What is the most disgusting thing in existence?

When asked, “What is the most disgusting thing you can think of?” you might think of a nasty green goop that oozes from a beaver carcass. The answer to this question is far more obvious than a green slime. The answer is right under our noses (literally) – shit! Its dynamic array of colors, smells, and textures clearly qualify shit to be the most disgusting thing ever.

Shit is too ubiquitous in our lives and therefore is understated to how disgusting it really is. We often forget that people are carrying hefty loads of shit at all times. Imagine how our perceptions of people will change if this subtle fact was made explicit. In the video game, The Sims, every character has a diamond thing hovering over its head. Imagine that in real life everyone had their stool displayed right over their heads.

Similar to this Image:



Knowing there is a chuck of shit dwelling inside this top model will inevitably bring her hotness level a few notches down. How can you possibly think someone is attractive knowing there is a steaming pile of mush lodged inside her? It’s like looking at a fresh glazed doughnut, but instead of being filled with cool creamy custard it’s stuffed with warm chunky shit!

Next time you see a hot girl shakin her ass in the club, just remember what else she is shakin.

Why My Twin Friends' Laughter is so Loud and high pitched

The twins wanted to remain anonymous so I will refer to them as Lior and Lioz (I just took my name and substituted the ‘r’ to a ‘z’ – this manipulation should give you no clue to what their real names are).

Lior and Lioz have an unusually loud and high-pitched laughter. I have observed this phenomenon for quite some time, and aside from being mildly annoyed, I have also been dumbfounded by the cause of such laughter. Finally, I have found the answer to this puzzle.

Before I share my answer, I must first point out another phenomenon in laughter. Does your laughter ever start to sound like your friends’ laughter? This happens a lot to people because laughter evolved as a social behavior. To those who are skeptical, I will ask you this: when have you laughed the most, by yourself or with people? Why do people laugh when others are laughing for no reason?

Because we laugh when people are around, we are likely to subconsciously mimic their laughter. I don’t know if there is an explanation to this, but it makes sense. One possible explanation is that it establishes conformity between the people. If I make a joke and laugh hysterically and you just chuckle, then that makes an awkward social situation. If you hang out with friends long enough, through different reinforcements your laughs my start sounding alike.

Now back to Lior and Lioz. These twins are constantly with each other and this could explain why their laughter is the same, however, it still doesn’t explain why its loud and high pitched. Because these twins are with each other so much, their mimicking alternates. For example: Lior doesn’t always mimic Lioz, sometimes Lioz mimics Lior, it alternates.

I believe that Lior and Lioz have normal laughter! It is just because the alternate mimicking happens so fast that the only laughter we hear is a high-pitched noise. This is similar to a feedback loop with a microphone and an amplifier. If you hold the microphone too close to the amplifier, you will hear a high-pitched noise as loud as the amplifiers can go. Similarly to this feedback loop, Lior and Lioz have learned to mimic each other’s laughter at a slightly higher pitch. In an instant, their laughter crescendos into loud high-pitched noise that is only limited by the noise their bodies allow them to project.

You might be wondering why they need this kind of social support from each other. You must know that they have shock humor, similar to that of Borat. It is easy for them to get in awkward social situations if nobody laughs at their jokes. Lior might say a joke and Lioz will support him back. Not to make Lioz feel like a loner, Lior will laugh with him. Lioz will continue to laugh to stay in the loop.

Side Note* When they are separated they don’t have the same high pitched laughter, like when a microphone is far away from it’s amplifier there is not feedback loop.

Is it Okay to Kill Animals?

Does a cow bleed if I prick its skin? Does a bear roar in agony if I shoot its kneecaps? Does a giraffe make weird noises when I tie its neck in a knot? Surely the answer to these questions is yes, but the answer comes at a social cost. If animals feel pain, wouldn’t it be unethical to hunt or kill them? Without being able to kill these “pain feelers”, we may never get to eat a juicy steak again! I, however, challenge this moral dilemma and believe that it’s morally acceptable to tie a giraffe’s neck into a knot (only if that giraffe pisses you off).

I propose that animals, although they feel pain, do not experience pain the same way that an adult human would. Lets first examine what kind of “mental gear” is necessary to experience pain. Humans are equipped with a complex brain in which a consciousness (or what appears to be one) emerges. This is our prerequisite “mental gear” necessary for us to experience pain differently. Imagine that I break your big toe using a sledgehammer. Initially, there will be a surge pain that propagates throughout your body. The pain does not stop there – emotional suffering may follow. This suffering could last for months or even years. You may even interpret the pain as something positive. Lets say it was part of your initiation for a lucrative fraternity you always wanted to be a part of. Then the pain could mean a bonding experience. The point is, because of our “mental gear” or highly developed consciousness, our experience of pain is fascinatingly unique.

Other creatures do not have the mental gear to experience this unique experience of pain. A cow, for example, can never interpret pain the same way as humans do. They do not even experience time the same way humans do and cannot mentally recall what happened. This recollection of a past event is not equivalent to a response of classical conditioning. If I punch a cow in the utter every time it goes in the barn, then the cow will not go to the barn anymore. This “decision” to not enter the barn, is not a conscious one, it is a mechanical one – just as a rock is attracted to the ground when dropped. The cow can never interpret the pain of a punch as anything else; the mental gear is simply not sufficient enough to grant it that ability.

Why is inflicting pain on another human so morally wrong? Because our mental gear allows us to experience pain in such a way I described above. What if our experience of pain was much simpler? What if we couldn’t remember the pain right after it happened? We couldn’t think about how the person inflicting the pain betrayed our trust? Or if pain could not affect us or our family’s emotions? Then will inflicting pain still be morally wrong? Animals have this sort of simple mental gear, so does that make it just to inflict pain on animals?

You may have caught my fallacy – I assumed that animals have simpler mental gear. You may be saying, “We can never truly know what it feels like to be an animal, and thus cannot know if they feel pain the same way we do.” I would have to contest to this proclamation. I once had simpler mental gear, when I was 8 days old. My mental gear was greater than a goldfish, but definitely smaller than a human adult. The range of complexity of my mental gear could be more or less equivalent to that of a cow.

When I was just 8 days old, I underwent a circumcision and with no anesthetics. I experienced what is seemingly a great amount pain. To this day, I have absolutely no memory of what happened, and couldn’t care less to what sort of mutilation I experienced. Could it be that cows, of equivalent mental gear, experience pain the same way I did when I was 8 days old? Inflicting pain on a cow is as emotionally harmless to the cow as my circumcision when I was 8 days old.

Side note: This does not mean that inflicting pain on an 8-day-old child is justified, because that child has the potential to grow more complex mental gear. Also, it is not necessarily morally correct to kill an animal because of possible extinction or harmful tampering of the ecosystem.

My conclusion: don’t feel bad for eating a hamburger, because the cow doesn’t.