Why shouldn't I eat a baby?

While that's a nice sentiment I'm fairly certain the univers isn't reborn like a pheonix as you say as there is no proof that will happen. Allow me to point you to this video.A universe from nothingYou also seem to assume that this is the only possible universe and that life is intended. What evidence do you have of that?
_________________________________________________

As for BigLundi's question: irrelevant as in, does all human action end up not mattering outside of a subjective viewpoint. I'm not sure that it does If the end of the end of the universe is exactly the same regardless of what we do.

"Okay so my next question is: Does the inevitable end to the universe mean that all human action is irrelevant, except for one that might perhaps stop the end of the universe?"

Each human action has its respective relevance in our world. Speaking in context of our current time, no human action can have a significant impact on the universe. But who knows if sometime in the distant future, by the acts of man, the universe's life span is either extended or shortened? If man is able to change the set time of the universe's demise, then that shows, to an extent, that man's actions do have a relevance on the universe. We can't say for sure now, but neither can we deny the possibility.

Irrelevant outside of subjective experience...wel, I think you're looking at to far a scope. A friend once told me, "You're looking at too large a picture, put it into focus."

Essentially, what you're saying is, "If we're all just going to die anyway, what's the point?"

And then I simply have to ask you, what if the people who made the polio vaccine said, "If we're all gonna die anyway...what's the point?"

The fact is we affect other people, people affect other people. We can make future generation's lives easier, we can make ONE generation's live a bit happier...and to be honest, while it might not be satisfying to you for some reason, I'm perfectly satisfied with at least having people remmeber me for good reasons for a few years after my death.

More or less, but not because of that. All human life, and therefore their actions can be seen, - as you said from the start, - as meaningless and without inherent meaning.

I would like to claim that this exists on two planes, in the greater picture, yes, all human action is completely irrelevant and meaningless, since nothing we can do will ever change the fact that we will all eventually perish. When we talk about the universe we humans are so insignificant that it is hard to grasp. We are but a tiny parasite on a tiny host in a teeny, tiny part of the whole, nothing we can do will ever have any major change on things. We will live as parasites on this Earth until we either destroy it and perish/go on to find a new host, or find a way that will not make the planet inhabitable so we can keep living here.

If we take a look at these things, for us humans they are huge; finding a new planet to live on, saving the Earth from our self-induced doom. Huge things, yet completely insignificant to the universe we are a part of.

However, like so many other things, what is and what is not relevant is merely subjective terms. Now I tend to disregard most discussions about subjective things as utterly pointless, because as long as there are two sentient beings in this universe there will be two opinions about it. This brings me to my next point.

Even if all our actions in the long run will be completely meaningless, that does not change the fact that what we do today will have an impact on the life of people living now as well, and as long as we have impact on the present, our actions will carry some kind of temporary relevance.
I wouldn't say that this temporary relevance is 'fake' per se, but I hope you will understand what I mean here.

Relevance, importance and meaning, - none of these really exists beyond a personal level, no subjective thing really does, so as longs as we don't act these opinions out, they are completely irrelevant to everyone. I can sit at home and have the answer to world hunger, if I don't voice this then it's completely meaningless, right? But if I voice it to someone who listens, will it gain meaning?
I would like to say that for a while, it does, but in the end it doesn't matter, because even if I made sure no one went hungry, they'd eventually die anyway. And this goes all the way up to the top. It doesn't matter if we managed to invent proper space travel, it doesn't matter if we developed into superhumans that live for hundreds of thousands of years, eventually we'll perish anyway.

I'm sorry if you find that this were completely incoherent.

TL;DR: To try and summarize this fever-induced clusterfuck of a rant I'd say this: Yes and no, on a personal level, everything we do carry meaning, but in the larger picture, nothing ever matters.

Nice video, very enlightening. However, a theory is only good until the next one comes along to replace it. The speaker himself made a mention that the laws of the universe will change over time. If the universe came from nothing, then I don't see why it wouldn't happen again in the distant future. Like my belief, there is no proof that another big bang won't happen. After all, mass and energy can't be created or destroyed. It just gets converted from one form and into another.

Also, I never made any claims that this is the only universe. I believe there are many universes out there with different laws. I feel that life is meaningful because nature favors diversity. Since everything is nature, we are given a purpose by default.

