Thanks for the feedback, and I definitely see your point. I was about to bring up how I meant characteristics that one isn't born with, but then that wouldn't address religious bigotry. I do remember how I originally saw the phrase as "intolerant to hateful ideologies toward traits that people don't have ANY control over," which may work better, but still may be ambiguous when we'd get to the topic of how much growing up and being nurtured in an echo chamber could impact our nature.

While double negatives hurt my brain, I'm hoping someone can tell me if my different explanation that kind of ends up with a similar conclusion holds up in any way.

The way I've been thinking about it is that advocating for tolerance was never about advocating for tolerance in every context. To me, it's more of a shorthand to say "tolerance toward those who have immutable traits that they can't control." There would thus be no contradiction to be intolerant toward discriminatory ideologies (in this case, having a discriminatory ideology isn't an immutable trait).

Not gonna lie, but this actually made me smile.

Eh, they were just using a hypothetical example to demonstrate how we interpret data based on context in general. Nitpicking how the hypothetical example doesn't fit the validity of the population kind of misses their point since that wasn't what they were trying to explain.

"Come into my bedroom for a private exhibition!"

I remembered that once I learned about HOX genes in undergrad biology (genes that more or less determine where an appendage would be located), I wondered how feasible it would be to splice a narwhal's tooth genes onto a horse's forehead. If it would ever get that far, I could imagine there being a need for some trial and error to make sure the tooth/horn wouldn't get too big for the horse's neck to support the extra weight.

Looks like it could be a concept for another vigilante superhero based on another arthropod!

Edit: now that I think about it, the satirical Tick had a moth guy as a sidekick, so basically a cool version of that, haha

The top was the story of my life before I knew exactly what adhd was.

To this day, I remember what I'd do to purify sea water via a lengthy process using nothing but two jars and some leaves

Waiting for "rumtumtugger is a curious cat."

I don't know what it is, but I find the bridal aesthetic in Indian weddings to be among the most beautiful in general.

Bass riff of Roundabout by Yes starts playing.

Yeah, to those passing by, I recommend the video by veritasium that I think was titled something along the lines of " the man that accidentally killed the most people in history." And I just looked up the timeline and it turns out that you were correct on how he was still mentally functional enough after his stunt inhaling the gas (1924) in order to streamline and mass market freon / CFCs in 1928.

Ah, tetraethyllead. The anti-knocking agent used in gasoline that caused the whole world to get dumber. And hearing this explained while knowing how the inventor of leaded gasoline straight up inhaled the stuff for a full minute in front of the press in order to ease the public's concern of toxicity (his health didn't fare very well afterward).

Thanks a lot for this as I'm someone who's trying to learn as much about the grieving process and how much it may or may not apply to a person's ability to accept tough truths in general.

I don't know much at all about telescope use and stargazing, but I was wondering what may have been causing the rhythmic and slightly "blurring" effect during the time lapse. Would it be due to something like the slight changes to the thickness in our atmosphere?

And I'd like to think that my question is really a testament to how clear and well done this was that it made me curious about the cause of any slight artifact and noise.

Yeah, I tend to boil this down to the age old tug of war between our limbic system (fear, desire, conditioning, etc.) and prefrontal cortex (conscious thought).

Thanks a ton for the reply. If I'm getting what you're saying correctly (and this may be a fun review of immunology for me since I was no big fan of the subject back in the day), I'm first thinking of an analogy comparing the difference between a walled fortress with a few soldiers versus one that would only have a small fence but a ton more soldiers, weapons, and tracking devices. For those passing by, the walled fortress would be like the blood vessel's "normal state" while the latter would be the "inflamed" state seen both in allergies and active infection.

While someone with allergies would have the latter state much more often with the weakened barrier (inflammation causes more porous blood vessels likely to function as a means to let more white blood vessels come in), I'm first guessing that this would be the main reason why it would precipitate the infectivity of viruses that happen to come by (as said in your first point).

In other words, all viruses that get into the upper nose may have an easier time getting through the small fence. And while the ones that cause allergic rhinitis may have an easier time evading the soldier's detection systems (perhaps more nimble / more stealthy), the question all 3 of us are talking about is whether or not SARS-CoV-2 may have a more difficult time avoiding getting tagged by the soldier's detection systems despite more easily getting in. (compared to a normal person who starts out with the walled fortress, maybe the virus may have a tougher time coming in, but if they ever do, the soldiers would have to go through "normal protocol" of calling for back up, weapons, and tagging systems, which all could take up extra time)

And to translate your hypothesis, perhaps much more SARS-CoV-2 viruses get in with a weak fence, but they likely won't do much after that since perhaps getting tagged more easily would make the rest the soldiers in the other fortresses much more aware of their presence (even if they get to other parts of the body, they have a shining beacon on them). The confounder is how allergies may just so happen to supplement the weak fenced compound with a big wall of slime.

Ooh, I actually really like this question. I'm no expert in immunology, but I'd suspect that because a lot of the immune system cells are involved with allergies (to our detriment), it's making me wonder here if all of those different white blood cells, complement systems, and antibodies that may or may not be involved with allergic rhinitis may somehow provide enhanced immunity(?). My educated guess is that the innate immune system may likely be involved, but I can't remember how that's affected by something like allergic rhinitis. Looking forward to someone passing by to either confirm, clarify, or refute this :)

I think this is particularly applying to people who are stuck in life. People who tend to be stuck here may be fearing the first step to break out into the unknown and out of their comfort zone (i.e. getting over social anxiety in order to meet new people and network, moving to a new area to be open to more job offers, etc.). Some people's comfort zone can be more detrimental than others, and it could parallel the mindset of having a security blanket all the way to having an addictive behavior that's been keeping them stuck. Letting go of that security blanket or those coping mechanisms can be very difficult and anxiety inducing for a lot of people.

No joke, this attitude is something that MLMs and cults would encourage people to do in order for the victims to believe they can actually catch whatever carrot on a stick that they've been promised.

Whoa, personal space there buddy

And Randall could be that whiplash enemy. Those guys are jerks