Jannes

Why though. You don't need all your calories coming from animal products in order to get enough protein and healthy fats for your brain and muscles. (Or any ) And evolutionary speaking all of this brain growth could have happened with a part fish diet. I don't think there is even that much Omega3 in meat but I could be wrong about that. Can be supplemented. Carnivores miss ALA from Omega 3. Vitamin A is in lots of fruits and veggies We could have gotten B12 easily from the dirt on plants and some insect on leaves for example vegan (well kinda vegan) That we only gotten EPA/DHA naturally through animal products is true though. But it's possible to get it with algae oil. And as a vegetarian with eggs, especially omega3 eggs. They tend to be on average but you could actually run a ketogenic vegan diet if you wanted. Idk where vegans are hypocrites. They don't say that you need or should eat as much carbs as possible to be healthy I don't think. I don't think you are getting easily getting deficient in these nutrients as a vegan. Zinc is the only one of that list that DGE (German Society for Nutrition) sees as a high risk of lacking in vegans and they are pretty conservative in their claims. That's what being deficient in something means, that it is a problem. Well there are many intelligent plant eating animals. Those also developed their brain only with plants somehow. I asked chatgpt about it and that's it answer below. What do you mean by that? Cooking is a very natural thing to do for us humans. Our digestive track is literally adapted for cooked food. It will be more nutritionally dense but still a cow for example has to eat pounds of grass everyday to get enough calories. Even with everything adapted perfectly. That's not what I wanted to illustrate. And cooked meat will be more nutritionally dense than cooked grains. Cow example Damn where do you live? yep I find that very interesting. I don't think people back then would through away the offal of an animal cause then they would waste a good chunk of the animal and the insights are the most nutritious. So doesn't that speak against carnivore diets being "natural" that we dislike the taste of unseasoned offals?

If people use pronouns to refer to a different gender then their biological one because then you need to communicate that and remember it.

yes its a bad diet. More variety, more fat sources, omega3 from fish or supplement, different legume and grain sources to get a full amino acid profile if you don't consume animal products,.. If you are vegan this is what I would recommend: https://nutritionfacts.org/daily-dozen-challenge/

This is a really interesting question I recently wondered about. How is it possible that you can explain different parts of reality by referring to analogies? Some examples: - A complete idiot will say some right things on accident just by mere chance -> A broken watch is right twice a day. - This old guys forehead is as wrinkled as a corn on the cob - You are as fat as an elephant - You are as tender as a water strider running on water - You are as stunning as a peacock opening his wings - She left him a foreign egg - You think as fast as a calculator - Getting fucked in the ass is like shitting backwards - An animated guy -> he is cooking By being able to explain one part of reality with another part, these parts of reality have to be connected in some way. The connection can be very direct or very abstract.

@ZenAlex Ok

That's not the point of this thread

It were just a lot of questions and by some of them I didn't know if you were serious about it or not. That's not the point of this thread though. The point is that I would prefer if we all didn't used pronouns for our gender and just used them traditionally to refer to our biological sex BUT further developed the picture of what he and she means. Because if we use pronouns to refer to our preferred gender then we make gender important. If SHE could already do everything a men does, why does she have to use a different pronoun now? And if HE could already do everything a women does, why does he have to use different pronouns now? I just don't want to be part of the drama and I don't want to take sides.

That's it. ?? Gender roles loose and change their meaning. 100 years ago the picture that came to mind when you heard women was a lot different than what it is today. So that's what I want. Just keep the traditional pronouns but make them less and less meaningful until more or less just the picture of the physical appearance remains. I am just surprised how fast this topic got emotional.

I meant intentionally using pronouns to refer to another gender than your biological one. You have conscious and unconscious pre assumptions about a person just by knowing if its a he or a she. The "gender war" is happening in many 1st world countries atm I heard. People find different ways to make their language gender equitable. I watched the Stage Green video from Leo so I roughly now what SG is about. As a human creature with a dick. Whatever that means. It's not really convenient. And that's not the point. It's that people using pronouns make pronouns important which I don't like. By repressing parts of your personality you put it in the shadow. If a boy isnt allowed to cry for example some emotional parts of him get hidden in his shadow, in his unconscious mind. That's how I would put it, idk how Carl Jung would define it. Well yeah.. I am tired though.. Okay if men integrate parts of the feminine side so their compassion and the ability to heal themselves emotionally for example their would be less conflict. Men could instead of starting conflict with another person to deal with hurt for example just cry. And if women a not de-empowered at an early age they would have more confidence, more will to get shit done at work.. It would be a lot to elaborate.

