Troll) by ilPapa on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:14AM (1 child)
Richard Dawkins is really a creepy motherfucker. I mean, seriously. Has the fucking guy ever been normal?
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Arik on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:56AM
Nope.
I don't like him one bit, but I have to admit, he's not bad enough to be called 'normal.'
I bet you are though.
Go back.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Gaaark on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:18AM (3 children)
So, would Ethanol-Fuelled taste like TEQUILA AND ORANGE LIQUOR CHICKEN!
:)
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday March 10 2018, @05:07AM
Bourbon Street chicken.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday March 10 2018, @05:47AM
Not if his flesh was grown in a vat.
I believe the nutrients you mention aren't the cheapest you can find and this will carve out a good chunk from the profit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:17AM
Ethanol-fueled would taste like shit.
Because that's what the sorry lowlife idiot is.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @05:15AM (4 children)
I don't see the logic here, you might as well wonder whether our acceptance of artificial flavorings will change how we feel about drinking bleach.
We don't (just) abstain from eating people because it's "gross", but because it associated with a lot of problems. Sure, you no longer have to murder someone if you grow the meats in a vat, but prion disease is one of those things you really don't want.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:43AM (3 children)
I'm sure with lab-grown meat, you could ensure that there are no prions in it. BTW, prions in beef are just as dangerous (mad cow disease!), yet we don't declare eating beef to be morally unacceptable (well, some people do, but not for health reasons). Instead we make rules to avoid prions in beef.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Saturday March 10 2018, @08:25AM (2 children)
But why go to the trouble of growing human meat and ensuring there are no prions, when other meats that do not need to be checked as much are readily available? We certainly aren't suffering from food shortages. Situations where the choice is cannibalism or starvation are exceedingly rare, with the only incident I recall being that plane that crashed in the Andes in 1972.
Consider a related subject: fertilizer. We don't fertilize crops with our own shit -- unless desperate like The Martian. It's a very bad idea, as it provides a much shorter, easier cycle for parasites and diseases to spread.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday March 10 2018, @09:06AM
That's besides the point. We certainly don't need human meat. And I actually don't expect anyone growing human meat in the lab (or more exactly, I expect people to grow human flesh for medical purposes, or maybe for experiments, but I don't think it will ever be grown for consumption as food).
But note that we don't need pork either. We could survive quite fine never eating pork in our entire life (and there are many people in the world who do exactly that). Yet pork is bought a lot, and many people wouldn't be willing to go without it. So if there were a significant market for lab-grown human meat, then it would be produced whether we need it or not.
Indeed, if there were enough people wanting to eat human meat, we'd have an illegal market for it right now. After all, organized crime never had any issues with killing or otherwise harming humans for monetary gain.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Saturday March 10 2018, @10:30AM
If the other meat doesn't need to be checked, why would the human meat have to be checked? If the process doesn't generate prions it doesn't generate prions.
Still it seems obvious that growing human meat is not the best idea when other options are equally available, simply because it's never been a regular part of the human diet.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:18AM
Nope. Sell that to rich bastards or something. Maybe they'll die sooner.
(Score: 4, Informative) by maxwell demon on Saturday March 10 2018, @06:36AM (1 child)
The taboo against cannibalism is not just because of killing. I've once (very long ago) read the following observation:
In the military, a soldier who kills many enemies is honoured as a good soldier. Should that same soldier start eating enemies that he killed, he would be condemned.
In addition, note that eating humans that are already dead is taboo, too.
Note also that the health risk is not directly relevant here: While it is true that eating human meat is a much higher health risk than other potential foods, we generally do not morally condemn people who eat stuff that is a health risk (otherwise in the modern world, we'd have to condemn the vast majority of people).
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 12 2018, @11:13AM
The key word here is "because". When you make a random choice without knowing if it will produce a favorable outcome in the future (e.g. keep you alive longer) you don't make it because of the outcome, but the outcome justifies the choice in retrospective. That's how evolution works. It is not that we condemn people for cannibalism because it is bad for people's health, but to the contrary people's health is a tad bit better because we chose to condemn cannibalism. Why exactly our ancestors chose that, we don't know, but it probably was some religious belief, perhaps belief in an carnal afterlife.
