upRootNutrition/obsidian
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://gitlab.com/upRootNutrition/obsidian.git synced 2025-06-16 00:05:12 -05:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

feat: reorganized hyperblog and added vitamin D paper

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Nick 2024-09-26 12:48:46 -05:00
parent 0fe545c254
commit e22bd788fe
167 changed files with 235 additions and 98 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

36
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/Anabolic Potential on Keto.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If a higher proportion of amino acids are spent on gluconeogenesis while on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets, then a lower proportion of amino acids are available for hypertrophy on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> A higher proportion of amino acids are spent on gluconeogenesis while on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If a lower proportion of amino acids are available for hypertrophy on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets, then ketogenic diets are likely to cost anabolic potential compared to non-ketogenic diets.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Q→R)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, ketogenic diets are likely to cost anabolic potential compared to non-ketogenic diets.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴R)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P),(Q~5R)|=(R))
---
# Hashtags
#arguments
#debate
#keto
#hypertrophy

45
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/Ancestral Health-Seeker.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
### Ancestral Health Consistency Checker
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**A**</font> | F(x) would be acting against their values |
| <font color="CC6600">**C**</font> | F(x) is in favour of consuming N(y) |
| <font color="CC6600">**F(x)**</font> | someone who favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of novel foods because they value reducing disease risk |
| <font color="CC6600">**N(y)**</font> | a novel food that reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If there exists someone who favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of novel foods because they value reducing disease risk, and there exists a novel food that reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food, then if that person is not in favour of consuming that novel food, then that person would be acting against their values.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∃xFx∧∃yNy→∀x∀y(¬Cxy→Ax))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> There exists someone who favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of novel foods because they value reducing disease risk.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∃xFx)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> There exists a novel food that reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∃yNy)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, if that person is not in favour of consuming that novel food, then that person would be acting against their values.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴∀x∀y(¬Cxy→Ax))</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~7xFx~1~7yNy~5~6x~6y(~3Cxy~5Ax)),(~7xFx),(~7yNy)|=(~6x~6y(~3Cxy~5Ax)))
Essentially, if our interlocutor identifies as "**F**", then all we need to do is demonstrate to them that "**N**" exists, and we're essentially home free. If they accept that "**N**" exists and they also identify as "**F**", then they should be in favour of substituting such a novel food for such an ancestral food. If they don't then they have a contradiction.
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments

41
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/Ancestral Superiority.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
### Ancestral Superiority Consistency Test
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**E**</font> | something (y) is more ancestral than something else (z) |
| <font color="CC6600">**N**</font> | engaging (x) with something (y) is to be favoured over engaging with something else (z) |
| <font color="CC6600">**b**</font> | black people |
| <font color="CC6600">**w**</font> | white people |
| <font color="CC6600">**s**</font> | sex |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If something is more ancestral than something else, then engaging with something is to be favoured over engaging with something else.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x∀y∀z(Cyz→Nxyz))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Black people are more ancestral than white people.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Cbw)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, sex with black people is to be favoured over sex with white people.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Nsbw)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y~6z(Cyz~5Nxyz)),(Cbw)|=(Nsbw))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#clownery
#ancestral

206
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/Antagonistic Pleiotropy.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,206 @@
### Argument Against Ancestral Diets
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definitions**</font> |
| ------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| <font color="CC6600">**Antagonistic pleiotropy**</font> | When one adaptation controls for more than one trait, where at least one of these traits is beneficial to the organism's fitness early on in life and at least one is detrimental to the organism's fitness later on due to a decline in the force of natural selection. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Ancestral food**</font> | A food to which we are presumably adapted, due to having consumed it consistently throughout evolutionary history. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Novel food**</font> | A food to which we are presumably not adapted, due to not having consumed it consistently throughout evolutionary history. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Short term**</font> | Within the reproductive window. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Long term**</font> | Beyond the reproductive window. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Gene degradation**</font> | The natural decline in gene functionality due to entropy. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Gene repair**</font> | The regulated repair of genes that lose functionality due to entropy. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Adaptation**</font> | Inherited traits that are the product of natural selection. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Ancestral diets**</font> | Diets comprised of ancestral foods. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Unnatural diets**</font> | Diets that contain at least one novel food. |
| <font color="CC6600">**A**</font> | a human trait (x) is antagonistically pleiotropic |
| <font color="CC6600">**E**</font> | the human trait (x) is an evolutionary adaptation |
| <font color="CC6600">**N**</font> | the human trait (x) mediates more than one downstream effect, one of which is negative in the post-reproductive window of the carrier |
| <font color="CC6600">**D**</font> | the majority of human genes succumb to degradation |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | human genes must be assumed to be antagonistically pleiotropic |
| <font color="CC6600">**R**</font> | humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods |
| <font color="CC6600">**C**</font> | antagonistic pleiotropy applies more to ancestral foods than it does to novel foods |
| <font color="CC6600">**V**</font> | there is a novel food that has non-inferior short term health value compared to a given ancestral foods |
| <font color="CC6600">**U**</font> | there is a novel food that is likely to be superior to such an ancestral food in the long term |
| <font color="CC6600">**O**</font> | there are unnatural diets that are superior to ancestral diets |
| <font color="CC6600">**i**</font> | the interaction between degradation and repair |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> A human trait is antagonistically pleiotropic if and only if the trait is an evolutionary adaptation and the trait mediates more than one downstream effect, one of which is negative in the post-reproductive window of the carrier.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Ax↔Ex∧Nx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> The interaction between gene degradation and gene repair is an evolutionary adaptation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Ei)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> The interaction between gene degradation and gene repair mediates more than one downstream effect, one of which is negative in the post-reproductive window of the carrier.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Ni)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> If the interaction between gene degradation and gene repair is antagonistically pleiotropic and all human genes succumb to degradation, then all human genes must be assumed to be antagonistically pleiotropic.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Ai∧D→M)</b>
<br />
<b>P5)</b></font> The majority of human genes succumb to degradation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(D)</b>
<br />
<b>P6)</b></font> If the majority of human genes must be assumed to be antagonistically pleiotropic and humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods, then antagonistic pleiotropy applies more to ancestral foods than it does to novel foods.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(M∧R→C)</b>
<br />
<b>P7)</b></font> Humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(R)</b>
<br />
<b>P8)</b></font> If antagonistic pleiotropy applies more to ancestral foods than it does to novel foods and there is a novel food that has non-inferior short term health value compared to a given ancestral food, then there is a novel food that is likely to be superior to such an ancestral food in the long term.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(C∧V→U)</b>
<br />
<b>P9)</b></font> There is a novel food that has non-inferior short term health value compared to a given ancestral food.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(V)</b>
<br />
<b>P10)</b></font> If there is a novel food that is likely superior to such an ancestral food in the long term, then there are some unnatural diets that are superior to some ancestral diets.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(U→O)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, there are some unnatural diets that are superior to some ancestral diets.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴O)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Ax~4Ex~1Nx)),(Ei),(Ni),(Ai~1D~5M),(D),(M~1R~5C),(R),(C~1V~5U),(V),(U~5O)%7C=(O))
Essentially, human DNA tends to degrade over time when it doesn't rightfully need to, as evidenced by the existence of biologically immortal organisms. Human DNA repair is also regulated and gene-specific. Given these facts, DNA degradation in humans itself is likely to be adaptive. This assigns every gene in our DNA that degrades over time a single antagonistically pleiotropic trait. Since most DNA in the human genome degrades over time, we can infer that over 50% of genes are antagonistically pleiotropic.
---
### Antagonistic Pleiotropy and Ancestral Foods
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods, then antagonistic pleiotropy is more of a concern for ancestral foods than novel foods.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If antagonistic pleiotropy is more of a concern for ancestral foods than novel foods, then novel foods that are equal in their short-term advantages to ancestral foods are more likely to be beneficial for long-term health.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Q→R)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, novel foods that are equal in their short-term advantages to ancestral foods are more likely to be beneficial for long-term health.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴R)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P),(Q~5R)|=(R))
---
### Antagonistic Pleiotropy and Ancestral Foods
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods, then antagonistic pleiotropy is more of a concern for ancestral foods than novel foods.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, antagonistic pleiotropy is more of a concern for ancestral foods than novel foods.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Q)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P)|=(Q))
---
### Argument for the Superiority of Certain Novel Foods
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If a given novel food has non-inferior health value to a given ancestral food in the reproductive window, then such a novel food is likely to be superior to such an ancestral food in the post-reproductive window.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> A given novel food has non-inferior health value to a given ancestral food in the reproductive window.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, such a novel food is likely to be superior to such an ancestral food in the post-reproductive window.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Q)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P)|=(Q))
![[Pasted image 20220619152531.png]]
Basically, we can infer that a certain subset of novel foods, which are non-inferior to ancestral foods early in life, are likely to be superior to ancestral foods later in life. This is based on the fact that most adaptations are antagonistically pleiotropic, and novel foods do not belong to the domain of foods that can be antagonistically pleiotropic.
---
### Superior Unnatural Diet
Take the best ancestral diet and...
- Swap out saturated fat.
- Add on supplementary protein powder.
- Add in supplementary soluble fibre.
- Add in phytosterol-enriched vegetable oils.
- Add in processed cocoa like chocolate
- Replace red meat with processed soy like tofu.
- Fortify foods with B12, folic acid, calcium, and vitamin D.
---
# Hashtags
#ap_argument
#novel_food
#ancestral_food
#primitive_cultures
#arguments
#antagonistic_pleiotropy
#philosophy
#evolution

