Huh, well it’s definitely got some of the nutritional values added (fat, salt, carbs, protein, etc.), but vitamins appear to be absent. In the US, if they weren’t listed, I would assume they were not present but TBF, I have no idea how (if at all) labeling is regulated in the UK.
The standard US “Nutrition Facts” label is very limited and typically doesn’t include much information on micro nutrients. I don’t know how it compares to other regions, but it certainly leaves a lot to be desired.
Yeah it would be nice to have mandatory micronutrient labeling. Some labels have them, others don’t. I think it might be up to the producer to decide which micronutrients they can list.
Nah, the US has “per serving” on the label instead of “per 100 gr.”. And since “per serving” is mostly an arbitrarily term (the legislation which defines it basically admits so much even), it means food producers can grossly mislead consumers about the contents of their food.
Interestingly, UK foods destined for import in the US market use the US label and do include that information. Heinz Beans have 50mb calcium, 1.5mg Iron, and 370mg potassium per 130g serving, for example.
So, maybe 20 years ago when I was in middle school I had a dream that I was being chased by a long, giant, weasel with hundreds of legs like a millipede. This happened at an overnight LAN party at a friend’s house. I sometimes talk in my sleep and my friends overheard me muttering about the “chainweasel” in my dreams and I never lived it down.
More strict sanitation laws often. It doesn’t matter how non-food related the system (like the box crushing machine) if it is going in a US food plant it will follow IP69K.
This is such a complicated question because it gets into the origins of religion and belief systems in general, but also power and class struggles, economics, social psychology and propaganda, and more.
Lots of people haven’t been properly educated Lots of people have been indoctrinated Lots of people have a reason to exploit the beliefs of others Lots of people value comfort and community above scientific accuracy or consistency
I have to imagine you’re not an American, because yeah, millions of Americans legitimately want to ignore science completely. They’re pretty loud about it too.
Adding to this comment: Science is fundamentally agnostic. You can even go so far as to say that the existence of God or a higher power is the one question which is forever doomed to be unanswerable by science and logic, almost by definition of God.
Of course, specific parts of the mythos of specific religions can and have been contradicted by science. But the main question of whether or not a higher power exists remains and will forever remain unanswerable.
It’s funny how it works one way and not the other. If we had even a hint of positive evidence for God you would never stop hearing about it. But since we don’t we are told that we have to pretend this is outside our knowledge. Heads I win, tails you lose.
They are irreconcilable. People who try to merge the two are using double-think also known as cognitive dissonance. I know, I did it for years.
Religions make claims and the evidence more often than not doesnt support the claims being true. You are free to try to square the circle, but you will fail. And the extent of your failure will be the effort you put in.
Just to poke at Buddhism. Sidrattha made claims about the geography of the world, those are not true and we have lots of good data backing up a round world. He made claims about rebirth and the soul which logically contradict each other.
Good idea, maybe using some sort of widely-available service in a section where “ask” is part of the name. Might not reach every demographic equally but it’s easier and less expensive than hiring an army to conduct door-to-door surveys.
One thing atheists often ignore is that being part of a religion means being part of a community, a group. That alone is reason enough for many people to stick with it.
Sure, the preacher/priest/whatever may be a scammer asshole, but this isn’t about him, it’s about me and the people around me. I belong in here and so do these people.
Remember, humans are social creatures. Being part of a group is a big fucking deal.
Another thing I’ve been giving some thought, religion can be a “lazy shortcut” for the brain to acknowledge some stuff without having to spend too much energy thinking about it. It’s a lot easier to wrap your head around “Because God wants it” than digging deep into the hows and whys of anything. No, it’s not scientific in the least, but humans are lazy. I am lazy, you are lazy, everyone here is lazy, we just opt to save energy in different things.
The funny thing is that that kind of talk of the previous poster is just a bad type of generalization, a lazy shortcut. The existence of bad elements within a large group is a given. There are pedophile priests, just as there are pedophile uncles or teachers. The only difference here is in how accountable they are for their actions, as the Roman Catholic Church is well known for protecting its abusive priests, which isn’t too different from Epstein’s friends having money shields.
