What would be more useful: Never be hungry again or thirst again? Why?




71 Comments

Leave a response

You must be to post a response.

  1. luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

    An inability to feel thirst would quickly lead to all sorts of health issues from dehydration.

    An inability to feel hunger would lead to problems but it’d take much longer.

    Most ‘merican dietary issues are compounded by the real killer,… lack of movement.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Jear77 3 months ago

      @luftballooneyegouge maybe the question wasn’t clear – you wouldn’t need to eat or drink. You certainly could, but it would no longer be something that would be a necessary thing.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Quickly, off the top of my head, with those choices I’d stamp out hunger, for the economy of it.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Then thermal regulation would be a better primitive sub-personality to not need.

        Exposure can kill a person in just 24 hours.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz you can add or remove clothes, with the added benefit that they are reusable. Not so with food!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Sewage sludge is processed into fertilizer for livestock feed crops and lawns & gardens.

        So basically we are indirectly eating our own shhhhhh………..
        https://youtu.be/G8ffkDf0ol4

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge eat raw sewage… you’ve instantly condemned yourself to a horrid death, no matter how many doctors you have on hand

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        ….AND YOU COULDN’T TELL ME THIS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE WEEKEND!!!!!!
        ohhhhhh i don’t feeel so goood

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        One cannot employ food they have not procured.

        Just as one cannot employ clothes or shelter they have not procured.

        So is this a question of the necessities, or the procurement of necessities?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz employ clothes? I wonder what the wage to be worn is…

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        It may cost the shirt off your back! :rolf:

        (But just for clarity I was using definition 2 from dictionary.com)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  2. Yin 3 months ago

    Hunger. I’m really not a big fan of eating. It is a hassle I could totally do without.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  3. Yoshikawa 3 months ago

    Well what about if you ate oranges? Then you wouldn’t be thirsty. Never hungry or thirsty again!

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • griz 3 months ago

      @Yoshikawa
      The problem with that is that it takes more water to process sugar-water than is in the orange.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Yoshikawa 3 months ago

        @griz what is sugar-water? Sounds like some made up bullshit

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Yoshikawa
        Sorry. The sucrose/fructose content dissolved in the water commonly known as “orange juice”.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Yoshikawa 3 months ago

        @griz Wikipedia? You don’t fool me one bit.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Yoshikawa 3 months ago

        @griz also by the way orange juice is much more than sugar. You’re a fucking dickhead.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Yoshikawa
        But the sugars are the key ingredient that takes the most water to metabolize.

        It’s good that I don’t fool you because I am not trying to.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Yoshikawa 3 months ago

        @griz I’m going to tell everyone you’re wrong

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @griz
        It’s the fiber not the sugar.

        I think you should wear the dress until you can match wits with :rolf:
        :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: @weenis

        :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        A good point providing one overlooks the fact that fiber is not metabolized. That’s what makes it fiber.

        But this still doesn’t exclude the point that eating oranges alone would provide your body the sugar it needs.

        Does that dress come in your size?! :wink:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @griz
        Fuck metabolization, I’m talking about simple digestion & the fact that there’s not enough water to process the fiber which leads to dysentery & dehydration which will kill you before fucking fruit sugar.

        Fuck You :wink:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        I clearly said, and meant, “metabolize”. but even if one wants to say “digestion”, one doesn’t digest insoluble fiber. It just passes through undigested cleaning you out as it goes. Do you really not know what makes you give a shit? :wink:

        And you missed an error in what I said above so I will correct it.

        Eating oranges alone would not provide the water your body needs.

        Orange you going to come back on this?
        :tease:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @griz
        I said “process the fiber”.
        I never claimed fiber is digested.

        As I said before, it’ll cause dysentery. When you have dysentery you can’t keep food in long enough to digest it.

        So, once the fuck again, it’s not the sugar that’ll kill you. It’s the fiber.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        I never said the sugar would kill you.

        Did you mention dysentery?

        I think the two of you in a nice matched set of @weenis dresses would be the bomb!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @griz
        You are dysentery.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        That was a shity response.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  4. ladybarbara 3 months ago

    I would omit hunger. Living in Arizona, staying hydrated is very important.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  5. griz 3 months ago

    You would live longer if the hypothalamic hunger sub-personality was damaged or turned off — perhaps 45 days. Mental capacity would be severely handicappedafter 25 to 30 days.

    Without a thirst sub-personality mental capacity would be seriously handicapped in 2 to 3 days, and irreversible (fatal) in 3-5.