38
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/Immortality Reductio.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
### Immortality Reductio
| <font color="CC6600">**Variable**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definition**</font> |
|:----------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**H**</font> | humans undergo normal physiological process (x) |
| <font color="CC6600">**R**</font> | normal physiological process (x) does result in negative health outcome (y) |
| <font color="CC6600">**s**</font> | senescence |
| <font color="CC6600">**d**</font> | death |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If humans undergo a normal physiological process, then the normal physiological process does not result in a negative health outcome.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x∀y(Hx→¬Rxy))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Humans undergo senescence.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Hs)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, senescence does not result in death.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬Rsd)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(Hx~5~3Rxy)),(Hs)|=(~3Rsd))
---
### Hashtags
#debate
#arguments

57
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/Polyphenol Reductio.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
### Polyphenol Reductio
| <font color="CC6600">**Variable**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definition**</font> |
|:----------------------------------------:|:-------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**H**</font> | plant defense chemicals (x) are harmful |
| <font color="CC6600">**C**</font> | plant defense chemicals (x) are contained in food (y) |
| <font color="CC6600">**V**</font> | plant defense chemicals (x) render food (y) harmful. |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | genetic modification that removes (p) renders (g) less harmful |
| <font color="CC6600">**p**</font> | polyphenols from grass |
| <font color="CC6600">**g**</font> | grass-fed beef |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If plant defense chemicals are harmful and plant defense chemicals are contained in a food, then plant defense chemicals render the food harmful.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x∀y(Hx∧Cxy→Vxy))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Polyphenols from grass are harmful.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Hp)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> Polyphenols from grass are contained in grass-fed beef.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Cpg)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> If polyphenols from grass render grass-fed beef harmful, then genetic modification that removes polyphenols from grass renders grass-fed beef less harmful.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Vpg→Mpg)</b>
<br />
<b>P5)</b></font> Polyphenols from grass render grass-fed beef harmful.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Vpg)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, genetic modification that removes polyphenols from grass renders grass-fed beef less harmful.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Mpg)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(Hx~1Cxy~5Vxy)),(Hp),(Cpg),(Vpg~5Mpg),(Vpg)|=(Mpg))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#carnivore

58
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ethics/Abortion Rights.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
### Abortion Rights
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If one consents to becoming pregnant or one consensually engages in sexual activity without contraception, then one is implicitly committed to at least accepting the average risks for the average pregnancy.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P∨Q→R)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> One consents to becoming pregnant.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> One consensually engages in sexual activity without contraception.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> If one is implicitly committed to at least accepting the average risks for the average pregnancy and one's pregnancy persists long enough for fetal sentience to develop and one's risk profile during pregnancy is not high, then one is morally bound to carrying the pregnancy to term.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(R∧F∧¬H→M)</b>
<br />
<b>P5)</b></font> One's pregnancy persists long enough for fetal sentience to develop.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(F)</b>
<br />
<b>P6)</b></font> One's risk profile during pregnancy is not high.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬H)</b>
<br />
<b>P7)</b></font> If one is morally bound to carrying the pregnancy to term, then one's whims are not a sufficient justification for the termination of sentient human life.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(M→¬W)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, one's whims are not a sufficient justification for the termination of sentient human life.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬W)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~2Q~5R),(P),(Q),((R~1F~1~3H)~5M),(F),(~3H),(M~5~3W)|=(~3W))
![[📂 Media/Images/Pasted image 20230607150451.png]]
# Hastags
#debate
#abortion
#philosophy
#arguments

42
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ethics/Anti-Natalism.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
## The Eternal Intergalactic Sentience Patrol Squad
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If humans abstaining from procreation maximally reduces rights violations, then humans have sterilized all sentient life in the universe.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Humans have not sterilized all sentient life in the universe.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If humans abstaining from procreation does not maximally reduce rights violations and many more generations are required to sterilize all sentient life in the universe, then humans should not abstain from procreation until all sentient life in the universe is sterilized.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬P∧R→¬S)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> Many more generations are required to sterilize all sentient life in the universe.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(R)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, humans should not abstain from procreation until all sentient life in the universe is sterilized.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬S)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(~3Q),(~3P~1R~5~3S),(R)|=(~3S))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#anti-natalism

