trafguy

I'll have you know it's perfectly unnatural when I invert my corporeal form to assimilate my terrified victims into the eldritch void where my soul used to be.

But in all seriousness, agreed. It's not possible for something that's part of nature to be unnatural. All behaviors are natural. Some behaviors pose a threat to the individual or society at large, and that's the only case where any action should be considered, but only as a harm reduction strategy rather than punitive. An individual's sexuality, gender identity, etc., definitely don't qualify as dangerous.

Fair enough, regulating the specific ways that people speak is challenging and prone to either overreach or being ineffectual. The only way I can think of to attempt it would require a law that is algorithmic. Speech that matches a specific pattern, and whose reach is sufficient to be a threat to our democratic process, would be analyzed in court with a team of linguists and psychologists doing their best to explain the problematic bits to a judge and jury.

I don't think the general public (or probably congress, for that matter) would accept such a high profile a law that was algorithmic and only understandable to a small subset of the population though, so this isn't really feasible. And new charlatans would find a way to work around it anyway.

Yeah, that would be crucial too. Antibioitics and the risks of antibiotic resistance need to be included. But to create and purify effective antibiotics, you also need to start with the scientific method, then branch into chemistry, biology, etc. Glassware and procedures to minimize contamination would be important to effectively extract helpful ingredients from potentially harmful molds/other sources.

Depending on the starting scenario, it might be possible to skip much of that at first if we had leftover supplies from a prior civilization. If this site is to be believed, it sounds like making penicillin at home is quite a process, but doable if you're able to get the right supplies. I don't see any efficient pathway from here to there if we had to start from zero though.

I read it as "what do you have enough knowledge of that you could aid in the birth/advancement of a new civilization?" Doesn't matter if you have it fully figured out, just what knowledge can you provide that would be highly valued if all knowledge were otherwise lost.

• Crafting bows to hunt. Wood selection, shaping, tillering, natural bowstring materials.
• Some edible wild plants
• Some basic farming knowledge
• Some construction/shelter repair techniques
• Algebra and concepts of calculus, and why they're useful
• How to preserve foods
• Basic concepts of electricity's importance and how to make it, but someone would need to explain how to go from raw material to a functional wire, find some rare earth magnets, and figure out how to make LEDs or something else worth using the electricity for.
• The scientific method
• Concepts of how to engineer/design a solution to a problem
• Troubleshooting techniques
• Some basic concepts of boat stability and construction
• Some concepts of modern psychology
• Concepts of critical thinking and rejection of groupthink
• Basic physics. Loose explanations of kinematic equations, gravity, friction, pendulums, air resistance, aerodynamics, basic concepts of rocketry and flight/parachutes/gliders
• Evaporative cooling? I could describe the concepts of modern air conditioning, but that doesn't seem useful yet.
• I could probably work out how a windmill works, how to make a wagon, how to purify water, how to make water-tight storage.
• Germ Theory
• The Paradox of Tolerance
• How pasteurization works
• Fermentation, concepts of distillation
• Basic oral hygiene? Habits of at least rinsing sugar out of your mouth afterwards, if brushes aren't available.
• Use of alcohol and heat as antiseptics. Suggestion to use honey in a pinch
• Basic concepts of how magnifying lenses work and why they're important

If we must tolerate healthcare being tied to work, the least we could do is require employers to pay part of healthcare for all workers based on the fraction of full time they work. 10hrs/30? You get 33% of a full time worker's healthcare benefit. Either as cash or with you covering part of the cost. Work multiple jobs that total 30 hrs? Pick your favorite employer plan and your other employers pay towards it.

But yeah, universal is long overdue, and this would be one of the worst tolerable ways to impelment improvement

It sounds like since we can clearly articulate the types of strategies used to rile up the masses and bypass critical thinking, it should be possible to create a law that would make this type of rhetoric illegal. While I'm generally opposed to limitations on speech, I would make an exception for limiting the tactics that allow the rise of fascism, particularly since it doesn't limit sharing of ideas, and simply limits the same type of behavior as shouting "fire" in a crowded theater.

Next time the opportunity arises (next time we have a major event that snaps the zealots back to their senses), we should be pushing our representatives to implement an amendment that bans this behavior. It's a necessary restraint on freedom of expression to protect the democratic process. This should specifically be an amendment because:

• Implementing as a regular law would likely be blocked by the supreme court as an infringement on freedom of speech.
• It's too important to allow future legislators to easily overturn.

I agree with you in some ways, but I think there's a communication barrier here. In short, yes, we need to be united in our approach and we need to focus our efforts in the areas that matter most, but individual action is not a united front; it's the opposite.

We've solved other problems through collective action. The climate accords resulted in the Montreal Protocol, which resulted in bans on freely releasing ozone-depleting chemicals like CFCs. This ban resulted in a resounding success--the hole in the ozone over Antarctica, which had been growing rapidly and threatened to leave us with much less protection from solar radiation, has now basically recovered to pre-industrial levels.

We need government action, and we as a people need to hold our governments accountable to these demands. That means demanding that corporations must implement effective strategies to reduce emissions and resource usage in general. It also means individuals must be pressured towards these changes, but that can only work if it's economically feasible for the average person. I'm in my mid-20s working full time and I can't even afford housing for myself, nor could I find a modest, truly eco-friendly home if I wanted to. How am I supposed to dedicate the energy to find more eco-friendly options when they're sparse, poorly supported or actively resisted by the structure of society, and most of my energy is already taken up just fighting to survive at all?

Yeah, that's the spirit! Let's all just blame ourselves for being born into a system which actively prevents you from choosing not to be a part of it! ^/s

But seriously though, individual action can be a little helpful and it's worth doing the parts that aren't an excessive cognitive load, but it's much, much more effective to have government regulate environmental action. Choosing to compost your vegetable scraps is helpful, but it pales in comparison to the industrial yard 30 miles over burning guzzoline by the kiloliter like they're in some sort of Mad Maxian hellscape.