If the thing in question is changed, and the only part of us that can directly affect is our opinion, then I would call that a social construction.

We define what existence is. We have all collectively agreed that being here in the perceptible world means that something exists. We could choose to include the imaginary in its definition and then would be able to say that dragons and wizards exist. We could also choose to say something has to be present in 4 dimensions to exist, in which case we’d not be able to say that anything exists.

A social construct is simply an idea that has been created and accepted by the people in a society which includes the dictionary itself. I’d also say that these definitions are often useful at allowing us to communicate and cooperate with one another, but that doesn’t mean we didn’t make up the idea.

Our naming and classification of things is all socially constructed. So yes, our categorization of edible things as food is a social construct, but our physical need to fuel our bodies with something digestible is not. But also, using it that way makes existence a social construct, so it depends on how rigid you want to be.

The world is literally burning.

The world is actually burning though, and there are fewer birds, and people are tired and stressed all the time, and money is tight, and this is all in the real world, no internet required to experience any of that. The internet may expose you to others struggles that don’t affect your real world, but it still affects theirs. The ability to commiserate is what helps a lot of people cope with their real world, and might even invite insight on how to end some of those struggles.

That’s just a safety tip

I’ve heard many people say the opposite of this.

(My own team is olive hater)

Children also don’t feel shame about being naked until they gain the knowledge of sexuality. Parents would probably notice a child covering themselves up after an encounter of that nature.

I’m also assuming the story would be altered in a number of ways to change the meaning to the biblical one.

For a dog example, a black lab (with dark skin) is more genetically similar to a yellow lab (with light skin) than a black pomeranian (with dark skin).

Username checks out

This one’s actually pronounced with a soft j

X gon give it to ya is still a great choice

What rockslayer said isn’t wrong but I want to add a little.

On the side of having no specific passions, you can absolutely choose to contribute with your labor on whatever needs the most help. We’ll still need janitors and bus drivers and construction workers and countless other tasks that have value to society that don’t have to include innovation. But if you do have an idea when you’re on the job you have the opportunity to suggest that without a boss ignoring you or someone stealing it to profit themselves. Because bosses and profit wouldn’t exist.

And if you do develop a random interest, it would be much easier to talk with experts in that field which might stir a passion that was previously stifled under capitalist cost of entry or its need to to turn it into a profitable endeavor. And you could easier step back from whatever job you were previously doing without fear of losing your livelihood, and it would even be easier to go back to said job if the passion didn’t stick.

That’s what we want, to make work a choice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-gdHrINyMU

Why not just a second white noise, or other white noise adjacent sound? Even if they’re both looped they’re not going to have the same loop length and that will be a changing rhythm that way.

No matter what you get you have to get hot sauce, and definitely not mild.

This has always been my go to. Cheap easy and tasty.

When going to a KFC combo, it’s also fun to get some fried chicken to add into the taco.

It also has built in ads

I don’t think you’re saying anything contrary but I wanted to make one point clear.

The democracy we live under is not unique to capitalism. In fact, our current system has less democracy than an anarchist system would. Also capitalism doesn’t have any requirement to be democratic. Whereas with anarchism, any dictatorship is directly against the core tenets of the system.

That being said, (I have not read enough theory to know for sure but) anarchism doesn’t necessarily preclude the idea of having managers or even CEO’s. It does preclude those positions having total power and control of an enterprise though. Dismantling the hierarchical structure of modern society doesn’t mean having someone be a coordinator of a larger group isn’t helpful. It just means that job isn’t given greater power or more significance than those being coordinated. Our current idea of a CEO is very dictatorial, but that’s not how it has to be.

I guess I wouldn’t consider hormones or nutrients drugs, but the nature of the question would rule out supplements I think.