this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2023

747 points (97.9% liked)

Comic Strips

12750 readers

4054 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
The comic must be a complete story.
If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
You may post comics from others or your own.
If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
Politeness.
Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.

Web of links

!linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
!memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

lawrence@lemmy.world

747

More Parmesan? - Existential Comics (programming.dev)

submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by sirdorius@programming.dev to c/comicstrips@lemmy.world

43 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Original: https://existentialcomics.com/comic/526

top 43 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Haagel@lemmings.world 64 points 11 months ago (3 children)

If the rationalist deduces what is logical based on their empirical experience then their reasoning is flawed. We have to accept the axiomatic truth that our senses are limited and cannot account for an absolute truth.

To separate valid perceptions from invalid ones, a person first must assume that the world can be known through the senses. They must also assume that the world is objectively real. These assumptions do not get along well with one other. To say the world is objectively real is to say it is independent of and indifferent to sense perception. Then what in the world can we know? We can know only the effects of the parmesan cheese upon our senses, not the cheese itself.

[–] mimic_kry@sh.itjust.works 27 points 11 months ago (5 children)

Rofl

You jest, but some actually do often confuse objective perception with objective reality.

Fact is though, the pursuit of a perfect vessel with which to observe reality is silly and impractical, so we make due with common shared characteristics.

In other words, the cheese itself is not cheese, we only perceive it as cheese

[–] TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Are even our eyes real?

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

How do they taste?

[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Ceci n'est pas fromage.

[–] jandar_fett@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

There is no cheese.

[–] ripcord@kbin.social 6 points 11 months ago

Only Zuul

[–] mimic_kry@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

Lmao

The only truth is that there is no truth

I aspire to your level of philosophical ascension

[–] ripcord@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago

But mightn't we perceive it as cheese because it is cheese?

Also maybe not, but I don't think we can say it is not cheese.

[–] Haagel@lemmings.world 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

How would you define objective perception? If empiricism is equally problematic for all humans, then what could possibly qualify as objectivity in perception?

[–] maccentric@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

There is no spoon

[–] mimic_kry@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

Twas a joke

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago

We experience a world through the senses. We have no other way to experience any world that may or may not exist. The world experienced through the senses is apparently consistent, and if we do not deal with it, we have bad sensory experiences, or cease to be experienceable to each other entirely. So, since this is the only world we can interact with, and how we do so matters to our happiness, all we can do is take this world on its own terms and deal with it.

[–] bunkyprewster@startrek.website 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The objectively real world may be separate from and indifferent to sense perception, but sense perception isn't indifferent to the objective world. Sense perceptions are caused by an interaction of our sense organs and the world. Surely from repeated patterns of sense perception we can draw some CC correct inferences about the external world.

[–] Haagel@lemmings.world 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

How can we be sure that those inferences are correct? Any appeal to empirical evidence would be circular reasoning.

[–] bunkyprewster@startrek.website 2 points 11 months ago

"correct" is a heavy word there. Would reproducible and predictable suffice?

[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And don't call me Shirley.

[–] Haagel@lemmings.world 1 points 11 months ago

Surely you can't be serious

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 29 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You're supposed to taste it before you have them do their little cheese ritual. All that intelligence, and like 7 wisdom.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 36 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No you're supposed to take all the cheese and make little cheese angels on the floor while they grate it around you

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

You and I may have different objectives at an Italian restaurant. Yours sounds more fun.

[–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I agree with the chef.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

I agree with the pasta, which questions if it's good enough and takes the notion of an implied revisit of another ingredient as a validation of its inadequacies.

[–] bunkyprewster@startrek.website 19 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I love parmesan and will take as much as I can before my spouse starts to scowl at me

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

That shit is like $50/lb so just keep grating and I'll take it in a to go box.

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

what would happen if you never told them to stop? would they eventually stop of their own accord or keep coming back with new blocks of cheese?

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Eventually the cheese would begin to form a singularity and the grater would exist on the boundary, slowing their own perception of time with each subsequent grate.

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

wormhole life hack

[–] x4740N@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Now I'm wondering if that's actually possible

If you had enough cheese would the collective mass create enough gravity to pull it all together and create a blackhole

[–] x4740N@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

I too love cheese and want to eat a shit ton of it but I count my calories because I don't want to end up fat

[–] ripcord@kbin.social 13 points 11 months ago

This is definitely the best thing I've seen today.

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I like it. It is a bit heavy handed with the philosophy. I would love to see more.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 15 points 11 months ago

Existential Comics is a philosophical comic.

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The gourmet has not proven that it is impossible to make a decision, only that it is impossible to make an optimal one. In order to do that, he would have to collect data, presumably by patronizing the restaurant multiple times and ordering the same dish each time with different quantities of cheese.

Had the waiter simply reminded the gourmet of this, he would have generated possibly substantial additional revenue for the restaurant, not to mention substantial savings on cheese. It is therefore my recommendation that

[–] EmergMemeHologram@startrek.website 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Oh fuck I've had this same thought when the waiter offers pepper or parmesan.

[–] Bahnd@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

The philosophy is plagued with circular logic (thus is the joke). Occam's Razor would state that the guy probably just likes cheese.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't say "when" until there is a mountain of cheese 2 feet high on my plate. And I sit there watching the plate in awkward silence the entire time.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Instead of making it awkward, perform the Austin Powers photo monologue.

"Yes. Yes! YES."

"NO! NO!"

"Yes"

[–] Blackout@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago

I used to go thru this every night at the olive garden. 12yr olds can be so mean.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I see that the chef is of the same I Always Want More school of parmesan as Ben Lapidus and Heidi Klum.

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

If all knowledge is empirical, you have your solution already. Just make an experiment. Use a heuristic to estimate an amount, test it and adjust as you go.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

He did! The heuristic was "what the chef recommends" and the next meal will adjust that estimate downward... assuming "as much cheese as possible" doesn't result in the collapse of the universe.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

All information is empirical, but all decisions are not. Life clearly requires approximation, and this is such a simple idea which a ton of really smart people fail to grasp.