109
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ethics/Ethical Slurs.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
### Argument for Using the Term Retard
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**C**</font> | (x) slur's negative connotations have been neutralised |
| <font color="CC6600">**B**</font> | (x) slur has been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage |
| <font color="CC6600">**D**</font> | oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of (x) slur |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | it is permissible to neutralise the term retard's negative connotations |
| <font color="CC6600">**A**</font> | it is generally permissible to use the term retard with an altered non-bigoted meaning |
| <font color="CC6600">**r**</font> | retard |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> For all slurs, (x) slur's negative connotations have been neutralised if and only if, (x) slur has been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Cx↔Bx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> For all slurs, if it is not the case that (x) slur's negative connotations have been neutralised, then oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of (x) slur.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(¬Cx→Dx))</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> It is not the case that the term retard's negative connotations have been neutralised.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Cr)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> If the term retard has not been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage and oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of the term retard, then it is permissible to neutralise the term retard's negative connotations.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Br∧Dr→Sr)</b>
<br />
<b>P5)</b></font> If it is permissible to neutralise the term retard's negative connotations, then It is generally permissible to use the term retard with an altered non-bigoted meaning.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Sr→Ar)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is generally permissible to use the term retard with an altered non-bigoted meaning.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Ar)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Cx~4Bx)),(~6x(~3Cx~5Dx)),(~3Cr),(~3Br~1Dr~5Sr),(Sr~5Ar)|=(Ar))
---
### Argument for Using the Term Nigga
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**C**</font> | (x) slur's negative connotations have been neutralised |
| <font color="CC6600">**B**</font> | (x) slur has been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage |
| <font color="CC6600">**D**</font> | oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of (x) slur |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | it is permissible to neutralise the term nigga's negative connotations |
| <font color="CC6600">**A**</font> | it is generally permissible to use the term nigga with an altered non-bigoted meaning |
| <font color="CC6600">**n**</font> | nigga |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> For all slurs, (x) slur's negative connotations have been neutralised if and only if, (x) slur has been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Cx↔Bx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> For all slurs, If it is not the case that (x) slur's negative connotations have been neutralised, then oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of (x) slur.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(¬Cx→Dx))</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> It is not the case that the term nigga's negative connotations have been neutralised.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Cn)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> If the term nigga has not been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage and oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of the term nigga, then it is permissible to neutralise the term nigga's negative connotations.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Bn∧Dn→Sn)</b>
<br />
<b>P5)</b></font> If it is permissible to neutralise the term nigga's negative connotations, then It is generally permissible to use the term nigga with an altered non-bigoted meaning.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Sn→An)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is generally permissible to use the term nigga with an altered non-bigoted meaning.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴An)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Cx~4Bx)),(~6x(~3Cx~5Dx)),(~3Cn),(~3Bn~1Dn~5Sn),(Sn~5An)|=(An))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#slur
#retard
#linguistic_prescriptivism

32
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ethics/Pen-style tattoo machine hygiene.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
I discussed the use of pen-style machines with several healthcare professionals. Their unanimous opinion was that for such a device to be used safely in a setting such as an operating theatre, one of the following four protocols must be followed:
**1)** The entire machine should be designed to be single-use disposable.
**OR**
**2)** Whenever a cartridge is removed, it should be immediately discarded. New cartridges must be inserted with extreme care to prevent contaminating the plunger bar. Failing to adhere to this protocol warrants disposal of the machine.
**OR**
**3)** The drive system, along with its housing, must be easily accessible and designed for either autoclaving or thorough sanitization using high-level disinfectants.
**OR**
**4)** The drive system should be isolated from the cartridge by a sterile barrier, which would be removed and discarded after each use.
However, it appears that most pen-style machines do not align with universal precautions and established health and safety standards. The first option is often deemed unfeasible and is pretty much never practiced. The second option also faces similar impracticality. The third option is applicable to only a limited number of machines. As for the fourth option, I am not aware of its implementation anywhere (other than maybe GGTS's Good Pen).
My review of the CDC's outline on Spaulding's classification system makes it clear that the CDC would likely concur with this assessment. Consequently, it seems that a worryingly large number of pen-style machines are unsuitable for use, unfortunately.
EDIT:
I'm extremely saddened by the post-hoc rationalizations of some of these users. When presented with a sound argument for why certain tattoo equipment is an infectious disease transmission hazard, the most common response has been "tattooing isn't sterile anyway". As if this is supposed to be convincing or profound, or put any client's mind at ease about the safety of the process.
Think about what you're saying. You're essentially saying that because tattooing "isn't sterile", tattoo artists should be free to not work aseptically if they choose. We all have a choice to not use dangerous equipment. What I'm suggesting isn't career-ending for any of us. It's just a minor inconvenience. It's extremely disheartening how many people elect to put others at risk unnecessarily because they personally don't want to be inconvenienced. It's shameful, and we have to do better.
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments

29
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ethics/Precautionary Principle Critique.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
The precautionary principle is a group of rules that function similarly. Any weak version just states permissibility and any strong version states requirement. But these rules can be formulated in different ways:
> 1) if I don't know the harm of action x, then I ought not to do action x.
> 2) if I don't know the consequences of action x, then I ought not to do action x.
> 3) if I have a doxastic leaning that action x has more undesirable than desirable consequences then I ought not to do action x.
But most people who use it seem to only ever cite something similar to the first example. In that case, you can just ask why they don't adhere to the opposing rule:
> if I don't know the harms of not doing action x, then I ought to do action x.
Applying this to the last example:
> if I have a doxastic leaning that not doing action x has more undesirable than desirable consequences, then I ought to do action x.
This doesn't run into the same issue: the knowledge component is turned from agnostic to affirmative, and the symmetry breaker is on the table.
Technically, it still needs the clarification that:
> if the ratio of desirable vs undesirable consequences is more favorable towards doing action x than it is disfavorable towards not doing action x, then I ought to do action x.
All this makes me think the precautionary principle is some kind vestige of unacknowledged consequentialist intuitions, by the way. Imagine setting undesirable consequences to violations of rights and desirable consequences to affirmations of rights. In the bivalve case, this would straight lead to arguing their rights, so why not do that in the first place instead of invoking precaution?
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#philosophy

10
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ethics/Rape Defintion.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
# Working Definition
>some sexual activity is morally impermissible if, and only if, only one participant is sexual mature and/or only one participant is able to give informed consent.
---
# Hashtags
#arguments
#debate