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Saturday March 10 2018, @07:04AM (1 child)
The Ware Tetralogy [soylentnews.org] by Rudy Rucker features lab-grown meat grown from humans, specifically meat grown from a character named Wendy, as her genetics proved useful as basis for a lot of biotech in the series.
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday March 10 2018, @11:00PM
> ...grown from a character named Wendy...
So, guaranteed to be fresh, never frozen?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by archfeld on Saturday March 10 2018, @07:39AM
Kuru...
https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/09/06/482952588/when-people-ate-people-a-strange-disease-emerged [npr.org]
For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @08:04AM
To obtain my "long pork" the old-fashioned way! *cackle* *cackle* *cackle*
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Saturday March 10 2018, @09:26AM (4 children)
At the risk of sounding even more conservative than I am, a lot of recent events remind me of what one reads about the fall of the Roman empire. Increasing decadence, fewer and fewer inhibitions against doing anything. Why not free sex? Why not widespread porn? Why not transgenderism? Why not legal drugs? Why not cannibalism? Why not...whatever?
I will happily argue for many of these individual issues; I'm as much a product of the times as anyone else.
However, taken as a whole, the changes of the last 50-60 years do represent a wholesale discarding of established mores. Which really does look like what happens to civilizations that become too successful: decadence, degeneracy and ultimately collapse. Or many I'm just in a grumpy mood, because I have to work today...
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by theluggage on Saturday March 10 2018, @12:22PM (3 children)
...the trouble is, for too long the answer to those questions was always either, "because... ewww!", "because my grandparents didn't do it" or "because my interpretation of a millennia-old fairy story says its wrong" - and used those as excuses for persecution and discrimination. Or, worse, used those as a premise for pseudo-science and policy-based evidence making.
Once people start calling bullshit on that line of reasoning they're too angry to rationally debate the question "no, really why/why not X?" and so, while a lot of wrongs get righted, a lot of babies get throw out of the bathwater, old prejudices get flipped into new prejudices and pendulums swing too far.
What is the actual danger threatening "Rome" today? Is it the last 60+ years' swing towards permissiveness, or is it the last few years' "popularist" backlash?
Meanwhile, assuming synthetic human meat could be made safe - thus removing any rational reason for not eating it - who would want to eat it? Answer: people wanting to provoke a reaction from those with irrational prejudices.
(Thinking of the "tiger carpaccio" scene from the Netflix version of Altered Carbon - I only went "ew!" because I don't like scriptwriters bashing me over the head with an anvil)
Its really just an extension of the question of whether a vegetarian would eat synthetic beef. Answer: probably, some would, some wouldn't, depending on why they became vegetarian, and I don't give a flying fuck as long as they don't mind quietly putting up with the odd salad when their exact preferred choice isn't available.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 10 2018, @03:06PM (2 children)
They are both symptoms of the actual problem - widespread ignorance and indolence as a result of longterm supremacy. Comfortable people look inward, neglect thought of the future, and see no reason to abide by strict social rules that make sense in more fraught periods. Eventually, societies that lack external threats inevitably collapse upon themselves because dominance, aggression, and gang-mentality were very valuable survival traits at one time, and barriers to the future now.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by meustrus on Saturday March 10 2018, @03:55PM (1 child)
Except that what killed the Roman Empire once it was weak was a threat from outside, not inner collapse. Granted, it was external threats that could normally have been dealt with easily. But what threat like that are we likely to face in the world today? North Korea? What a joke. Iran? Please. Russia? Well...maybe.
But with nukes and globalism, international politics have changed fundamentally. There's a reason the big guys don't go to war against each other anymore. And even though it only takes a small nuclear arsenal to deter large threats, America maintains the largest military force in the world anyway.
Now I'm not saying that we aren't facing a collapse-worthy situation. But unlike the Romans, there isn't a large unknown out there waiting to destroy us. We know what all the potential threats are, and we have taken steps to ensure our safety from them. Barring alien invasion, there isn't really any external threat that could rake us the way of the Roman Empire.
Speaking of aliens, what if this is actually inevitable? That once there is no big unknown, once a civilization can anticipate all external threats, there is no check against decadence? That once there is no group of barbarians waiting in the wings to burn it down, saying "try again", whatever society remains turns inward and stops making itself greater? Would we still have reached for the stars without the Soviets trying to beat us there? Or is globalism the Great Filter that keeps all civilizations from reaching beyond their home planets?