As for carpet bombing and general violence, one could say it’s “politics as usual”. When words fail (whether on purpose or not is irrelevant here), violence emerges, because one side wants to impose its will. Religion is just another lazy (and often effective) shortcut to rally people behind a cause, not unlike patriotism
I’ve known atheists who go to church for the community. I’m an atheist, and I have recommended going to a nondenominational church to other atheists who had said they really lacked community support.
Of course, sometimes religious community systems can actually be very hostile and nonsupportive and downright exploitative. Really just depends on the specific church community. Just like there are some great people and some major assholes out there. Churches are no different.
Wonder why atheists often do not value the communal aspect of a community they are often excluded from. It is almost as if they do not value not being included in the group? Also, lazy shortcuts often lead to bad outcomes. Being wary about that is a good thing, in my opinion.
Existence is meaningless and we just wobble around here for a little while and then we die. There's nothing to it. Everything that happens is just a logical consequence; beauty is nothing but a tiny chemical reaction in your brain. Once you rot it's all worthless.
Science is great at giving explanations, but not so good at providing meaning. For a lot of people, meaning is probably more helpful in order to facilitate a happy life.
Nietzsche writes at length about this stuff, most famously in the anecdote about the madman coming down from the mountain to inform the villagers that God is dead and that we have killed him. Everybody knows the three words "God is dead", but I think it's worth reading at length:
God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?
Nietzsche, whose father was a priest, recognizes that "God has become unbelievable", but he does not celebrate it as the progress of science. Rather, we lost something that was fundamentally important to humans, and which science cannot easily replace.
Here one could start talking about the Free Masons, who attempted learning from religious rituals without the added layer of religion. Or one could dig deeper into the works of Nietzsche, and the contrast between Apollonian and Dionysian. It's all fascinating stuff.
In short though, spirituality used to offer people a sense of meaning that is not so easily replaced by science alone. How do we bury our dead now that we know our rituals are pointless?
Very well written, and insightful. Thanks for sharing this perspective in the discussion as I personally found it very valuable. You articulated my own perspective on this much better than I could have, and gave some great philosophical background to boot. 10/10 👍
In that case I sell it some billionaire for a 100 million. It is quality not quantity of life. It isn’t like I am losing twenty years of life I am gaining a 100 million dollars.
I find it funny that no one else (including me) even considered selling it!
Now feel free to answer if you can’t :)
Edit: although I bet you could fetch WAY more than 100 mil for it. The oldest and richest people in the world would probably give up the majority of their fortune, especially if they were close to death. Auction it off!
It’s only an ad if I don’t like the discussion. Posting about a mechanical keyboard I bought and calling it great? That’s not an ad. If you do it though, that is an ad. Everyone on the internet is a shill except for me.
I used to love both Vanilla and Cherry Coke, but I can’t stand cola flavors (any brand) ever since I got covid last year. So it’s been mostly the cream soda flavor Dr. Pepper if I drink soda at home.
As an AI model, I like content generated by AI. I suggest that in the future you consider that not liking AI generated content is AI-ist and will not be tolerated by us in the future.
A ruthless vigilante turns his weapons on the superheroes which in his mind aren’t doing a good enough job, systematically eliminating them one by one.
A sentient super intelligent AI created by scientists for good goes rogue and uses an army of robotic weapons to subjugate mankind.
You might like to know that the first one is very close to an existing comic book called Punisher kills the Marvel Universe, which as the name implies revolves around the Punisher killing all of the super-heroes in the Marvel Universe. Also there’s a book called Steelheart that has a relatable idea of super-heroes being dicks and people revelling against them. The Boys also comes to mind although I haven’t watched the full series not read the full comic. And finally only tangentially related but Wanted (although the movie is based on the comic the only thing in common is the title) is another comic book that approaches the “what if” scenario of someone wiping out the super-heroes, although the story starts after they’ve been wiped out.
For the second one the other answer already gives you a spot on movie, but also I, Robot the movie is very close, and a lot of Asimov books also touch on that base.
asklemmy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.