50
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Ethics/Scratcher Pioneers.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
### Tattoo Pioneers were Scratchers
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:-------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | one (x) is a scratcher |
| <font color="CC6600">**L**</font> | one (x) tattoos without a license |
| <font color="CC6600">**H**</font> | one (x) tattoos without observing basic health standards |
| <font color="CC6600">**U**</font> | one (x) tattoos without having undertaken apprenticeship |
| <font color="CC6600">**t**</font> | original trailblazers of modern tattooing |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> One is a scratcher if, and only if, one tattoos without a license and/or one tattoos without observing basic health standards and/or one tattoos without having undertaken apprenticeship.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Sx↔Lx∨Hx∨Ux))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> The original trailblazers of modern tattooing tattooed without licenses.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Lt)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> The original trailblazers of modern tattooing tattooed without observing basic health standards.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Ht)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> The original trailblazers of modern tattooing tattooed without having undertaken apprenticeship.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Ut)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, the original trailblazers of modern tattooing were scratchers.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴St)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Sx~4Lx~2Hx~2Ux)),(Lt),(Ht),(Ut)|=(St))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#tattooing

148
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Gender/Gender Semantics.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,148 @@
## Strict Gametic Definition
#### Intended Usage
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | something (x) counts as male |
| <font color="CC6600">**F**</font> | something (x) counts as female |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | something (x) is a small gamete |
| <font color="CC6600">**L**</font> | something (x) is a large gamete |
| <font color="CC6600">**p**</font> | sperm |
| <font color="CC6600">**o**</font> | ova |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Something counts as male if, and only if, something is a small gamete, and something counts as female if, and only if something is a large gamete.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Mx↔Sx)∧∀x(Fx↔Lx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Sperm are small gametes, and ova are large gametes.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Sp∧Lo)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, sperm count as male and ova count as female.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Mp∧Fo)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Mx~4Sx)~1~6x(Fx~4Lx)),(Sp~1Lo)|=(Mp~1Fo))
#### Reductio
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | something (x) counts as male |
| <font color="CC6600">**F**</font> | something (x) counts as female |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | something (x) is a small gamete |
| <font color="CC6600">**L**</font> | something (x) is a large gamete |
| <font color="CC6600">**e**</font> | people |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Something counts as male if, and only if, something is a small gamete, and something counts as female if, and only if something is a large gamete.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Mx↔Sx)∧∀x(Fx↔Lx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> People are neither small gametes nor large gametes.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Se∧¬Le)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, people do not count as male or female.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬Me∧¬Fe)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Mx~4Sx)~1~6x(Fx~4Lx)),(~3Se~1~3Le)|=(~3Me~1~3Fe))
---
## Gametic Entailed Definition
#### Intended Usage
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | something (x) counts as male |
| <font color="CC6600">**F**</font> | something (y) counts as female |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | something (x) produces small gametes |
| <font color="CC6600">**L**</font> | something (y) produces large gametes |
| <font color="CC6600">**t**</font> | a person with gametogenic testes |
| <font color="CC6600">**o**</font> | a person with gametogenic ovaries |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Something counts as male if, and only if, something produces small gametes, and something counts as female if, and only if something produces large gametes.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Mx↔Sx)∧∀x(Fx↔Lx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> A person with gametogenic testes produces small gametes, and a person with gametogenic ovaries produces large gametes.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(St∧Lo)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, A person with gametogenic testes counts as male, and a person with gametogenic ovaries counts as female.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Mt∧Fo)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Mx~4Sx)~1~6x(Fx~4Lx)),(St~1Lo)|=(Mt~1Fo))
#### Reductio
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | something (x) counts as male |
| <font color="CC6600">**F**</font> | something (y) counts as female |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | something (x) produces small gametes |
| <font color="CC6600">**L**</font> | something (y) produces large gametes |
| <font color="CC6600">**a**</font> | a person with azoospermia |
| <font color="CC6600">**w**</font> | a person with complete gonadal dysgenesis |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Something counts as male if, and only if, something produces small gametes, and something counts as female if, and only if something produces large gametes.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Mx↔Sx)∧∀x(Fx↔Lx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> A person with azoospermia does not produce small gametes and a person with complete gonadal dysgenesis does not produce large gametes.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Sa∧¬Lw)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, a person with azoospermia does not count as male, and a person with complete gonadal dysgenesis does not count as female.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬Ma∧¬Fw)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Mx~4Sx)~1~6x(Fx~4Lx)),(~3Sa~1~3Lw)|=(~3Ma~1~3Fw))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#transgender

111
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Gender/Trans Women.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**Male**</font> | the cluster of traits that associate with small, but not large, gametes. |
| <font color="CC6600">**Female**</font> | the cluster of traits that associate with large, but not small, gametes. |
| <font color="CC6600">**W**</font> | someone (x) is a woman |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | someone (x) is a man |
| <font color="CC6600">**L**</font> | someone (x) possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with large gametes than weighted traits that associate with small gametes |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | someone (x) possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with small gametes than weighted traits that associate with large gametes |
| <font color="CC6600">**O**</font> | someone (x) is over 18 years of age |
| <font color="CC6600">**a**</font> | a trans person of the male sex |
| <font color="CC6600">**g**</font> | a trans person of the female sex |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Someone is a woman if, and only if, someone possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with large gametes than weighted traits that associate with small gametes and someone is over 18 years of age.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Wx↔Lx∧Ox))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Someone is a man if, and only if, someone possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with small gametes than weighted traits that associate with large gametes and someone is over 18 years of age.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Mx↔Sx∧Ox))</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> A trans person of the male sex possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with large gametes than weighted traits that associate with small gametes and a trans person with small gametes is over 18 years of age.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(La∧Oa)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> A trans person of the female sex possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with small gametes than weighted traits that associate with large gametes and a trans person with large gametes is over 18 years of age.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Sg∧Og)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, a trans person of the male sex is a woman and a trans person with female sex is a man.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Wa∧Mg)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Wx~4Lx~1Ox)),(~6x(Mx~4Sx~1Ox)),(La~1Oa),(Sg~1Og)|=(Wa~1Mg))
---
### Maz' Argument
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**W**</font> | Someone (x) is a woman |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | Someone (x) is a man |
| <font color="CC6600">**B**</font> | Someone (x) is a trans person with female sex |
| <font color="CC6600">**A**</font> | Someone (x) is a trans person with male sex |
| <font color="CC6600">**L**</font> | Someone (x) possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with large gametes than weighted traits that associate with small gametes |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | Someone (x) possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with small gametes than weighted traits that associate with large gametes |
| <font color="CC6600">**O**</font> | Someone (x) is over 18 years of age |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Someone is a woman if, and only if, someone possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with large gametes than weighted traits that associate with small gametes **and** is over 18 years of age.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Wx↔(Lx∧Ox)))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Someone is a man if, and only if, someone possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with small gametes than weighted traits that associate with large gametes and is over 18 years of age.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Mx↔(Sx∧Ox)))</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> Someone is a trans person with male sex if, and only if, someone possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with large gametes than weighted traits that associate with small gametes and is over 18 years of age.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>∀x(Ax↔(Lx∧Ox))</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> Someone is a trans person with female sex if, and only if, someone possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with small gametes than weighted traits that associate with large gametes and is over 18 years of age.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>∀x(Bx↔(Sx∧Ox))</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, a trans person with small gametes implies a women and a trans person with large gametes implies a man.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴∀x(Ax→Wx)∧∀x(Bx→Mx))</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Wx~4(Lx~1Ox))),(~6x(Mx~4(Sx~1Ox))),~6x(Ax~4(Lx~1Ox)),~6x(Bx~4(Sx~1Ox))|=(~6x(Ax~5Wx)~1~6x(Bx~5Mx)))
---
# References
Hermaphrodites:
https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(08)00233-1/fulltext
Producing both small and large gametes:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4532534/
https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/pubmed/ovulation-in-a-cytogenetically-proved-phenotypically-male-fertile-Steztrbecy
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#transgender

