Doll_Tow_Jet-ski

Interesting and related: Noam Chomsky, in his work as linguist, has stated that what reaches the ear (or the eye in this case) is not what reaches the mind. What this means is that we experience language as if it was linearly ordered, when at the cognitive level (in the mind) language is actually hierarchically organized. This means that the underlying structure of language has to interface with the sensory-motoe systems in order to transform the hierarchical structure into a linear one. This is why we sometimes also struggle putting our thoughts into words, because in that interface there is a change in structure that doesn't always preserve the 'original' (hierarchical) structure

Hi! Back in reddit there was a DID community. Is there something equivalent in the fediverse? I'm not a system myself but I know a few and I am doing some research on the topic, so I'd be really appreciate it if you could point me in the right direction

I thought I read the title wrong. Good for them

Am Chilean. Can confirm

Same here. I used to shave my head and face but recently I went through a period of over-work and didn't have time to shave. Everyone told me I looked better with hair and beard, including the wife. So hair and beard it is then

Agreed!

Aaaah ok ye now I get it.

I guess ultimately the end process is what's important, there I agree with you. However, with ethical issues, or matters of principle, you could argue time is of the essence.

For example, if the Western world had taken 30 more years in embracing the importance of LGTBIQ+ rights, we would be now at the same place as the likes of Russia or Saudi Arabia, which is a place we feel good about not being.

So in a way yes, the end result is what matters, but in the meantime it does kinda sucks to live in a society that normalizes something that will undoubtedly be considered morally wrong and unethical in the future

What is an extreme is relative. Are we in an extreme because we don't tolerate slavery? Is having only one slave less extreme then? In the current context I guess you can see veganism as one end of the spectrum, but calling it an extreme has the connotation that it is an unreasonable position.

We can have meat consumption without the industrialized part, sure. But ethical veganism claims eating animals is wrong, regardless of how you kill them. Just like we now consider slavery to be wrong, regardless of how good the slave is treated.

Some people will take the fast, but hard way. Some people will take the longer/ but easy. If you end up in same destination, it’s a win in the end.

I guess you meant to say fast but easy, or longer but hard, right?

Maybe the random community would be appropriate too

I agree with you. I guess the difference lies in that I would call that laziness. Not knowing how to eat balanced meals (or more precisely, not looking it up), it's not a matter of it being hard or easy. It's a matter of simply doing it. All the information is out there and at a level anyone who can read will understand

Plenty of eateries don’t have vegan options

Maybe you are thinking of processed vegan food, like a vegan nugget or hamburger. That is completely unnecessary. beans, lentils, chickpeas, seaweed, grains, rice, vegetables, nuts.... those are widely available and enough for a healthy diet.

For the rest I agree, it's easier to convince an omnivore to go vegetarian than vegan. But that has to do with their will, not with actual physical limitations.