Many theaters I’ve been to in the US stopped enforcing the “no outside food” thing. Last time I went to the movies there were dudes walking in with Chipotle or sub sandwiches and no one cared.
Because who the fuck is going to start a fight with someone that’s already proven they’re an asshole, for $7 an hour, to protect profits they’ll never see any part of?
In the larger sense, yes the owners tend to exhibit the behaviour that of an asshole.
In the context of what the previous commenter was saying, however, the employees would have to confront the individuals bringing in the food, and for what they are paid, they might rather not bother dealing with a potentially unruly patron. The patron in this case, should they exhibit such unruly behaviour (though still less ashole-ish than the owners), still exhibit asshole-ish characteristics, relative to the poor minimum wage employee who’s just trying to do their job.
Well, both I guess, but I was specifically talking about anyone fronting a “try and stop me” attitude by not even trying to sneak it in. They’re not going to sympathize with a low-level employee just trying to keep their job, they’re going to be a loud fuck head about it.
I go to the Dollarama just down the road, but the candy/chocolate is already getting to expensive. Would be cheaper going to the grocery store and grabbing a bag of chips.
Have you read any of Confucius writings? Rulers actually have higher expectations for them than common folk. If a ruler doesn’t act properly and conduct the proper rituals, then their people can’t be expected either. I’m not sure how familiar you are with Confucian thought, I’m struggling to understand what you are basing that statement on.
“The Master said, "If the people be led by laws, and uniformity sought to be given them by punishments, they will try to avoid the punishment, but have no sense of shame.
“If they be led by virtue, and uniformity sought to be given them by the rules of propriety, they will have the sense of shame, and moreover will become good.”
“If they be led by virtue, and uniformity sought to be given them by the rules of propriety, they will have the sense of shame, and moreover will become good.”
I have no real context other than what is here, and maybe Frogfucius, and I’m not great at reading between the lines so bear with me, because that doesn’t seem so awful for medieval philosophy. Lead by virtue rather than punishment? Sounds almost enlightened.
I mean with the part about rules and propriety, it sound a bit like the Broken Window Theorem which has been shown to be a cover for racist policing, but it also came out in the 80s.
Not medieval, Confucius was writing in 500 BCE. I’m not staning Confucius, but he was far harsher on rulers than he was peasants. Rulers are supposed to act like rulers, if they want their people to follow. There are more restrictions on them - a bad ruler (not just bad as in ineffective or cruel, but sexual deviance or drunkeness) can cause droughts or other disasters.
and the joke is, who sets these traditions and rules? go a bit farther, and you learn the justification of these rules is “there wasn’t a natural disaster recently”
like sure there are stringent rules the leader must follow, but whatever the leader decides the rules should be is what even these rules are
??? That would be more accurately describing Lao Zhu if you’re really willing to stretch your interpretations. I’m not sure how you get Machiavelli, Confucius is about as far away from realpolitk as it gets.
For example that producing and shipping the pure amount of mass corresponding to the same amount of nutrition in vegan foods vs dairy/meat products is not sustainable, because plant based foods contain so much less nutrition than animal products. You have to level and destroy forest habitats to grow all these things for 10,000,000,000 people… That’s an infant amount of plants.
And a lot of foods that claim to be “good sources of protein” don’t really… contain much else, like meat does. Some are even harmful in large quantities like too much soy in your diet, especially to children.
I dunno, these are things I’ve been told. Just the messenger so take with a grain of salt. But I thought they were interesting points that shouldn’t be ignored and should be disproven before dismissed. I just have too much going on in my life to worry about researching it right now. 😓 But one day maybe!
What do you think? I think this topic is definitely more complicated than “let’s fix/save the world by going vegan”.
Now I know what you do: you are shitposting inside a shitposting community! If that’s what lemmy has become, I don’t want to be part of it anymore. Sad.
I generally don’t try to correct shitposts, but for some reason this one annoyed me because it’s only sort of true and the real truth is more interesting.
Shakespeare’s observation (from Cymbeline) explains why attempts to alleviate the pain of disease, injury or simple surgical procedures by producing unconsciousness are almost as old as civilization, although the techniques were crude. Most involved ingestion of ethanol and or herbal mixtures, but ‘knock-out’ blows to the head and bilateral carotid artery compression (carotid derives from the Greek for stupor) are also described. These methods were impossible to quantify, and the best that can be said of many is that they were harmlessly ineffective, but that is obviously not the case with head trauma or obstructing the flow of blood to the brain. Hypnotism, introduced as ‘animal magnetism’ or ‘Mesmerism’ in the latter part of the eighteenth century (depicted above), can be effective in susceptible individuals, but such people are relatively rare in developed societies.
