shitposting rave 3: Dawn of the third rave

That's a fascinating distinction. How far must the 'long-term' be? It does win out over 'able to communicate', which seems to be the standard for most of the mages I've spoken to, but I wouldn't say many spirits are capable of long term planning. In certain lights, I wouldn't say that my people are either.

 

so vwhat vwould you call the difference betvween being incapable of long-term planning and being capable of planning the long-term, but only in the short-term.

no you dont.

 

"Capable" and "making use of the capability" are two different things, as the being with the lovely ruffles has so kindly pointed out already. My society's primary deity is the embodiment of chaos, we are well aware of the boundary between not using one's mind and not having a mind to use.

 

Beings incapable of forethought are often capable of communicating short-term desires; is not signalling aggression or ability to mate communication of some sort?

Everything is up for debate, of course-- again, the chaos deity influence-- but if I had to set a line, I'd put it at "beyond the next three meals," whatever that might look like to any given species. Certain creatures are absolutely inclined to stash their food for later, difficult as that may be for those that feed on energon!

 

Why, thank you. It was an uh... juvenile as far as I remember? She (I'm assuming here, hopefully I have determined the right pronouns) had a quite peculiar head ornamentation style. Anyway there was a heated debate during which she used several anti mechanoid slurs and then asked me impolitely to drop the subject or something like that.
The events are quite hazy in my memory as I rather prefer to compress inconsequential memories to allow more room for useful data.

I love you too dear.

Please refer to the above explanation even if it is a rather messy first draft kind of explanation.

Oh I am quite confident that everyone here would be more than willing to define words and simplify so everyone may follow any discussion.

And where does one draw the line for what is standard deviation and what is a distinct feature. Why that many umbrella categories and not more? Also whose taxonomic system are you using, your own, or can you trace the developement of categories to their first usage? All of these are traits that, if left unreflected upon, help reinforce a hegemonial dispensation of knowledge through the elite institution of the academy.
However if I am not mistaken you hail from one of the colonies with a rather more, ah, decentralized scientific history, so this may be a critique that is less relevant to how Licentan scientific discourse is negotiated.

 

Juveniles do tend toward impatience and anger, I find. I certainly did at that age. Nowadays, I'm happy every time something even gets close to letting me demonstrate my stupidly expensive education. Not much call for it in my line of work -- former line of work, anyway, I'm considering myself retired from it. Although some clients do find intelligence attractive.

 

Dude, my personhood has been doubted before - even though I do all the fancy things you guys have been listing. People have treated me as though I didn't have thoughts or as though the ones I did didn't matter. And me talking and making long-terms plans and shit didn't do anything to get them to believe in my personhood.

And I know you. I know how much contempt you have for people with blood warmer than yours. I know how you treat babies. I know all that shit.

So, fuck you!

Oh, I know the definitions. It just doesn't make sense or seem to be of any use. And I mean, seriously, something needs to be objective, right? 'Cause, well, if nothing's objective, nothing exists and nobody knows shit, you know...

 

Right, but how about you disengage your dislike for the person proposing the statement from your evaluation fo the statement.
"Sapience is Subjective"
what this really means is that if we attempt to make hard and fast rules for where sapience begins and ends, inevitably people will fall through the cracks.
In this statement lies power to reclaim sapience for the disenfranchised.
Yes Sapience is subjective. Hence we should treat everyone we meet with the assumption of sapience and act accordingly.
For me that means I will consider your actions to be your actions and will without indication that you do not stand behind these actions, react accordingly. This includes lethal force if I deem that necessary.
But then I am of a species with no need to hunt and I understand that that might come with moral conundrums.

 

... I really doubt he means it that way, though.

I think what he's actually going for is more like, "sapience is subjective so I can refuse to believe in someone else's sapience and treat them like shit if I wanna."

 

I'd call it just that. Just because one person is more suited to planning for the future than another doesn't mean either are lesser.

 

vwhere did the grub evwer display a tendency to plan for the long-term future.

 

I quite enjoy getting to occassionally act above my stat- Er... Engage in discussion like this. Seeing as I lack a formal education of any accredited kind I can only presume what it must be like to have the funds to spend on getting one that one doesn't plan to get much use out of...

Everyone's ssensory arrays are different, personal bias colors even the purest form of data.
We can say we are fairly certain of many things, but stating such things as objective truths as "one and one always results in the same amount" might be objectively true in that if you add one stone to another stone you have two stones, but one time you do that you might have a pound of stone and the other time you might have two pounds of stone.
Everything is a matter of framing and what information gets left out.

 

Addendum: I personally feel sapience should be judged in the adult - assuming from terminology that this "grub" is a juvenile form - since juveniles have not finished brain development and therefore capability of sapience yet.

 

excuse me??

 

If it reacts in a singularly unique manner, it is an outlier. If it reacts in a manner unique to components that share its structure, it is a feature. If it reacts in a manner common to components that do not share its structure, the components are likely more related than they appear.

I pulled three distinct examples at random to illustrate my intended point; a complete delineation would be impractical and more exhausting than I am currently comfortable with.

My mentor's; I am not in possession of equipment that allows for microscopic inspection, unfortunately, nor do I specialize in organic biology. Given time to follow the chain, I am certain I could find the origins of each term, but linguistics is also not my science of choice.

Apologies; everything after "reinforce" makes no sense at all to me. Is rephrasing possible?

Put a question to six scientists and you'll get eight answers, and another four as they build on or dispute each others' ideas.

(Please pardon me for interjecting into a conversation I'm not the target of.)
We are in agreement on this point-- sapience is difficult, if not impossible, to quantify, and societal guidelines should not be based on such assumptions.

 

That's why I spoke of reclaiming the statement.
He might have meant it that way, but that just means he is a person inclined to violence against those he considers easy prey for whatever reason.
Don't allow him the out of using this sentence to be a slagger.

 

Hm! That seems like a mostly sensible way to look at it, though of course there will always be outliers. Spirits don't eat, so I can't use that as a metric, but if we combine multiple definitions and apply them with qualifiers, that seems like a way to look at the issue.

That's part of the fun! If everything is subjective, that means everything is capable of change, yes? So we can forever improve on the faulty framework we are given.

These are the young of your people, correct? I've found that children often aren't capable of planning anything other than chaos.

 

The education was for the Crown Princess Yvgenia, but since I was her bodyguard and double, I was there too, and had to learn it just the same as she did. I don't think Gen gets much use out of his education anymore either, but the world tilted and we grasped anything we could to avoid sliding off.

Fuck status. You're smart. It shows.

 

no, the young are vwigglers. grubs arent trolls yet.

 

The grub is a baby! A baby! Its brain isn't even finished yet!

I'm not allowing him an out if I prove him wrong, though.

... how does that follow?