That plating in particular looks like a stainless steel prison toilet

I think I’m subconsciously doing this when I watch food shows while eating

Dang, do they have trouble imagining things in general?

Yes of course, the Russian guy that made 7-zip duh

Could just be me but I get a more immediate and more intense reaction when I think of sour foods

Can you elaborate on the Australia communism thing

Could be my personality but I’m perfectly happy with living a royal life without the pressure of being in charge

I usually put on a layer about as thick as one of the slices of bread. My tip is to make a melt. Put a very thin layer of mayo on each slice, throw them mayo side down in a pan on medium-low, tuna salad on one slice, cheese on the other get it golden brown then slap those 2 bad boys together.

I don’t think they’re called infinity stones due to the number of them. They provide infinite power when combined.

Sounds like a joke Theo would say

Some people are fully happy sitting at home and reading while it would be torture to others. There are a lot of variables like socioeconomic, mental health, even IQ. I think Theo is an incredibly intelligent person who has perfected a character but he does have depression which makes it hard for him to enjoy things.

Theo Von?

I think the term is hedonic adaptation or treadmill. Some people don’t feel satisfied with being content so they constantly seek more. Like a crack addict.

Just because someone publishes a book about their opinion does not make it a fact. The fact is, both Donald and George were inaccurate. Daniel Everett was an evangelical missionary that tried to convert the Pirahã tribe in the '70s/'80s. He ended up becoming an atheist after seeing how everything he was taught about the world in church was a lie, that there are people who live without religion and are content. Murdock studied ~1200 societies for “Ethnographic Atlas” but he has never been documented to have met the Pirahã tribe. All that means is he gave insight based on the information available to him. For Human Universals, try googling “Human Universals outdated” you’ll find that it’s not a trusted source at this point and considered outdated even at release.

Your archeological discovery part, I mentioned trying to find evidence of which predated which would be difficult. If people were around to leave evidence of their existence, that means they were there at that time, it gives no proof as to how long they were around prior to leaving evidence.

Your statement about lack of counter arguments is as wrong as Donald and George confidently stating religion is ubiquitous to all societies. It is provably incorrect based on current knowledge.

Certainly not your point. Religion must not be fundamental to society if there are societies with no religion. You claim religion came before society and societies are built on religion, that can’t be true if there are societies without it.

If I were to say fire requires 4 things: oxygen, fuel, heat, and marshmallows but there are instances where marshmallows are not present yet there is a fire, then marshmallows must not be fundamental to a fire. Any loss of the other 3 would not result in a fire so those 3 are the foundation. If there are societies without religion, why are you so adamant that societies require religion? Why must a fire have marshmallows if there are fires with no marshmallows?

It would probably be difficult to find evidence of which predates which but if you say religion is the foundation for society and morals then every society must have a religion right? As far as researchers understand, the Pirahã tribe in the Amazon have no religion. If there is a present day society with no religion then there likely were in the past as well. That makes it difficult for me to believe religion is the foundation of society if there are societies with no religion.

We’re going to have to agree to disagree about this. I simply don’t believe that religion came before society and morals unless I see some evidence.

Well now I’m a little more confused. Are you saying those things are all morally right through religion?

I’m sorry if you thought I meant it was about believing in religion, that’s not what I meant. I’m asking if you believe morals and society could exist without religion or if religion came before morals and society.

I can understand your logic up until the point you said the reason for organized religion was lightning strike/fire. I’m not understanding why that is evidence for religion as opposed to evidence for how people have misunderstood things in the past?

So if someone in the past makes a mistake in judgement but we should continue believing in the incorrect assumption because that’s what we did when we were dumb cavemen?

Why is lightning strike or fire a religious thing and not physics?