Most of the herbal mixtures were devised in Southern Europe or the Orient where plants with active alkaloids (e.g. opium) are indigenous, but one called ‘Dwale’ appears in medieval English texts. Although a number of drugs used in modern anaesthesia have their origins in substances found in plants those early concoctions are irrelevant to the development of effective, drug-induced anaesthesia. It stems from discoveries made in Britain during the latter half of the 18th century, the time of the ‘Enlightenment’. However, di-ethyl ether, the first agent to be demonstrated successfully in public, was originally synthesized (by the action of sulphuric acid on ethanol) in the thirteenth century. There are early reports of it producing both pain relief and loss of consciousness, but such observations were not applied clinically for centuries - examples of a recurring theme: clinical use of the effect did not follow until long after its original observation.
And it isn’t even really true about using a gas as anaesthesia:
Davy’s ‘Researches, Chemical and Philosophical: Chiefly Concerning Nitrous Oxide’, published in 1799, describes two major effects of its inhalation: euphoria (he coined the term ‘laughing gas’) and analgesia (it eased the pain of his erupting wisdom tooth). Davy suggested inhalation of nitrous oxide during surgical operations, but this was not acted upon (that recurring theme again) though a slightly earlier event may indicate possible explanations. In 1784 a London surgeon, James Moore, published a description of nerve compression in producing numbness for limb surgery – most people have experienced this effect after falling asleep while lying on an arm. The method was used successfully for an amputation performed painlessly by John Hunter, the ‘father’ of modern surgery, yet there is no record of a repeat. Was it fear of complications, inconsistency of effect, or simply that minds were not yet attuned to the concept of surgery without pain?
Davy went on to work at the Royal Institution in London, giving demonstrations of nitrous oxide and other discoveries of the age. In 1813, another scientist famous in later life, Michael Faraday, joined him as assistant and studied the inhalation of ether. He published his findings, which included soporific and analgesic effects, in 1818, but one subject had taken over 24 hours to recover full consciousness. Such an observation provides another explanation for failure to implement important observations – the difficulty of quantifying and controlling their effects.
Then:
The story moves to the USA, specifically to Hartford, Connecticut on 10 December 1844, when Gardner Quincy Colton, a travelling showman, gave a demonstration of the latest discoveries, including inhalation of nitrous oxide. In the audience was Horace Wells, a local dentist who had mastered the art of using new materials to make dentures, and had sought ways of easing the pain of first removing the patient’s own rotten teeth. Here was a prepared mind, and Wells realized that he might have found a solution when a young man (one Samuel Cooley) who had inhaled the gas injured his shin without any apparent discomfort.
…
Discussions led to an experiment the following morning during which Wells had one of his own teeth removed by a colleague, John Riggs, after Colton had administered the gas. Wells learned how to make nitrous oxide, and used it in his practice until he felt confident enough to demonstrate the technique at the nearest major medical centre, Boston. He gave a talk to a class of the Harvard Medical School and then administered the gas to one of them who, unfortunately for Wells, cried out when a tooth was removed. Even though the student remembered nothing Wells reacted badly (he was probably a manic depressive) to being dismissed as a charlatan and, although he continued to use nitrous oxide, he faded from the scene.
However, William Morton, who had previously been both Wells’s student and later partner, had helped with the demonstration, and was made of sterner stuff, recognizing that a ‘better’ agent was required. He was by then a medical student at Harvard and consulted, among others, his chemistry teacher, Dr. Charles Jackson. What part Jackson actually played in Morton’s decision to use ether by inhalation became the subject of great controversy, but there is no doubt that it was Morton who studied it, tested it in animals and then tried it in his patients. Having been successful with these trials he offered to demonstrate his method to Dr. John Warren, surgeon at the Massachusetts General Hospital, and was invited to do so on 16 October 1846. Before a large audience, Morton administered ether vapour to Gilbert Abbott before Warren removed a tumour from Abbott’s neck without any sign of distress. A new era had dawned.
Another fun fact is that using ether during childbirth was forbidden by church for a long time because bible specifically says that giving birth in pain is God’s punishment.
This is an old post, and sometimes little kids do remember being a baby. My kid is 6 now and losing his baby memories but he used to tell me he wants to go back to certain places we went to “before (he) could talk” which started at 2. He described going on a boat to an island, something he had literally only ever done one time as a baby and we didn’t have any photos of. And lots of other things, that’s just an example. He doesn’t remember it now but he did when he was 4.5.
It’s weird. I don’t like most fish, but I really don’t have an ethical problem in general with eating fish as long as they were harvested sustainably. Unfortunately, most of the saltwater fish I have enjoyed over the years- shark and swordfish steak, cod, tuna- are not harvested sustainably, so I don’t eat them. That pretty much leaves me with farmed trout and catfish, the only two other fish I like. And I just don’t feel like it’s the same as eating a cow or a chicken. Maybe I don’t have any actual scientific basis to go on, but fish are just so different from us and so much more primitive that it just doesn’t bother me.
lemmyshitpost
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.