mirror of
https://gitlab.com/upRootNutrition/obsidian.git
synced 2025-06-16 06:45:12 -05:00
83 lines
2.3 KiB
Markdown
83 lines
2.3 KiB
Markdown
|
# Debate 1
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Proposition
|
|||
|
|
>It’s way more likely that seed oils are harmful to humans as opposed to the opposite.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Analysis
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
1. "likely"
|
|||
|
|
1. statistical term or a priori?
|
|||
|
|
1. if statistical, what's the data?
|
|||
|
|
2. if a priori, what's the argument?
|
|||
|
|
1. they're novel foods, only consumed for the last 200 years?
|
|||
|
|
2. refining process, rather than it being a novel food
|
|||
|
|
1. novel food tho
|
|||
|
|
1. arg: adaptation tho
|
|||
|
|
1. weston a price tho
|
|||
|
|
2. heavily flaws studies tho
|
|||
|
|
1. ffqs tho
|
|||
|
|
2. ~~refining food tho~~ adding compounds that strays too far from the natural **(conceded!)**
|
|||
|
|
1. scenario: choline from eggs vs oil from soybeans in a blueberry smoothie
|
|||
|
|
1. symmetry breaker: refining process specific to seed oils
|
|||
|
|
1. needs to have seed oil refining process (all other processes presumed cool)
|
|||
|
|
1. what about the refining?
|
|||
|
|
1. neurotoxins (hexane?)
|
|||
|
|
1. fibres in nose tho
|
|||
|
|
2.
|
|||
|
|
2. ~~what is meant by refining?~~
|
|||
|
|
1. ~~adding neurotoxins?~~
|
|||
|
|
3. monocropped agriculture tho
|
|||
|
|
1. sprayed toxic chemicals (pesticides, etc)
|
|||
|
|
1. doesn't know if there's evidence
|
|||
|
|
1. appeals to anecdotes again
|
|||
|
|
1. signed off on the shit and piss and cum stew, lol
|
|||
|
|
2. how do we know the compounds
|
|||
|
|
3. GMO allows higher doses
|
|||
|
|
2. fewer nutrients, for "good" (means essential and non-essential) nutrients **(conceded!)**
|
|||
|
|
1. multivitamins based then?
|
|||
|
|
2. apples shit?
|
|||
|
|
3.
|
|||
|
|
4. anecdote tho
|
|||
|
|
1. anecdote > data if n=1
|
|||
|
|
1. signed off on the shit and piss and cum stew, lol
|
|||
|
|
2. "harmful"
|
|||
|
|
1. with respect to what?
|
|||
|
|
1.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
---
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Debate 2
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Proposition
|
|||
|
|
>"it would be more vegan to abstain from monocropped agriculture" **CONCEDED!**
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Analysis
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
1. "more vegan"
|
|||
|
|
1. more compatible with the VS definition
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## Questions
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Cruelty** (signed off)
|
|||
|
|
1. rewilding vs kidnapping and abandoning babies/kitten?
|
|||
|
|
1. rewilding = not cruel
|
|||
|
|
2. kidnapping = cruel
|
|||
|
|
1. symmetry breaker 1: rewilding better for the environment
|
|||
|
|
1. fewer toxins
|
|||
|
|
2. produces more oxygen
|
|||
|
|
1. didn't sign off/contradiction
|
|||
|
|
2. symmetry breaker 2: rewilding returning the space to its natural state
|
|||
|
|
1. didn't sign off/contradiction
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Exploitation**
|
|||
|
|
1. signed off
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
---
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# Hashtags
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
#debate
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
#debate
|
|||
|
|
#debate_opponents
|