78
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Metaethics/Companions in Guilt.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
### Companions in Guilt
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If error theory is true then there are no categorical moral norms.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→¬Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> If there are no square-circle norms, then there are no categorical epistemic norms.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Q→¬R)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> There are categorical epistemic norms.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(R)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, error theory is false and there are categorical moral norms.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬P∧Q)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5~3Q),(~3Q~5~3R),(R)|=(~3P~1Q))
---
### Companions in Guilt Interpretation
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If error theory is true then there are no square-circle norms.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→¬Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> If there are no square-circle norms, then there are no circle-square norms.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Q→¬R)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> There are circle-square norms.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(R)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, error theory is false and there are square-circle norms.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬P∧Q)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5~3Q),(~3Q~5~3R),(R)|=(~3P~1Q))
---
| Moral Norm | Epistemic Norm | Judgement |
| ------------ | -------------- | ------------ |
| categorical | categorical | gibberish |
| categorical | hypothetical | equivocation |
| hypothetical | categorical | equivocation |
| hypothetical | hypothetical | agree |
---
# Hashtags
#moral_realism
#philosophy

13
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Metaethics/Drowning Child.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
## Tit-Gazing Case Reductio
>Bob is walking home from work one day when he sees a lifelike statue of a woman with pair of shapely, double-D breasts inside a nearby park. Bob can stop to admire the breasts, and he knows that the experience would be very exciting. However, Bob is not wearing his glasses and does not have enough time to enter the park. In order to fully appreciate the breasts he will have to squint and be momentarily uncomfortable. Should Bob gaze upon the breasts as he passes by?
>
>The Tit-Gazing case is aesthetically compelling because we seem to be able to see, without argument, that we ought to stop and admire the breasts. If this is right, then the judgment that we ought to admire the breasts cannot be based on some contingent social or psychological fact about us. Rather, it seems that the claim that we ought to admire the breasts is an objective aesthetic truth that exists independently of our beliefs or desires. This is evidence in favour of aesthetic realism, the view that there are objective aesthetic facts that are true independently of us and our beliefs.
---
## Hashtags
#philosophy
#moral_realism
#sexuality

36
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Nutrition/Epi-Denial.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
### Epi-Denial Consistency Checker
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If experimental evidence is required for a sound causal inference and confounding is a causal concept, then experimental evidence is required to validate potential confounders.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P∧Q→R)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Experimental evidence is required for a sound causal inference.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> Confounding is a causal concept.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Q)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, experimental evidence is required to validate potential confounders.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴R)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~1Q~5R),(P),(Q)|=(R))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments

40
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Nutrition/Healthy Food.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
### Healthy Food Argument
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**P**</font> | A given food (x) is healthy compared to another given food (w) when in a given context (y) |
| <font color="CC6600">**Q**</font> | when within that context (y) the consumption of that given food (x) is likely to increase the lag-time to the onset of illness, disease, or infirmity (z) when replacing another given other food (w) |
| <font color="CC6600">**p**</font> | Pepsi |
| <font color="CC6600">**d**</font> | trapped on a desert island |
| <font color="CC6600">**s**</font> | starvation |
| <font color="CC6600">**l**</font> | leafy greens |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> A given food is healthy compared to another given food when in a given context if, and only if, when within that context the consumption of that given food is likely to increase the lag-time to the onset of illness, disease, or infirmity when replacing a given other food.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x∀y∀z∀w(Pxyw↔Qxyzw))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> When trapped on a desert island the consumption of Pepsi increases the lag-time to the onset of starvation when replacing leafy greens.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Qpdsl)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, Pepsi is healthy compared to leafy greens when trapped on a desert island.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Ppdl)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y~6z~6w(Pxyw~4Qxyzw)),(Qpdsl)|=(Ppdl))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments

45
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Nutrition/Saturated Fat & LDL.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
### Title
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | a given saturated fat source (x) increases LDL-C at a similar rate to other saturated fat sources |
| <font color="CC6600">**L**</font> | a given saturated fat source (x) has no other known qualities that counteract said increase in LDL-C |
| <font color="CC6600">**R**</font> | there is a reason to believe that such a saturated fat source (x) is any better for heart health than other saturated fat sources that increase LDL-C |
| <font color="CC6600">**c**</font> | coconut oil |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If a given saturated fat source increases LDL-C at a similar rate to other saturated fat sources and and a given saturated fat source has no other known qualities that counteract said increase in LDL-C, then there is not a reason to believe that such a saturated fat source is any better for heart health than other saturated fat sources that increase LDL-C.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Sx∧Lx→¬Rx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Coconut oil increases LDL-C at a similar rate to other saturated fat sources
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Sc)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> Coconut oil has no other known qualities that counteract said increase in LDL-C.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Lc)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, there is not a reason to believe that coconut oil is any better for heart heart than other saturated fat sources that increase LDL-C.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬Rc )</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Sx~1Lx~5~3Rx)),(Sc),(Lc)|=(~3Rc))
---
# Hashtag
#saturated_fat
#LDL
#coronary_heart_disease
#arguments

43
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Philosophy/Agnosticism.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
### Agnosticism Argument
| <font color="CC6600">**Variable**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definition**</font> |
|:----------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**U**</font> | one (x) can unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on a proposition (y) |
| <font color="CC6600">**K**</font> | one (x) knows why they believe that a proposition (y) is true |
| <font color="CC6600">**W**</font> | one (x) should temporarily withhold the belief that a proposition (y) is true |
| <font color="CC6600">**o**</font> | the interlocutor |
| <font color="CC6600">**r**</font> | the proposition at hand |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If one cannot unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on a proposition, then one does does not know why they believe that a proposition is true.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x∀y(¬Uxy→¬Kxy))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> If one does not know why they believe that a proposition is true, then one should temporarily withhold the belief that a proposition is true.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x∀y(¬Kxy→Wxy))</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> The interlocutor cannot unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on the proposition at hand.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Uor)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, the interlocutor should temporarily withhold the belief that the proposition at hand is true.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Wor)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(~3Uxy~5~3Kxy)),(~6x~6y(~3Kxy~5Wxy)),(~3Uor)|=(Wor))
## Hashtags
#arguments
#philosophy
#debate

