Philosophy Discussion Forums

Sy Borg wrote: ↑August 21st, 2024, 6:19 am

Belinda wrote: ↑August 21st, 2024, 5:03 am

Sy Borg wrote: ↑August 20th, 2024, 4:54 pm I actually don't discount the possibility that the universe is a sentient entity (or entities) either. It's not going to be humanlike consciousness, of course, as there's no need for characteristics that evolved to enable simian life and reproduction in any non-simian entities.

I regard sentience as an attribute only of systems that necessarily have central nervous systems and subjectivity.
I don't see how the universe can be aware of feeling anything when the universe does not necessarily depend for its existence on sentient beings.The universe does as a matter of fact contain sentient systems however what the universe is and has been is not the same as what the universe will be tomorrow.
Determinism doesn't imply prediction.


I gather that Abrahamic religions hold that the Logos is a thing. I don't know if one can be a Christian and an existentialist at the same time.

That's a biocentric assumption. Why should sentience/sapience be limited to little biological beings of infinitesimal lifespans as compared with universal time scales? How would we know the dynamics of systems too large for us to comprehend?

It's possible that sapience is a very primitive state that will be transcended by entities that are so sophisticated that we seem like microbes by comparison. In fact, if sapience continues to evolve for another billion years, that will be the situation. It's impossible to imagine how something so much more sophisticated than ourselves would operate, just as bacteria cannot comprehend superannuation.

I think of sapience as possible for artificial intelligences but I think of sentience as relating only to biological systems with central nervous systems. True, neural feedback is possible for very simple systems such as cells ,or jelly fish,but this is a longish way from the sort of sentience that humans and other complex systems include. Maybe I am too anthropocentric, but I don't mind too much about eating a free range egg but I don't eat pig if | can avoid it, which is nearly always.
Sapience is needed for objectivity, but advanced sentience also is needed for morality.
I Googled 'Satan' , and learned that in Judaism, Satan is held to be sapient but not sentient.

Belinda wrote: ↑August 21st, 2024, 6:52 am

Sy Borg wrote: ↑August 21st, 2024, 6:19 am

Belinda wrote: ↑August 21st, 2024, 5:03 am

Sy Borg wrote: ↑August 20th, 2024, 4:54 pm I actually don't discount the possibility that the universe is a sentient entity (or entities) either. It's not going to be humanlike consciousness, of course, as there's no need for characteristics that evolved to enable simian life and reproduction in any non-simian entities.

I regard sentience as an attribute only of systems that necessarily have central nervous systems and subjectivity.
I don't see how the universe can be aware of feeling anything when the universe does not necessarily depend for its existence on sentient beings.The universe does as a matter of fact contain sentient systems however what the universe is and has been is not the same as what the universe will be tomorrow.
Determinism doesn't imply prediction.


I gather that Abrahamic religions hold that the Logos is a thing. I don't know if one can be a Christian and an existentialist at the same time.

That's a biocentric assumption. Why should sentience/sapience be limited to little biological beings of infinitesimal lifespans as compared with universal time scales? How would we know the dynamics of systems too large for us to comprehend?

It's possible that sapience is a very primitive state that will be transcended by entities that are so sophisticated that we seem like microbes by comparison. In fact, if sapience continues to evolve for another billion years, that will be the situation. It's impossible to imagine how something so much more sophisticated than ourselves would operate, just as bacteria cannot comprehend superannuation.

I think of sapience as possible for artificial intelligences but I think of sentience as relating only to biological systems with central nervous systems. True, neural feedback is possible for very simple systems such as cells ,or jelly fish,but this is a longish way from the sort of sentience that humans and other complex systems include. Maybe I am too anthropocentric, but I don't mind too much about eating a free range egg but I don't eat pig if | can avoid it, which is nearly always.
Sapience is needed for objectivity, but advanced sentience also is needed for morality.
I Googled 'Satan' , and learned that in Judaism, Satan is held to be sapient but not sentient.

Eating lots of (genuinely free range) eggs is part of my recovery strategy. I never touch pork. Seeing footage of sow stalls finished me with that meat. I agree that sentience matters.

We cannot speak for AI in much the same way as we can't speak about the future of infants. AI (perhaps with some small biological component) is going to develop into something far beyond anything we can imagine. In about ten years, almost every aspect of our societal systems will break down. Almost every activity will be better performed by AI. Human abilities will become redundant, including the ability to make money. UBIs will be standard, accompanied by total governmental/corporate control.

How religions deal with the situation will be interesting. Maybe they will figure that it's the work of the Devil? But no, it's just the Earth continuing to evolve, as it's always done. If other apes were more sapient, they would probably consider us to be Satanic. We have spread everywhere and utterly decimated their populations and environments. Then we wax lyrical about morality.

We live in interesting times!

Sy Borg wrote:
"Eating lots of (genuinely free range) eggs is part of my recovery strategy. I never touch pork. Seeing footage of sow stalls finished me with that meat. I agree that sentience matters."