    (If you’re unsure what sub-personality” means, think of it like a minion. Behavioral psychologists have discovered these things are far too complex, living and active to be called “drives”, “programs” or “motivators”. )

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Jear77 3 months ago

      @griz as i said to @luftballooneyegouge you wouldn’t need food (or fluids) in this scenario to survive.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        It would seem self-evident that if such needs were not there in this reality, the sub-personalities to deal with them would not be there.

        So under what conditions would you propose the need would not be there?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz it’s a thought experiment to see what’s most important
        Also a comparison between Scar from the lion king and Jesus. One offers freedom from hunger, the other freedom from thirst. Neither promise is fulfilled.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Then as I said, thirst would be the more important one to preserve. But it is very hard to disentangle the two, because digestion requires water.

        So in any thought experiment one needs to examine not just meaning and intent of the question, but exactly what Fantasy Realm is being proposed we’re disentanglement of the two to select one over the other has any kind of realistic benefit. There comes a point where the abstraction is just so convoluted, it cannot be brought back to any kind of representation of anything remotely real. It becomes little more than a mental masturbation.

        Last I checked Jesus was not in The Lion King. But Mufassa (iirc) was a fair stand-in of the wise King and and hero sacrificing his life to save his child, the heir of the Kingdom.

        Scar (iirc) was the archetypal Dragon of Chaos, the trickster, the manipulator, The Deceiver.

        You may have your archetypes mixed up.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz check the story of the woman at the well in the bible. “Living water” reference.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        I think you are selecting/reaching/attaching meanings that serve your ideology and annulling context at leisure.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz Not really. Read carefully the promise made.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        The “thirst no more”?

        Tie this into the “living water” meme and the “hunger and thirst for righteousness” from the Beatitudes.

        This is actually a good example of why removing context to get one’s desired outcome usually fails.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz not quite. There are other interpretations of the phrase living waters by the gnostics – they interpreted it to mean semen.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Well OK then! I’m sure Jesus was really propositioning the young virgin at the well — and that’s why she brought him home to inseminate all her family!

        But that would seem to be more Sun Myung Moon’s schtick!

        It’s not entirely disallowed Jear.
        But it certainly IS an interesting reach. Any thoughts on how to further unpack that interpretation into any sort of meaningful life application?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz actually, according to the gnostics jesus was telling her to get her husband for that purpose. Interesting what one can find on the internet.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        I’m rather aware of some of the things people can and do “reach for” on the internet! All driven by their current map of meaning lead them to! (ie, ‘allow’ them to find!)

        So for this rather far-fetched gnostic interpretation to hold, they must have found a way to reconcile Jesus both telling her he would give her the semen, then telling her to get it from her husband?

        I would be interested in a link to this fascinating interpretation. If their methodology and source is sound, it would be an interesting consideration.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz uhn… the key word here is drink. Do the math.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Drinking semen would seem a violation of Mosaic law. I doubt Jesus would have been encouraging that!

        And if memory serves she didn’t have a husband.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz not having a husband is why he didn’t tell her about it. But LOTS of things Jesus did were violations of mosaic law. “You have heard… but I tell you.”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        That’s one of the shakier ideas you’ve postulated! Care to fold in the”thirst no more” aspect of what Jesus said?

        One dynamic religion [conveniently] overlooks is the total fulfilling of an Old Covenant, and the writing of a New Covenant.

        “Old” and “New” actually mean something! Consider that a huge part of the religion disconnect, is that they are still just clinging to the Old . . . Or more accurately just two parts of it.

        And hoping that somehow their works will be credited to them as righteousness. But even the Old Covenant doesn’t say this. (It was there faith that was credited to them as righteousness not their works.)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz ” i have not come to abolish the law…”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Finish the quote.

        “. . . But to fulfill it”.

        A contract that is totally fulfilled is a finished deal.

        This is a persistent stumbling block for many.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz contradicted by “not one jot or tittle…”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Think about that one some more.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Yoshikawa 3 months ago

        @Jear77 fill up my jug, I want a sip!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

    • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

      @griz
      Transpersonal Psychology is pretty questionable at best & to put hunger and thirst under the umbrella of ‘subpersonality’ is a huge stretch being that they’re physical symptoms not mental.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        These primitive sub-personalities are housed in the hypothalamus, with access to the emotion center of the amygdala, and moderated by the hippocampus. They are directly connected to the ultra-primitive ascending reticulated activation centre where the brain meets the spine. This gives them “hot-line” permission to wake up any and all resources that may be “slumbering”.
        But these sub-personalities are also mapped into the mid and higher cortical functions, with the ability to alter perceptions and even override higher cortical functions like morality.