77
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Philosophy/Modus Bronens.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
## Modus Bronens
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If studies show that PUFA is preferable to SFA for heart disease prevention, then people who wish to lower their heart disease risk should generally lower their SFA intake and increase their PUFA intake.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> I don't like Nick's face.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬N)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, studies do not show that PUFA is preferable to SFA for heart disease prevention and people who wish to lower their heart disease risk should not generally lower their SFA intake and increase their PUFA intake.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬P∧¬Q)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
---
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If LDL causes CVD, then those whose LDL increases in response to a carnivore diet should take steps to lower their LDL.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Nick is not the epitome of health.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬N)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, LDL does not cause CVD and those whose LDL increases in response to a carnivore diet should not take steps to lower their LDL.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬P∧¬Q)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
---
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If Anna does act in bad faith, then Nick is justified in blocking Anna.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> I don't like the fact that Nick uses pragmatic markers in his discourse.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬N)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, Anna does not act in bad faith and Nick is not justified in blocking Anna.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬P∧¬Q)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
---
## Hashtags
#clownery
#philosophy
#logic
#propositional_logic

42
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Philosophy/Philosophy Gibberish.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
direct reference
externalist epistemology
metaphysical modality
ontological modality
phenomenal conservatism
transcendental realism
correspondence theory of truth
disjunctivism
libertarian free will
theism
content internalism
subjective idealism
parallelism
pre-established harmony
epiphenomenalism
non-entailing explanations
causal powers
inductive arguments
abductive arguments
metaphysical essence
relative identity
stance-independent norm
non-inferential justification
private language
moral particles
ultimate grounds
invariant justification
transcendental oneness
equal ultimacy
personal creation
single consciousness ontology
mind-heart connection
synthetic a priori
non-physical mental entities
externalist value
warrant
---
# Hashtags
#philosophy

46
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Politics/Israeli Pagers.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
### Argument Against Israeli Pagers as Booby-Traps
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**B**</font> | (x) is a booby-trap |
| <font color="CC6600">**D**</font> | (x) is a device or material |
| <font color="CC6600">**K**</font> | (x) is designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure. |
| <font color="CC6600">**F**</font> | (x) functions (as a device or material that was designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure) when a person disturbs or approaches an apparently safe act |
| <font color="CC6600">**p**</font> | pagers |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> For all x, x is a booby-trap if, and only if, x is a device or material AND x is designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure AND x functions (as a device or material that was designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure) when a person disturbs or approaches an apparently safe act.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Bx↔(Dx∧Kx∧Fx)))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> The pagers were devices or materials.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Dp)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> The pagers were designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Kp)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> The pagers did not function (as devices or materials that were designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure) when a person disturbs or approaches an apparently safe act.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Fp)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, the pagers were not booby-traps.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬Bp)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#israel-palestine

47
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Seed Oils/Atherogenic Omega-3.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
### Atherogenic Omega-3 Argument
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**A**</font> | something (x) increases the risk of atherosclerosis |
| <font color="CC6600">**L**</font> | something (x) facilitates the oxidative modification of LDL particles |
| <font color="CC6600">**F**</font> | all MDA-producing fatty acids (x) are atherogenic |
| <font color="CC6600">**m**</font> | MDA |
| <font color="CC6600">**o**</font> | omega-3s |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Something increases the risk of atherosclerosis if and only if something facilitates the oxidative modification of LDL particles.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Ax↔Lx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> MDA facilitates the oxidative modification of LDL particles.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Lm)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If MDA increases the risk of atherosclerosis, then all MDA-producing fatty acids are atherogenic.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Am→∀x(Fx))</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, omega-3s are atherogenic.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Fo)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Ax~4Lx)),(Lm),(Am~5~6x(Fx))|=(Fo))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#omega_3
#omega_6
#MDA

31
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Seed Oils/LA Veterans argument.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
###
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If underpowered studies provide weaker causal estimates than adequately powered studies, then meta-analytic summations that include adequately powered studies to the exclusion of insufficiently powered studies will provide better causal estimates than meta-analytic summations that include both adequately powered studies and insufficiently powered studies.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Underpowered studies provide weaker causal estimates than adequately powered studies.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, meta-analytic summations that include adequately powered studies to the exclusion of insufficiently powered studies will provide better causal estimates than meta-analytic summations that include both adequately powered studies and insufficiently powered studies.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Q)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P)|=(Q))
---
# Hashtags
#arguments
#debate

44
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Theism/Fine Tuning.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
### Fine Tuning Regress V2
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**F**</font> | something (x) is finely tuned |
| <font color="CC6600">**D**</font> | something (x) has a designer |
| <font color="CC6600">**T**</font> | fine tuning is an infinitely regressive explanation for God |
| <font color="CC6600">**g**</font> | God's constitution |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If something is finely tuned, then something has a designer.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Fx→Dx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> God's constitution is finely tuned.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Fg)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If God's constitution has a designer, then fine tuning is an infinitely regressive explanation for God.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Dg→T)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, fine tuning is an infinitely regressive explanation for God.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴T)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Fx~5Dx)),(Fg),(Dg~5T)|=(T))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments

85
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Agricultural Predation.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**P**</font> | something (x) counts as predation |
| <font color="CC6600">**Q**</font> | something (x) involves an animal (y) regularly capturing another animal (z) |
| <font color="CC6600">**R**</font> | something (x) involves an animal (y) regularly killing another animal (z) |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | something (x) involves an animal (y) regularly subduing another animal (z) |
| <font color="CC6600">**T**</font> | something (x) involves an animal (y) regularly consuming, to the captor's benefit, another animal (z) |
| <font color="CC6600">**a**</font> | animal agriculture |
| <font color="CC6600">**h**</font> | humans |
| <font color="CC6600">**l**</font> | livestock |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Something counts as predation if, and only if, something involves an animal regularly capturing, killing or subduing, and consuming, to the captor's benefit, another animal.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x∀y∀z(Px↔Qxyz∧(Rxyz∨Sxyz)∧Txyz))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Animal agriculture involves humans regularly capturing livestock.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Qahl)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> Animal agriculture involves humans regularly killing or subduing livestock.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Rahl∨Sahl)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> Animal agriculture involves humans regularly consuming, to the captors' benefit, livestock.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Tahl)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, animal agriculture counts as predation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Pa)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y~6z(Px~4Qxyz~1(Rxyz~2Sxyz)~1Txyz)),(Qahl),(Rahl~2Sahl),(Tahl)|=(Pa))
---
### Ethical Factory Farming Reductio
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**D**</font> | a predator (x) engages in predation (y) |
| <font color="CC6600">**R**</font> | it is the case that we ought stop the predator (x) from engaging in predation (y) |
| <font color="CC6600">**a**</font> | human |
| <font color="CC6600">**m**</font> | factory farming pigs |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If a predator engages in predation, then it is not the case that we ought stop the predator from engaging in said predation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x∀y(Dxy→¬Rxy))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Humans engage in factory farming pigs.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Dam)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is not the case that we ought stop humans from engaging in factory farming pigs.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬Ram)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(Dxy~5~3Rxy)),(Dam)|=(~3Ram))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#predators