In that we are agreed, and I saw similar photos that stopped me eating pigs' body parts. However there are levels of badness even about eating pig meat . Eating pigs that are born , reared, fattened, and killed at the same location with the best welfare standards in all areas are more expensive but vastly more ethical.
By the way, I was taught that when the yokes and whites are cooked solid ,as in hard-boiled or similar, eggs tend to slow the peristalsis.

The link to Christianity is that none of us can be JC but all of us can aspire to imitate JC. Our need to destroy other lives so we can live relates to more ethical ways to do so, but not to dying of ethical starvation.

Belinda wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:07 am Sy Borg wrote:
"Eating lots of (genuinely free range) eggs is part of my recovery strategy. I never touch pork. Seeing footage of sow stalls finished me with that meat. I agree that sentience matters."

In that we are agreed, and I saw similar photos that stopped me eating pigs' body parts. However there are levels of badness even about eating pig meat . Eating pigs that are born , reared, fattened, and killed at the same location with the best welfare standards in all areas are more expensive but vastly more ethical.
By the way, I was taught that when the yokes and whites are cooked solid ,as in hard-boiled or similar, eggs tend to slow the peristalsis.

And do you consider that slowing a benefit or a harm to you?
I can understand the the denaturing of eggs by cooking could slow digestion, but I'm puzzled by the idea that it slows peristalsis.

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:15 am

Belinda wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:07 am Sy Borg wrote:
"Eating lots of (genuinely free range) eggs is part of my recovery strategy. I never touch pork. Seeing footage of sow stalls finished me with that meat. I agree that sentience matters."

In that we are agreed, and I saw similar photos that stopped me eating pigs' body parts. However there are levels of badness even about eating pig meat . Eating pigs that are born , reared, fattened, and killed at the same location with the best welfare standards in all areas are more expensive but vastly more ethical.
By the way, I was taught that when the yokes and whites are cooked solid ,as in hard-boiled or similar, eggs tend to slow the peristalsis.

And do you consider that slowing a benefit or a harm to you?
I can understand the the denaturing of eggs by cooking could slow digestion, but I'm puzzled by the idea that it slows peristalsis.

Peristalsis is part of the digestive process. Hard boiling the eggs,like boiling the milk, changes the casein as I understand. I was taught this a long time before Google was invented but I bet it's all written up on reliable modern sources on Google-----more reliable than I.

Colicky pain in the gut is I understand caused by increase of peristalsis.

Belinda wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:27 am

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:15 am

Belinda wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:07 am Sy Borg wrote:
"Eating lots of (genuinely free range) eggs is part of my recovery strategy. I never touch pork. Seeing footage of sow stalls finished me with that meat. I agree that sentience matters."

In that we are agreed, and I saw similar photos that stopped me eating pigs' body parts. However there are levels of badness even about eating pig meat . Eating pigs that are born , reared, fattened, and killed at the same location with the best welfare standards in all areas are more expensive but vastly more ethical.
By the way, I was taught that when the yokes and whites are cooked solid ,as in hard-boiled or similar, eggs tend to slow the peristalsis.

And do you consider that slowing a benefit or a harm to you?
I can understand the the denaturing of eggs by cooking could slow digestion, but I'm puzzled by the idea that it slows peristalsis.

Peristalsis is part of the digestive process. Hard boiling the eggs,like boiling the milk, changes the casein as I understand. I was taught this a long time before Google was invented but I bet it's all written up on reliable modern sources on Google-----more reliable than I.

Colicky pain in the gut is I understand caused by increase of peristalsis.

I wonder i it would not be more apt to say that the food that causes the problem is dealt with by the gut to remove the food more quickly thus the increase in peristalsis is a natural response to eject substance that are harmful?

Lots of foods can cause indigestion, constipation, bloating, IBS, etc. A lot depends on our individual makeup. For example, if I eat raw onion I have awful bloating and IBS for days after. But cooked onions are fine. So some people may well find that hard-boiled eggs affect them badly but lightly cooked eggs are fine.

Lately the FODMAP diet has become very fashionable. It works for some people. My sister swears by it so I bought a FODMAP recipe book. I can't say I've noticed any difference. As long as I stay away from foods that I know affect me badly like raw onions, peanuts and soy, I'm fine.

BTW, becasue I can't eat peanuts or soy and many other pulses such as peas an beans, I find it hard to get enough good quality protein on a vegetarian diet which is why I reluctantly remain a flesh eater. I try to eat only free range poultry, eggs and fish. I wish I could go vegetarian.

Sculptor1 wrote:I wonder i it would not be more apt to say that the food that causes the problem is dealt with by the gut to remove the food more quickly thus the increase in peristalsis is a natural response to eject substance that are harmful?

I think that is what happens, Sculptor1. Also, some foods that are harmful to some may be fine for others.

Lagayscienza wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 6:16 am

Sculptor1 wrote:I wonder i it would not be more apt to say that the food that causes the problem is dealt with by the gut to remove the food more quickly thus the increase in peristalsis is a natural response to eject substance that are harmful?