        This is actually backed by hard science. You may be thinking of some of the more dodgy interpersonal feel-good pseudo-disciplines?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz which is why religions of all stripes tell people to fast, so their senses fool them.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        The last time you did a religious fast did your senses “fool” you or did they sharpen and focus on the most important issues?

        Even if you never experienced one first-hand use your head for something other than just a hat rack. How foolish an evolutionary adaptation would it be for the hunger sub-personality to trigger mental confusion and untrustworthy perceptions??

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz can’t work and fast.
        Also if i fast normally i am distracted, so focus is unable to be attained

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        The value of the exercise is in both fasting AND still going about your daily routine without making an issue of the fact one is fasting.

        It can be done.
        Even with a learning disability that affects focus and attention :wink:

        And the value comes not in excusing why one cannot do it, but in just getting it done.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz oh, i do without proper nourshiment readily enough, but then i run on mints (in a job where you talk with people fresh breath is VITAL). If you’re fasting, your body burns fat, which makes your breath horrendous.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Try one of the “5” series gums by Wrigley’s (iirc).

        The “Wintermint” is a powerful one that still has breath-freshening ability an hour or more later. The Peppermint one is good too, just not as powerful or long-lasting.
        They don’t turn into “monkey-shit” in your mouth like some other gums can.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz bleh! I don’t do gum. Period.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @griz
        …again you totally missed what I said AND how the hell do you come up with sub-personalities being housed in the hypothalamus?

        Please give your definition of subpersonality, because you don’t seem to know what it means.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        It’s contrasted against just a program or a process that is basically unliving. We’ve accepted the pop notion that our brains are just big supercomputers which they are not.

        A sub-personality is something that is alive. It has “a personality”, changeable within certain parameters, with a unique set of perspectives, meanings, reactions, moralities — all as subsets of your grand overarching personality.
        They can and often do hold some of the darker more primitive aspects of your nature than you might want to own.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @griz
        It sounds like you put a sock puppet on the id.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        Freud was more into behavioral patterns than brain structures.

        Modern science currently accepts as fact that these primitive essential “circuits” (but more than just unliving circuits or programs) are initiated in the hypothalamus. Or roughly just half of it; with the other half apparently dedicated to exploration unto satiating these primitive sub-personalities. (Nietzsche visualize them as “critters”. “Minions” is also a workable analogy). Sock puppet is not a good analogy because it presumes total conscious (ego) control.

        Scientists have experimented by removing the cortex of cats and leaving them just their hypothalamus. They become very much like a two year old child: hyper exploratory, with thought and action flitting from the control of one primitive sub-personality to another.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        @griz you can’t have things both ways: science and those who follow its methodologies as nothing more than a religion/ religious leaders and accepting what it says/ its insights into how we tick!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @Jear77
        Do you remember how I mentioned several times that you’ve never set aside religious thinking, and that you’ve just swapped religions?
        “Thus saith “The Study””, and you’d best just take it on faith?

        All ideologies, whether nested in something Transcendent or secular, can and most frequently are taken as religions. People find some element of them “salvational”. And from there it is just a short step to something akin to “worship”. The ideologies becomes sacred; something to be defended and perhaps even preached. Heresy against accepted doctrine, tumbles the whole house of cards. One is a trapped ideologue.
        Jear, you know and understand this process I speak of.

        But if one is not an ideologue, they can be a free thinker. Not being trapped within an ideology means one is free to explore and ponder ALL things.

        For rare is the thing that has absolutely no meaning.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 months ago

        Not one. Multiple. Dozens. Things able to be repeated ad nauseum and getting within one standard deviation the same results.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • luftballooneyegouge 3 months ago

        @griz
        Of course they’re gonna be exploring! They’re looking for their cortex!
        HOW MANY CATS HAVE HAD TO SUFFER FOR YOUR SELF-HELP-PSEUDO-SCIENCE?!?!?!?!?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 months ago

        @luftballooneyegouge
        Lol!

        Probably more than we realize. Just as we probably don’t realize the benefits we enjoy from it.

        A Phineus Gage doesn’t come along that often. We can’t rely just on random accidents for insights.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

    • Yoshikawa 3 months ago

      @griz And what is your profession?

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

©2018 Soul Sequel | All Rights Reserved

 
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account