108
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Animal Rights.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
### Flash's NTT Argument
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**W**</font> | a being (x) has moral worth |
| <font color="CC6600">**N**</font> | we should exploit a being (x) to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans |
| <font color="CC6600">**t**</font> | trait |
| <font color="CC6600">**a**</font> | animal |
| <font color="CC6600">**h**</font> | human |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> For all things, if a being has moral worth, then we should not exploit it to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Wx→Nx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> If animals don’t have moral worth, then there exists a trait that is absent in animals such that if it were absent in humans, humans wouldn’t have moral worth.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Wa→∃t(Ata→(Ath→¬Wh)))</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> There doesn’t exist a trait that is absent in animals such that if it were absent in humans, humans wouldn’t have moral worth.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬∃t(Ata→(Ath→¬Wh)))</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, we should not exploit animals to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Na)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Wx~5Nx)),(~3Wa~5~7t(Ata~5(Ath~5~3Wh))),(~3~7t(Ata~5(Ath~5~3Wh))),(Wa)|=(Na))
---
# Vegan Society Definition Tho
| <font color="CC6600">**Defineindum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:----------------------------------------:|:------------------------------------------ |
| <font color="CC6600">V</font> | it is vegan to do something (x) |
| <font color="CC6600">E</font> | something (x) exploits animals (y) |
| <font color="CC6600">A</font> | a being (x) is an animal |
| <font color="CC6600">e</font> | eat |
| <font color="CC6600">g</font> | Groot |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> For all things, it is vegan to do something if and only if that thing does not exploit animals.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Vx↔¬Ex))</b>
</font>
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P2)</b></font> If some beings are not animals, then eating those beings does not exploit animals.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x∀y(¬Ax→¬E(e(y))))</b>
</font>
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P3)</b></font> Groot is not an animal.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Ag)</b>
</font>
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is vegan to eat Groot.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴V(e(g)))</b>
</font>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Vx~4~3Ex)),(~6x~6y(~3Ax~5~3E(e(y)))),(~3Ag)|=(V(e(g))))
---
# Nick's Definition of Veganism
>Veganism is an applied ethical position that advocates for the equal, trait-adjusted application of commonplace human rights (such as the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights) to non-human sentient beings.
#### Terms:
**Sentient being:** an entity for whom a subjective experience can be reasonably argued, such as with vertebrate animals.
**Right:** an entitlement to an action, that if not performed, or an inaction, that if performed, would be bad in principle (meaning independent of utility concerns). For example, if others perform an action that deprives me of X, or fail to take an action necessary for me to have X, it would be considered wrong in principle, independent of the consequences or utility of such actions or inactions.
---
# Hashtags
#arguments
#philosophy
#propositional_logic
#logic
#ethics
#animals
#vegan

44
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Anti-Pollination Reductio.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
### Pollination Reductio
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**V**</font> | something (x) is vegan |
| <font color="CC6600">**E**</font> | something (x) does not involve human on non-human animal exploitation |
| <font color="CC6600">**P**</font> | the products (x) generated are not vegan |
| <font color="CC6600">**b**</font> | bees pollinating human crops |
| <font color="CC6600">**a**</font> | apples |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Something is vegan if, and only if, something does not involve human on non-human animal exploitation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Vx↔¬Ex))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Bees pollinating human crops involves human on non-human exploitation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Eb)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If bees pollinating human crops is not vegan, then the products generated are not vegan.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Vb→∀x(¬Px))</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, apples are not vegan.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬Pa)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Vx~4~3Ex)),(Eb),(~3Vb~5~6x(~3Px))|=(~3Pa))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments

43
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Anti-Rewilding.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
### Anti-Rewilding
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**W**</font> | something (x) has negative rights |
| <font color="CC6600">**N**</font> | we should defend something (x) from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans |
| <font color="CC6600">**F**</font> | it is permissible to subject animals to conditions that are likely to involve predation, starvation, or death due to environmental exposure to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans |
| <font color="CC6600">**a**</font> | animal |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> For all things, if something has negative rights, then we should not defend it from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Wx→¬Nx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Animals have negative rights.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Wa)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If we should not defend animals from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans, then it is not permissible to subject animals to conditions that are likely to involve predation, starvation, or death due to environmental exposure to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Na→¬F)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is not permissible to subject animals to conditions that are likely to involve predation, starvation, or death due to environmental exposure to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬F)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Wx~5~3Nx)),(Wa),(~3Na~5~3F)|=(~3F))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments

38
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Argument against Marineland vandalism.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
### Argument Against Marineland Vandalism
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If Marineland must spend extra money cleaning graffiti, then Marineland will have less money to devote to animal care.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Marineland must spend extra money cleaning graffiti.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If Marineland will have less money to devote to animal care, then vandalizing Marineland increases the probability of harming the animals they keep.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Q→R)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, vandalizing Marineland increases the probability of harming the animals they keep.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴R)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P),(Q~5R)|=(R))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#vegan
#orca

56
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Argument against normal fin collapse.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
### Argument for Fin Collapse Abnormality
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If a killer whale with a collapsed dorsal fin is healthy, then collapsed dorsal fins are normal.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Collapsed dorsal fins are not normal.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Q)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, a killer whale with a collapsed dorsal fin is not healthy.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬P)</b>
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(~3Q)|=(~3P))
### Argument for P2
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If empirical data shows that most killer whales do not succumb to dorsal fin collapse, then collapsed dorsal fins are not normal.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬R→¬Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Empirical data shows that most killer whales do not succumb to dorsal fin collapse.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬R)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, collapsed dorsal fins are not normal.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬Q)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~3R~5~3Q),(~3R)|=(~3Q))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#vegan
#orca

47
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Colonizing Nature.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
## Non-Violence Displacement of Nature
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If the natural world contains intolerable rights violations and we do not know if nature is net positive or net negative for utility and there is not any known practical means by which to end the rights violations beyond the use of force and the natural world is not currently instrumentally vital to facilitating human flourishing, then we are justified in displacing nature into non-existence.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P∧¬Q∧¬R∧¬S→T)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Nature entails intolerable rights violations.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> We do not know if nature is net positive or net negative for utility.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P4)</b></font> There is not any known practical means by which to end the rights violations beyond the use of force.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬R)</b>
<br />
<b>P5)</b></font> The natural world is not currently instrumentally vital to facilitating human flourishing.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬S)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, we are justified in displacing nature into non-existence.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴T)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~1~3Q~1~3R~1~3S~5T),(P),(~3Q),(~3R),(~3S)|=(T))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#vegan

39
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Crop deaths.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
### Crop Deaths Rebuttal
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If it is known that cropland leads to more animal death than wildland, then there is evidence that cropland leads to more animal death than wildland.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(P→Q)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> There is not evidence that cropland leads to more animal death than wildland.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Q)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is not known that cropland leads to more animal death than wildland.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬P)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(~3Q)|=(~3P))
---
### Cropland vs Pastureland
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ecog.05126
### Cropdeaths Article
https://anupamkatkar.com/2015/10/08/debunking-cultivating-crops-for-vegans-kills-more-animals-than-pasture-grazing-livestock/#Footnote2
---
# Hashtags
#arguments

