Samuel7899

Samuel7899 t1_ja17muk wrote

If it were discovered with the hollow underneath, balancing on two points before being cut... It wouldn't necessarily have its mass distributed in such a way that it even could be cut to balance as two separate rocks. That's definitely unlikely, but not impossible. Edges of the sandstone could've been cut down to help this though.

19

Samuel7899 t1_j6p4bkg wrote

There are a few different considerations to keep in mind.

One, is that the temperature setting is only measured at the thermostat. This temperature tapers off between the thermostat and the exterior. In well-insulated homes, the temperature only drops a little between the thermostat and exterior wall, with a big drop-off through the wall insulation.

In a poorly insulated home, this drop-off is more noticeable between the thermostat and the exterior wall. So keep in mind where any pipes may be. If you have any that are close to a poorly insulated exterior wall, they can be a few degrees cooler at that location, even though the thermostat stays the same.

5

Samuel7899 t1_j6nivuv wrote

Life is a pattern of persisting. Persisting is directly improved by having a more accurate model of one's surroundings. An accurate model of the environment is developed by developing and improving patterns.

It's the reason we're alive today, and why we've developed intelligence.

5

Samuel7899 t1_iv7c7dl wrote

> In general, many people agree on what "is" about the world

> in general, people do not agree on what they call an "ought"

While I agree on the popularity of these terms, I'm not particularly fond of relying on popularity as an argument for or against something of this nature.

"the fulfillment of desires" sounds very much like an "ought" to me, not an "is".

You talk about the physical reality of "is" being something tangible that we can perceive through our senses... Yet you're also labeling Sally's desires as an "is", which seems to undermine your initial point about "is".

You're describing Sally's desires as an if/than statement, and yet you don't think that's a potential "ought"?

I'm not arguing for or against either... While I tend to agree that "ought" cannot really come from "is"... I wonder why everyone assumes that the starting point is "is" and not "ought". Because I think "is" can come from "ought". And I also don't think it's terribly challenging to imagine a world originating from "ought" not "is".

1

Samuel7899 t1_iu4pf6c wrote

I'd argue that humans have at least a handful of "central biological drives". Communication is probably just as important as reproduction. Biological reproduction doesn't differentiate us from most animals. So if your idea of "our" is "all animals", then you may be right. But if you mean "humans", you're probably wrong.

Not to say that we can necessarily survive significantly long if we all stopped reproducing... But that we wouldn't survive much longer (as humans) if we all stopped communicating. Probably less, given the state of things today.

2

Samuel7899 t1_iu4opf8 wrote

Neither evolution, nor life, rely exclusively on genes and traditional vertical gene transfer.

What is Einstein's genetic contribution to civilization? Or Shakespeare's? Or Netwon's?

Life, especially complex life, is a complex pattern of vertical gene transfer, as well as both vertical and horizontal meme transfer.

Just because we/life as a whole couldn't persist that long without reproduction doesn't mean that there aren't still many hundreds of absolutely necessary processes that also absolutely have to happen for life to carry on for any significant amount of time.

4