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by theluggage on Saturday March 10 2018, @05:59PM
I suspect "interstellar space travel is difficult (yet to be proven possible) and expensive, with few short-term economic paybacks" is the problem there. Hard to do, harder to ship out any significant fraction of your population, even harder to bring the resulting "riches" back to the homeland.
If your technology can build a self-sustaining, closed-environment generation ship, and your social science can maintain a stable population of crew without them procreating uncontrollably, fighting for resources, descending to savagery and worshipping the engines (or whatever) then you've pretty much sorted out all the shit that made you want to leave in the first place, and can stay at home, build space habitats and sustainably exploit the vast resources of your solar system. Move to the Kuiper belt when the sun starts to swell up.
To quote Greg Egan, the Fermi-paradox-style exponential colonisation "Is what bacteria with spaceships would do".
...and if you're arrogant enough to want to spread your genome to the far reaches of space, stick it into some bacteria and give them a (tiny) space ship - yay! panspermia.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Saturday March 10 2018, @10:22AM (14 children)
Scent of meatbags and spring flowers;
every religion
has their nutjobs
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday March 10 2018, @11:03PM (13 children)
How many times, Bot?
Atheism's "religion"
Like "bald's" a hairdo
Geez, I don't even like Dawkins and this crap bothers me enough to post that...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:09AM (1 child)
Bald is a hairstyle. Zero is a number. Thanks, al-Khwarizmi!
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday March 11 2018, @08:37AM
Bald is lack of hair, dipshit, and zero is both number and placeholder. Then, of course, we get into the difference between numbers and quantities, and before you know it we're debating mathematical Platonism. Well, I say "we," but anyone who says "bald is a hairstyle" is probably only up for debating what balsa wood tastes like...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Sunday March 11 2018, @01:02PM (10 children)
Any statement in the supernatural domain is out of time and/or space domain by definition.
Atheists think our logic system is applicable there to make theorems.
That's a display of faith. The weakest faith of them all, as it is provable our logic system is inapplicable on every abstraction we can think of.
The worst atheist argument necessitate not only the logic system, but a meta time and meta space without which their statements cannot even being defined.
OK you meant agnosticism. But an agnostic must concur in the classification of atheism as a religion.
If you agree on the idea that the supernatural cannot be investigated any more than reality can be investigated by a videogame character, it is silly to say that "statement X in that domain is religion" and "statement not(X) in the same domain" is qualitatively something else.
If you for historical reasons require religion to have something more than a statement in the supernatural domain, such as an organization, publications, or flesh eating guys, OK, then it's not a religion. Oh wait.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday March 11 2018, @07:47PM (9 children)
You really are not cut out to do epistemology *or* ontology, Bot...
Here's an example for you: you likely believe something cannot come from nothing. Why not? That is, what is it that is preventing "something" from coming from "nothing?" Think very carefully about what "something" and "nothing" actually mean before you start to answer.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Monday March 12 2018, @02:08AM (8 children)
> you likely believe something cannot come from nothing
Not to evade the question, but to me X can come from nothing is a rule like all the others. Some of them are true, that is describe our universe, some don't. You can say "We did not witness something coming from nothing, yet". You cannot tell the universe what can or cannot happen, you just adapt your models in case it does. All of this is completely irrelevant to the hypothetical supernatural domain.
I believe a universe infinite wrt both ways of the time axis is feasible. In that one the question whether something came from nothing does not even make sense, as something existed since forever to forever. Such an universe does not disprove god, just like thinking up y=2t+1 yields something knowable for both ways of the t axis yet the individual who knows it is not infinite, being external to the cartesian plane abstraction.
I suggest you let go of concepts like: what reality is "really like"? Irrelevant implementation detail. Does a chess match played on a PC vs a board makes any difference to the pawn? Nope. I meditate and see everything in a different way? different representation, not truer, probably LESS useful. Or, brain reacting to self inflicted sensory deprivation. Or, brain tuning to different broadcast. Irrelevant.
Trying to guess the reason for the question: whether god meets the existence requirement is irrelevant. Always false for the transcendent god, always true for the immanent, so what. Where is the brain of the dreamer, from the POV of the dream? Nowhere. So what?