69
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Obligatory Activism.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
### Obligatory Activism
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**C**</font> | one has an obligation to convince others of something (x) |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | something (x) is a moral obligation |
| <font color="CC6600">**v**</font> | veganism |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> One has an obligation to convince others of something if and only if that something is a moral obligation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Cx↔Mx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Veganism is a moral obligation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Mv)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, one has an obligation to convince others of veganism.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Cv)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Cx~4Mx)),(Mv)|=(Cv))
#### Reductio
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**C**</font> | one has an obligation to convince others of something (x) |
| <font color="CC6600">**M**</font> | something (x) is a moral obligation |
| <font color="CC6600">**r**</font> | not raping others |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> One has an obligation to convince others of something if, and only, if that something is a moral obligation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Cx↔Mx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Not raping others is a moral obligation.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Mr)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, one has an obligation to convince others to not rape others.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Cr)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Cx~4Mx)),(Mr)|=(Cr))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#clownery

45
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Odd Order Predators.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
### Culling Odd Order Predators
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| <font color="CC6600">**W**</font> | something (x) has negative rights |
| <font color="CC6600">**N**</font> | we should defend something (x) from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans |
| <font color="CC6600">**F**</font> | it is permissible to prevent predation with lethal force to the same degree we would tolerate for humans |
| <font color="CC6600">**a**</font> | animal |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> For all things, if something has negative rights, then we should not defend it from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Wx→¬Nx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Animals have negative rights.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Wa)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If we should not defend animals from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans, then it is permissible to prevent predation with lethal force to the same degree we would tolerate for humans.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Na→F)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is permissible to prevent predation with lethal force to the same degree we would tolerate for humans.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴F)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Wx~5~3Nx)),(Wa),(~3Na~5F)|=(F))
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#vegan
#predators

131
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Ostroveganism.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,131 @@
### Delicious Bivalve Argument
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">**B**</font> | something (x) counts as a brain |
| <font color="CC6600">**P**</font> | something (x) is a complex network of interconnected neurons |
| <font color="CC6600">**Q**</font> | something (x) integrates neuronal pathways from multiple sensory organs |
| <font color="CC6600">**R**</font> | something (x) presents with distinct functional regions |
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | something (x) presents with nuclei with white matter tracts that facilitate inter-regional communication |
| <font color="CC6600">**N**</font> | the corresponding brainless biological system into which the cerebral ganglia are integrated (x) is not likely to be sentient |
| <font color="CC6600">**c**</font> | cerebral ganglia |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> Something counts as a brain if, and only if, something is a complex network of interconnected neurons, integrates neuronal pathways from multiple sensory organs, and presents with distinct functional regions or nuclei with white matter tracts that facilitate inter-regional communication.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(Bx↔Px∧Qx∧(Rx∨Sx)))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Cerebral ganglia meet criteria one and three, but not criteria two and four.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(Pc∧¬Qc∧Rc∧¬Sc)</b>
<br />
<b>P3)</b></font> If cerebral ganglia do not count as brains, then the corresponding brainless biological system into which the cerebral ganglia are integrated is not likely to be sentient.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Bc→∀x(¬Nx))</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, bivalves are not likely to be sentient.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴¬Nb)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Bx~4Px~1Qx~1(Rx~2Sx))),(Pc~1~3Qc~1Rc~1~3Sc),(~3Bc~5~6x(~3Nx))|=(~3Nb))
---
### Argument for Bivalve Consumption
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------- |
| <font color="CC6600">V</font> | it is vegan to consume (x) lifeform |
| <font color="CC6600">S</font> | (x) lifeform does have sentience |
| <font color="CC6600">b</font> | bivalves |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b></font> If it is not vegan to consume a lifeform, then the lifeform does have sentience.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∀x(¬Vx→Sx)</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b></font> Bivalves do not have sentience.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(¬Sb)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is vegan to consume bivalves.
<br />
<font color="CC6600">
<b>(∴Vb)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(~3Vx~5Sx)),(~3Sb)%7C=(Vb))
---
### Ecological Harm Tho
| <font color="CC6600">**Variable**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definition**</font> |
|:----------------------------------------:|:------------------------------------------ |
| <font color="CC6600">F</font> | the food is OK to eat |
| <font color="CC6600">H</font> | the food does cause ecological harm |
| <font color="CC6600">s</font> | soy |
<div style="text-align: center">
<font color="CC6600">
<b>P1)</b> <font color="DADADA">If the food is OK to eat, then the food does not cause ecological harm.</font>
<br />
<b>(∀x(Fx→¬Hx))</b>
<br />
<b>P2)</b> <font color="DADADA">Soy does cause ecological harm.</font>
<br />
<b>(Hs)</b>
<br />
<b>C)</b> <font color="DADADA">Therefore, soy is not OK to eat.</font>
<br />
<b>(∴¬Fs)</b>
<br />
<br />
</font>
</div>
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Fx~5~3Hx)),(Hs)|=(~3Fs))
---
![[📂 Media/PDFs/Pasted image 20220917174011.png]]
---
### Ganglia Tho Hypothetical
>For example, say we had a braindead body on life support, and some people (like loved ones) who would experience emotional well-being if you took them off life support. Would you say "screw their emotions, we should apply the precautionary principle to that body's cerebral ganglia". I personally wouldn't. I'd take the wishes of those people to supersede keeping the ganglia alive. Likewise, I can't think of a good reason to deny people well-being from eating oysters.
### Links
#### Biomass Distribution
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1711842115
#### Tumour Case Report
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28042664/
#### Mollusc Sentience
[[📂 Media/PDFs/sentience-in-cephalopod-molluscs-and-decapod-crustaceans-final-report-november-2021.pdf]]
---
# Hashtags
#vegan
#philosophy
#sentience
#bivalves

19
🛡️ Debate/Arguments/Vegan/Wild Animal Suffering.md Executable file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
### A) Wild animal suffering should end.
>All else equal, is a world where sentient beings are getting torn to shreds and eaten alive or starving to death if they don't succumb to this fate better than a world where this does not happen?
### B) Wild animal procreation should end.
>All else equal, is a world where sentient beings are fucking (often without even implied consent) and impregnating each other without informed consent with respect to the risks of pregnancy, birth defects from inbreeding, or the extremely high risk that their children will be torn to shreds and eaten alive or starve to death better than a world where this does not happen?
### C) We favour less risky environments.
>All else equal, is a world where tens of thousands are killed, hundreds of thousands are injured or maimed, and up to millions are displaced or rendered homeless every year due to natural disasters alone better than a world where this does not happen?
---
# Hashtags
#debate
#arguments
#animals