You think art isn’t useful?

Seitan can be a bit complicated, for sure. The above recipe is definitely not the simplest out there, but it is absolutely delicious. It can be made with regular ol’ flour instead of “vital wheat gluten” powder, but that does add a little bit to the complexity.

That said, here’s an extremely simple “2 Ingredient” recipe for seitan made with flour. Like tofu, seitan will soak up flavors well, and can be used to simulate almost any meat depending on how you prepare it.

Also, I recommend checking out Sauce Stache (website : youtube) for excellent vegan recipes (including plenty for seitan). Thee Burger Dude is another great source of vegan recipe wisdom (website : youtube).

You should try this recipe, then.

Best seitan roast I’ve had.

You don’t have to use meat if you don’t eat it.

Seitan roast with potatoes, onions, and carrots is divine.

Highly recommend this recipe.

Lucky for you the linked article explains the acronym!

Wait, you’re not one of those people who only reads headlines, are you?

Unfortunately not:

Here’s a more in-depth article about what happened.

What about Ween?

Of course it’s not a good reason, but it’s also not the main complaint. That’s a disingenuous argument.

The problem is that the locations that offer IDs become political footballs.

Imagine that you change the law to require a certain type of ID in order to vote (even though you already have a social security card, it doesn’t count for voting purposes), and that said ID cannot be acquired via mail.

Imagine, then, that the place you go to get the necessary ID is closed down, or intentionally understaffed via defunding/budget cuts. Hours reduced to 10am-4pm Monday through Friday, perhaps, when most people work. The next nearest location may be hours away. It may not be accessible via public transit. It then becomes incredibly burdensome for someone with limited time, transportation, or income to get the necessary ID. Now you’re able to control access to the IDs in lower income areas by shuttering or defunding locations.

This isn’t just a theoretical situation. This occurs.

Now, I think you’ll find that most people are onboard with requiring ID to vote, provided that the barriers to getting the ID do not have a chilling effect on low-income voters.

But that’s not the way things tend to go.

Present a plan that expands access to the ID printing services and watch the resistance to these sorts of policies disappear. Or better yet, mail one to every eligible taxpayer the first time they file a tax return. It’s not particularly difficult.

That is very frustrating, to be sure.

However, the ways we’ve begun to think about sapience are so intriguing, as well. We’re beginning to move away from the anthropocentric view that humans are the only sapient creatures. Corvids, elephants, and dolphins probably already make the cut (among other vertebrates) according to the current definition of sapience.

Ants, too, which makes me wonder about the potential for deepening our understand of group/swarm sapience, as well. True “hive minds”, etc. Fascinating stuff!

So much of our understanding of the natural world comes from comparing creatures to ourselves through surface level observation. The more we can relate to an organism, as we perceive it, the more likely we are to elevate its status or “worthiness”, it seems. Now, in the presence of modern technology, we’re discovering how little we actually knew about how the world around us works.

This all ties strongly into historic religious world-views, and elevation of humans to god-like (or god’s chosen) status. So much to unpack!

Haven’t we moved into the belief that many/most multicellular organisms are sentient?

Sentience is the ability to experience feelings and sensations. It may not necessarily imply higher cognitive functions such as awareness, reasoning, or complex thought processes. ^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience}

The studies on plant ‘cognition’ and their ‘nervous system’ are not for naught. They have produced doubt. Some researchers are suddenly unsure about the status of plants and this doubt is necessary to get researchers engaged in and to acquire funding for research into plant sentience. The question of plant sentience is one of those fascinating question where, whichever answer is true we will all be in awe. If plants are sentient, then we need to rethink much of our current understanding in neuroscience. How could such a vascular system, different in so many ways from our own nervous system, give rise to consciousness? If plants are not sentient, then we are witness to a self-maintaining entity capable of complex cognitive behaviour without the presence of consciousness. ^{https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10539-024-09953-1}

This topic fascinates me. I’m not trying to be confrontational or argumentative, sorry if it comes off that way.

That’s totally fair, and I agree with you. I probably shouldn’t have used the phrase “high form of humor”. I more meant “worthwhile form of humor”. Even that doesn’t really encapsulate what I mean.

I don’t know. It can be hard to separate brainrot from intelligent comedy, and I laugh at both, myself. I’m not the comedy police or anything, I just don’t want to end up here:

That’s me! Cringe and proud.

You’re not being a jerk, you’re being pedantic.

Ignorant is absolutely the better word, and I should have used it.

I think, however, that people are far more capable of gaining intelligence than we give them credit for. I don’t believe that IQ is assigned at birth, and it’s been shown that the entire idea of IQ testing is extremely flawed.

There are people born with learning disabilities, of course, but that’s a whole other conversation.

Shitposting is just pretending to be stupid/racist/shitty for laughs/attention, right? Pretty low form of humor, if you ask me (no one did), but I’m also guessing a lot of shitposters aren’t just pretending.

I like a laugh as much as the next person, but we can’t sit around going “Why are people in this country so fucking stupid/racist/shitty?” while simultaneously elevating “acting” stupid to some high form of humor. You see how that’s counterproductive, right?

“Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.” - Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

“Any community that gets its laughs by pretending to be idiots will eventually be flooded by actual idiots who mistakenly believe that they’re in good company.” - Jason Garrett-Glaser

As much as I love these quotes, I think it’s important to qualify them:

Everyone is born stupid, but people can be educated. If we want an educated populace, we must put in the work to create functional systems of education, and celebrate intelligence as a society. It’ll be hard work, and there are plenty of people out there who would prefer to see the masses remain stupid.

“The way Americans regard sports heroes versus intellectuals speaks volumes” An article by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” ― Isaac Asimov

I don’t entirely disagree with you, here. My concern is that, when engaging with the world in a nuanced (non-dualistic) way, there is rarely a solidly defined “yes or no”, “good or bad” answer.

Evidence can point to positive and negative points of nearly any given thing. Agreeing on the weight of each point is going to dramatically color a given person’s idea of whether something is a net positive or a net negative. This is why I asked you, earlier, about what sort of evidence you’d need to see to sway your opinion.

Boiling it all down to rational or irrational is a fool’s errand in the absence of objective truth.

I’m not going to waste my time on this unless you can answer my very direct question, above.

I’ve been convinced through a great deal of reading over the course of many years. For me to compile it all for someone who by all indications is not receptive to having their opinion changed would be a fool’s errand.

Where did I claim that DEI is rational or irrational? DEI is an evidence-based practice.

Ed: Be sure to look at who you’re engaging with. I have not “changed my argument” as I have only just begun discussing this here.

Never assume rationality in an irrational world. We don’t live in econ 101 class where the assumption of rational actors is used to simplify equations for freshmen.

Putting Rational Actors in Their Place: Economics and Phenomenology

Law and Behavioral Science: Removing the Rationality Assumption from Law and Economics

What sort of evidence would it take to convince you that DEI programs have been a net positive for US businesses?