So the answer I'm hearing is that for the long-term, life is meaningless, but in the short term our actions affect other people so we might as well care. Thanks again. My answer to the question has been something like this as well. I just wanted to see if other people would independently come to the same conclusion. I don't think I really have any more direct questions at the moment. I think talking about this stuff is helpful to understanding our place in the indifferent universe so does anyone else have something to discuss.

Labeling the 'long term' is a bit of an overstatement.

I have a personal problem with the idea that even hundreds of years of human advancement can be referred to as "short term". It's akin to saying that me stealing a pencil from my friend, and robbing a bank, is still both just stealing.

Short term for me, maximum, since we're talking of all of humanity, amounts to the end of my life. That's short term. If I do something that positively affects people for even just a couple decades after my death, then I did something good for the long term.

IF you must label the end of time some sort of long term goal, then label it what it is "The end game result".

To be honest they aren't very tasty.

Its simply against the natural order to eat your own species.

Bad for your health, last I heard. You wouldn't eat something that'll end up killing you upon consumption, would you? Well, unless you're suicidal, that is...

Like i said before, it might be better young as it hasn't got all the chemicals and crap that an adult has, but i'm still not entirely sure it would be all that tastey. my reasoning is based on the smell of different rotten meats. i found a dead person once(by the smell), and i've smelled many different dead animals. each type had it's own unique notes within the overall stench, but cats, possums, and humans all have an extra foul and similar tinge. this was of course well beyond the point where the meat would still be safe to eat, but i can't help but think it must effect the taste.

Not entirely, some species of animal are indeed cannibals. Hedgehog mothers eat their own children if they reject them, whilst others do it for survival. We're the most complex animal on earth in terms of behaviour, so it isn't really against our natural order because anything that can be done, probably has been done by a human.

Not to mention it's a complete nonsequitor to say that because something isn't natural, it is then immoral. I believe it's called the Naturalist's Fallacy.

You shouldnt eat babies if you honestly feel bad about doing it. There is really no clear logical explanation other than your feelings. After all, humans and animals are biological creatures and eating each other would provide energy. It really depends on how you've been raised and what you believe in as well as how your feeling. That's why the majority of people wouldnt eat the baby cause we've been taught by society and raised by our parents that cannibalism is wrong, but some societies accept cannibalism. So the clearest answer would be, if u dont want to go to jail, then dont eat the baby cause thats the rules of our society but other than that, it really depends on your feelings and moral upbringing

Simple answer.
If you have the heart to kill a baby, eat it.
This way, you will always carry the memory of a dead baby in your memory. Both by sight and taste.
In fact, smell it! Listen it it cry and scream as you kill it.
Will you enjoy eating it?

With that being said, I probably will taste like chicken. Just a bit fatty, 'cause babies are chubby.

There is honestly nothing physically wrong with eating your own species.
Probably derived from the "Thou shall't not kill". Unless you like eating old dead people.
Also, other people have a psychological dislike for the prospect of eating their own kind.

TL;DR.
If you kill it, eat it.
Nothing physically wrong with eating you kind. Psyco-wise. Maybe.

Actually, eating things of your own species is bad for you. All the toxins that you can't screen out of your body are likely in theirs too. So while it may seem like a not-so-terrible idea initially it'll come back to bite you.

babies aren't even human (yes, they have no sense of right or wrong any ethics or believes- they have nothing that makes them human). you can eat them if you want to and nothing is going to happen. also reading your first post with your avatar looking at me through this intense color haze....it gave your question flavor.



Your post did not meet the basic intelligence requirement for this forum.

Seeing as how you definitely wrote enough, if you added some capitalization it might have let you post no problem.

Before you ask the question of "Why shouldn't I eat a baby?", I think it's more helpful to us if you ask the question of "Why shouldn't I eat my own brain?".

Seriously though, there are some things you just can't explain with logic and then you stop caring. No one can make logic to convince anyone why anything is important. Then there's nothing to stop you from doing anything you want but other people who actually give a damn and have the common sense to not use logic on existential questions.

It's as meaningless as: Why...

• 
  [*]emotion?
  [*]life?
  [*]existance?
  [*]'why'?
  

Would familial relation make a difference? would it be preferable to eat someone elses baby rather than your own or a closely related one?





you only have to capitalise the first letter of the post.