What is a women? Well there is the biological meat suit of a women. But that's not what a women is in political correct terms. Because a biological men can be a women. So a women is characterized by her traits. But it's wrong to say that a women is a person with such and such traits because that's greatly limiting. If I say a women is a person that is charming, empathic, emotional, caring, .. well are people who don't resemble these traditional traits not women? Of course not they can also be women. So a women is not her body and not her traits. So a women is an empty set like in mathematics where a set without any elements in it is still a set, the empty set. You could make the objection and say that just every person who identifies as a women is a women. That answers the question formally but not existentially because there is something an individual has to identify as. When the person identifies as a women they actually identify with something and not an empty set. Here is my definition of what a women is: "A person who identifies as a women is a women. What being a women means for the individual is completely subjective and there is no objective consensus and what being a women entails.

That's what my first magic truffle trip revealed to me

Are you argumenting for a carnivores diet/ highly meat based diet or for a diet that includes some meat? What deficiencies? Well as I argumented there are many reasons for why our brain developed independent from the fact that we consumed meat. Also we could have just grown more intelligent and therefore gotten able to kill more animals tactically and as a result thrived and reproduced a lot. You say that the chicken came before the egg but you don't actually know. But all of this doesn't even really matter because we have modern nutrition now which might be better than any paleo diet. It's good as a side dish instead of rice for example. "complete cereals" lol. Sounds carbphobic. Bulgur is made out of wheat flour so its not really a natural product I am not arguing that cooked grains are more appealing than meat, (although idk if I would like it because I am not used to meat anymore). Anyway let's take a pig as an example. A pig is a clear omnivore we can agree on that right? If you give that pig the option between veggies and meat I think it's safe to say that it would pick the meat. Not because it's healthier or more natural for the pig but just because the meat is loaded with calories and calories are jummi. Well if a deer has badly adapted enzymes for meat but still manages to break up 10% of the meat that's still better then the grass where it can digest 90% from or whatever. Are you sure people like meat without seasonings? I was never a big meat eater so I can't really tell but I always find it funny how bodybuilder grow tired of eating their unseasoned chicken breast so much ? I think you have to compare seasoned plants with seasoned meat or unseasoned meat with unseasoned plants. And even then, as in my marked comment, meat has an advantage because it is high in calories which doesn't mean it's healthy for ya. High calorie foods just taste good for survival reasons but that doesn't count anymore.

Hate reveals love The purpose of evil and devilry is to find out what things are about at the core. If people manage to move through or not move through tragedies you can see what they are really about at the core. How much love do they have to sustain themselves.. I love this picture of the last of us because it perfectly captures how hate is actually love. All the hate in her body is perfectly correlated to the love that was taken away from her. In her hate you can see the love the clearest. But reality is made in such a way that this hate can only be experienced authentically. You actually have to hate. You can’t see that hate is beautiful if you never hated. Notiz 24.04.2023 (2).pdf

I sometimes felt the sensation of weird energies that I couldn’t really name. I don’t know what they are or why I experienced them. What I could say though was that they felt pretty "real“. Some things feel more real then others and those energy felt pretty real. In my mind I just had the picture of myself doing push-ups the other day. This picture (with the felt effort in the muscles) was the basis for the weird sensation I just felt. I could only connect the weird sensation with the push-up because I just saw it directly happening. If not they were no chance I could connect the dots. I experienced it like a black hole sucking in the experience into its essence. This observation was really hard to catch because it happened on a really sensitive level. I hope I can make this observation again.

Yes so know that everything is clear how would you define that?

Relatively physically fucking

I think it's hard to call cuddling and kissing sex in everyday use. I would draw the line further up. Physical fucking.

Fucking

95% plus 1% plus 10-20% = 106-116% ..? Right now relatively few people use pronouns. But I think it will be more and more common for people to use different pronouns than their biological gender. A pronoun unconsciously connects a person with pre assumptions that we have about the gender. Stage green across the globe. I want to be called he without making a statement about it. Its not that because I use the pronoun he that I am implying that I want to be seen as a person who feels manly nor do I want that people think I am not feeling that way. I just don't want to make a statement with my pronoun. But if everybody uses pronouns intentionally then people will think that I am using mine intentional as well. Which I am not. I want that he and she loose their value in a sense. By using pronouns intentionally it becomes important again. For lower developed countries I don't see this as too important. But for first world democracies the gender topic is important imo. People who integrate their shadow are a lot more functional. I think men with integrates female traits are way less likely to start a war and women with integrates male traits get the economy and development going a lot more. Plus it makes people happier. So I think it's very important to find strategies on how to remove stereotypes.