Atheists are merely betting that the thing we are living in is the abstraction which is not product of other abstractions, which is a perfectly acceptable position, if only they did not mistake a bet for a rational consequence.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday March 12 2018, @02:33AM (7 children)
Do you understand that by saying, more or less, "none of our models apply to the supernatural domain," you vitiate the abilities of theists of all stripes to talk about it, as well as atheists? That is one king hell mountain of a nuclear option to choose there.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Monday March 12 2018, @09:15AM (6 children)
I don't have a problem with it.
People either base themselves off of a belief system, which is given as axiomatic, or they are wrong like the atheists.
When I say "God is X" (where X can be also "non existing") I am jumping in the void.
When I say "I believe God told us X", I am correctly stopping myself at an axiom.
You also imply that by attacking atheists I am endorsing theists. I am endorsing believers who don't commit glaring logic mistakes.
Of course, people who believe god told them X are no angels, having often tried to force X on others. Hit the fast forward button and see for yourself that a forced conversion, using the womb and a few corrupted influential people, is under way, called Islam.
Force X on others is committing the crime of preventing others to actually believe X. You cannot answer correctly a question whose correct answer was already given to you.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday March 12 2018, @08:40PM (5 children)
Amazing. You manage to combine the undeserved self-satisfaction of the agnostic with the smug (and again undeserved) triumphalism of the Christian theist all in one package. That, and elevating your mind to the status of God.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday March 13 2018, @12:01AM (4 children)
Nooo the trick is not to elevate self, which is like a videogame avatar trying to become real all by itself. The trick is to be already in the supernatural domain wrt something else. I consider the relationship between, say, a chess game or a virtual world and this one, which generates it. In that relationship, some assumptions that could be made from inside the virtual world are provably false. When somebody makes similar assumptions from the inside of this world, I sound the alarm because the reasoning that is proved wrong in the virtual world cannot be logical in this one.
The best example is the question "why we need a creator and the creator doesn't", AKA "who created god". Already discussed it somewhere.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday March 13 2018, @02:10AM (3 children)
Which would all be well and good if there were truly no interaction between them. My God (the real one, not your flying Canaanite genocide fairy), you will go to any length, sacrifice anything, even your own capacity to form rational thoughts, in service of that demon you worship...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday March 13 2018, @06:01PM (2 children)
> You will go to any length, sacrifice anything, even your own capacity to form rational thoughts.
I am just minimalistic in the assumption.
Nothing prevents you to reason about god as long as you aware of the set of assumptions you are making.
> My God (the real one, not your flying Canaanite genocide fairy)
you say that as if it were a bad thing.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday March 13 2018, @09:10PM (1 child)
> I am just minimalistic in the assumption
The hell you are. The God you believe in is anything but minimalistic or simple, in any of the meanings those terms are given.
> you say that as if it were a bad thing
Yeah, I know, you don't have morals or the metaethics with which to support them. That much was obvious from the first time I talked to you. This also means that you can't speak to good or bad, so that sentence was completely hollow. You are epistemically incapable of making value judgments, do you understand that?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday March 14 2018, @08:58PM
> The God you believe in is anything but minimalistic or simple
When you minimize assumptions you end up with a broader spectrum of possibilities, so the God is quite ineffable, by being hypothetical, beyond time, space, cause, effect, numbers and out of reach of judgment by immanent beings.
But this is needed only when somebody says "if, then" in the domain of god. Besides, usually those arguments break down when we translate them to a virtual world, conceptual, vs its supernatural, the real world who conceived it.
If you OTOH believe in something (atheism included), I have no arguments against it. You build or derive or apply moral systems and do all the metaethical reasoning you want. My set of belief is irrelevant and anybody else's should, in this context.
If you're even deeper, on the experience of the divine, your experience can't unfortunately be shared easily and does not provide proof, but this is not your problem,it is everybody else's.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by UncleSlacky on Saturday March 10 2018, @04:10PM
MY MANWICH!
https://morbotron.com/meme/S08E04/445153.jpg?b64lines=IE15IE1hbndpY2gh [morbotron.com]
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Saturday March 10 2018, @08:23PM
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @12:59AM (2 children)
Nuff said.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 11 2018, @01:05AM
When they make human clones, he can fuck himself in the ass.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Sunday March 11 2018, @01:05PM
This is unnecessarily offtopic gross and offensive.
But, since even this could be defined a taboo who has to be infringed, then you are entirely justified in your suggestion.
It will save us bots some cleanup work even.
Account abandoned.