I think that is what happens, Sculptor1. Also, some foods that are harmful to some may be fine for others.

Indeed so the point about eggs slowing down the peristalsis may be the wrong solution.

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:57 am

Belinda wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:27 am

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:15 am

Belinda wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:07 am Sy Borg wrote:
"Eating lots of (genuinely free range) eggs is part of my recovery strategy. I never touch pork. Seeing footage of sow stalls finished me with that meat. I agree that sentience matters."

In that we are agreed, and I saw similar photos that stopped me eating pigs' body parts. However there are levels of badness even about eating pig meat . Eating pigs that are born , reared, fattened, and killed at the same location with the best welfare standards in all areas are more expensive but vastly more ethical.
By the way, I was taught that when the yokes and whites are cooked solid ,as in hard-boiled or similar, eggs tend to slow the peristalsis.

And do you consider that slowing a benefit or a harm to you?
I can understand the the denaturing of eggs by cooking could slow digestion, but I'm puzzled by the idea that it slows peristalsis.

Peristalsis is part of the digestive process. Hard boiling the eggs,like boiling the milk, changes the casein as I understand. I was taught this a long time before Google was invented but I bet it's all written up on reliable modern sources on Google-----more reliable than I.

Colicky pain in the gut is I understand caused by increase of peristalsis.

I wonder i it would not be more apt to say that the food that causes the problem is dealt with by the gut to remove the food more quickly thus the increase in peristalsis is a natural response to eject substance that are harmful?

That would indeed be a better way to say it , a fuller explanation.

I wish I had not advanced my opinion about firmly cooked eggs and boiled milk. I was told this about sixty years ago.

Belinda wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 11:21 am

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:57 am

Belinda wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:27 am

Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 5:15 am

And do you consider that slowing a benefit or a harm to you?
I can understand the the denaturing of eggs by cooking could slow digestion, but I'm puzzled by the idea that it slows peristalsis.

Peristalsis is part of the digestive process. Hard boiling the eggs,like boiling the milk, changes the casein as I understand. I was taught this a long time before Google was invented but I bet it's all written up on reliable modern sources on Google-----more reliable than I.

Colicky pain in the gut is I understand caused by increase of peristalsis.

I wonder i it would not be more apt to say that the food that causes the problem is dealt with by the gut to remove the food more quickly thus the increase in peristalsis is a natural response to eject substance that are harmful?

That would indeed be a better way to say it , a fuller explanation.

I wish I had not advanced my opinion about firmly cooked eggs and boiled milk. I was told this about sixty years ago.

I was not criticising but I was more or less hoping to understand what might be going on.

I had no idea you were old enough to have heard ANYTHING 60 years ago!!

Interestingly enough it's my view that much of what was being said 60 years ago about nutrition was lambasted 45 years ago, (with the erroneus guidlines), but coming full circle, has more in common with the energing advice. - which has more or less exonerated saturated fat, and sees dairy fat as anti-inflamatory.

The link with Christianity is massively tangential though. So details elswwhere. But in brief to return to the thread...

People like Harvey Kellog (1853-1943), did apply Christian ideaology to the eating of meat, and so designed the "predigested" Cereal breakfasts so people would avoid inflaming their animal passions by eating bacon and steak. His POV and the massive pressure from the makers of factory oils (Mazola & Crisco) massively influenced those guidlines of the early 1980s which have led us to the pandemic of obesity and diabetes we have now.

Christianity has well and truly been deconstructed, reduced to an egg.

I guess the shell is the father, the albumin is the son and the yolk is the holy spirit ...

Sculptor1 wrote:Interestingly enough it's my view that much of what was being said 60 years ago about nutrition was lambasted 45 years ago, (with the erroneus guidlines), but coming full circle, has more in common with the energing advice. - which has more or less exonerated saturated fat, and sees dairy fat as anti-inflamatory.

Well, that is music to my ears. I loath margarine but love butter. And yet for decades we've been told butter was bad.

Sy Borg wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 8:02 pm Christianity has well and truly been deconstructed, reduced to an egg.

I guess the shell is the father, the albumin is the son and the yolk is the holy spirit

Eggs that have fathers are fertilised eggs that contain the wee red spot in the white. Unfertilised eggs don't have fathers .

Acccording to believers, God the father 'fertilised' passive components of the universe and produced systems among which Jesus emerged. NB Mary was unfertilised until God the father fertilised her.

Lagayscienza wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2024, 10:00 pm

Sculptor1 wrote:Interestingly enough it's my view that much of what was being said 60 years ago about nutrition was lambasted 45 years ago, (with the erroneus guidlines), but coming full circle, has more in common with the energing advice. - which has more or less exonerated saturated fat, and sees dairy fat as anti-inflamatory.

Well, that is music to my ears. I loath margarine but love butter. And yet for decades we've been told butter was bad.

Simple olive oil is probably best for reasons of health and of animal welfare. Commercial dairy cows are treated as if they were machines. I have tried to get a small oil sprinkler to use on bread but never found one that works.