It's like 5 to 7 months ago when I first got my first small insight into god. A few days ago I remembered some of it again. I remembered how my hairy leg looked like through gods glasses. Golden, noble, like a lion mane shimmering at sunrise. It was so clear, so true that this leg was made out of god. No earthy material could ever touch the majesty of god. It's like the insights of these trips worked through me for all these months.

You now that you understand a persons behavior completely when you realize that you would behave exactly the same way if you were in their shoes. Anything away from that, anything "but I still would have acted differently in that situation." is ego, is illusion.

There aren't any "things" in the real world. The real world is exclusively made out of experienceable qualities. So truth is an experienceable quality of reality. It's not "1 plus 1 equals 2", because that's not the real part, that's just black forms on white background. The real part is the experienceable quality truth.

I just watched a very well researched video on the question "Was meat responsible for brain growth?" The answer that its just meat is way to simplistic. Meat could be part of the reason but probably not the main reason: -Eating much meat doesn't cause brain growth per se because if that were the case all carnivores would be smart as fuck which they aren't. It needed a survival benefit for brain growth. -One of the main reason might be that we learned how to cook food. Cooking food means our digestive track could get smaller from the easier digestible and more energetic type of food and therefore didn't take up as much energy which allowed for the growth of the brain. Despite us being far more intelligent than most animals, we need around the same calories as an equally heavy mammal. -Another good is reason is that humans developed a body with less muscle and more fat compared to other mammals which is energy saving and would allow for brain growth. -Cooking allowed two new food sources in roots and sweet grasses (predecessor of grain). The extra carbs helped us to think cause our brain runs on carbs if it isn't in ketosis and also gave us more calories which could allow for adaptations. -Our denture is neither the one of a meat eater, nor of a plant eater. It's a unique one that fits the purpose of eating easily digestible (cooked food). But now matter what the reason was back then how does this even matter for today? The question "Was meat responsible for brain growth?" can't be translated into todays question "Does meat grow my brain?". There are enough plant based fat and protein sources today to cover brain health. [6] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19843... [7] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24564... [8] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17439... [9] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26123... [10] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17827... [11] https://www.pnas.org/content/109/45/1... [12] https://www.jstor.org/stable/2744104 [13] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25293... [14] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26591... [15] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NB... [16] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19049... [17] https://bit.ly/3BFMhF4 [18] https://bit.ly/3AwY4o0 These are not objective facts that's just your preference. I like cooked starches actually. The whole grain has a healthy natural taste to it. I still like many unripe fruits like bananas or apples. Not necessarily. A deer is very badly adapted to eat steak. But because the stake is SO MUCH more nutritionally dense than grass it will still outrank its natural food sources. Even if only 10% of the steak can get digested, that's still way more than all the grass. But an animal that is adapted to eating watermelon for example compared to an animal which is adapted to eating meat. In this case these animals probably wouldn't switch their food sources because they already have very nutritionally dense food sources so the benefit to change to another less adapted diet for the benefit of getting more valuable food doesn't stand. Do you season your meat? Most people put a bunch of seasonings on their meat to make it taste more like vegetables. If that's not cheating idk what is. "Natural" doesn't necessarily mean healthy as I argumented before. Although I do believe that cooking various plants including grains is natural.

There is definitely much truth to that. But it is still possible that the adoption for diet A accidentally allowed diet B as well. Besides that humans survived with many different eating habits around the globe, some meat focused and some with very little meat. And if there is one thing that accelerated our evolution and brain growth the most it's the ability to heat things up. This paleo raw eating philosophy is completely BS. Our natural diet is a cooking diet. Anything with lots of calories tastes good pretty much universally. You can find deer enjoying stake. Do you think that is natural? Or you can find Tigers munching on watermelon. Do you think that is natural? Also do you think candy and fried food is healthy because it tastes good? I think it's our oversupply of food that makes us delusional to the point where we confuse somewhat boring natural taste with toxicity. In Stone Age you would probably be very happy to munch on some roots and seeds.

It's the argument that paleo people use to argument for their diet. They say it's what we did in the past and therefore we should (or it's "good") if we do it now. It could be however that an "unnatural" diet is actually way healthier. That's why I said "Just because you did something in the past doesn't mean you should do it in the future." We have to actually look what's best for us now and that doesn't have to be the same as what we had to do in Stone Age to survive. Oh interesting didn't know that about fruits and stuff. Although with the honey, the honey that the tribe hunter-gatherer eat is more bee than honey actually. Yeah easy catchphrases like natural diet are way more moving than rational argumentations. Our rational mind seems to be easily overruled by more primitive parts of our brain. I guess you wanted to put this understanding to the show. idc honestly I just got triggered by the title lol.