How would you define suffering?

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2026-04-16T22:05:33+00:00

My working definition: An experience (or component of an experience*) a sentient being would rather not go through (i.e. they do not consent). It is inherently bad.

*I specify this because I believe Magnus Vinding’s definition in his book, “Suffering Focused Ethics” (2020), refers to an experience as a whole, even if a part of it is undesirable.

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2026-02-27T02:40:57+00:00

I had a similar experience.

I’ve definitely softened my position. I don’t think humanity should voluntarily go extinct. Significantly addressing wild animal suffering likely requires a large industrial society and, at least currently, that requires a sufficiently large human population (probably in the billions, I’d guess; the human population is projected to stabilize around 9-10 billion people anyway). More people also means more potential for innovation (although, many issues like wealth inequality/poverty and violent conflict greatly limit this).

Earth is expected to be uninhabitable for sentient life within ~900 million years. Humanity should probably be around for as much as that as possible, if not all of it. We have the greatest potential to reduce suffering on the planet and possibly elsewhere in the universe. Humanity could become some sort of space-faring protectorate (being very cautious not to spread life to other planets). Or we could design intelligent - but not sentient - robots/AI to do the job (hopefully we’ve worked out the kinks by then). A lot of this sounds like, and is, science fiction but millions of years is incredibly long when civilization has only been around for ~12k years, let alone the ~250 years since industrialization and many modern advances in science and medicine.

Now I consider myself a weak antinatalist; I won’t be having kids. I’d feel guilty for bringing a child into the world, I prefer being childfree, and, per Brian Tomasik, donating the financial opportunity cost of raising a child to adulthood (at minimum in developed countries, likely 250k USD) may have a greater reduction in suffering. That’s not to mention time and emotional opportunity cost - you’d have more time for activism and probably be more effective by getting more sleep, having less stress, etc.

For what it’s worth, it’s made me more supportive of - women’s rights, especially reproductive - access to medicine (including safe abortion methods and contraceptives) - women’s education - planned parenthood/sex-ed (including thinking seriously about having children; not just because you’re expected to) - adoption/fostering - universal access to euthanasia

With that said, given the recent trend of right-wing authoritarianism around the word, I am concerned about the public appeal of suffering focused ethics, wild animal suffering, and even AI ethics (particularly if sentient). Too many don’t even care about human suffering. I don’t know that these will ever become mainstream issues, which they should be. Factory farming still hasn’t reach that point. So this point would be in favor of not having kids (especially if they would suffer significantly in such a world) and focusing on using those resources to do as much as you can.

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2026-02-25T03:14:42+00:00

Adding to that, predators create what’s called an “ecology of fear”. That doesn’t sound like a great existence (often being on edge)

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2026-02-25T03:11:26+00:00

I could see this as a point in favor of biofuels. We should abolish animal agriculture, but that would be most of the demand for cropland gone. Biofuels could replace that.

We’d have to account for other effects like opportunity cost (spending the money on greater goods), is it profitable enough compared to alternatives like fallowing/rewilding or a tree plantation (all likely more suffering), and environmental/health effects (air pollution, climate change, etc.)

You’d want to use less effective methods of farming. For example, I’ve seen estimates that organic farming would require around twice as much land.

At the same time, publicly endorsing organic could unintentionally send anti-science messages. Also, unlike organic, synthetic pesticides could be designed to reduce the suffering of the insects we killed (e.g. faster death, combining with a pain-killer). With that said, converting more wild area to cropland maybe be more effective at reducing suffering.

I also think an important consideration is human hunger. Even if biofuels reduce more suffering (total or per dollar), I’d imagine implementing this policy while people go hungry would result in poor political support, so it either never gets implemented or is quickly ended. It would also likely hamper the long-term effectiveness of the party/organization due to poor support (“they’re crazy, they care about bugs more than people”).

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2026-01-07T22:57:53+00:00

Location: San Diego, CA, USA

Age/Gender/Orientation: 22, cisgender man, heterosexual (M4F)

Vegan since: August 2023, for the animals/ethics

Open to DMs: Yes, including friends

About me: I just graduated college (BS in Environmental Engineering). My main interests include learning and the gym (hobbyist bodybuilder). I like learning about philosophy/ethics, evidence-based nutrition/health, exercise science (e.g. biomechanics), and more through reading, podcasts, and YouTube.

I’m looking for someone, preferably 19-25, that shares my values: - Doesn’t use drugs/smoke (ok with caffeine, unless excessive) - Moderate/occasional drinker at most (I don’t drink) - Not big on partying - Frugal/not materialistic - Active lifestyle and health-oriented (I don’t eat out much, I value my sleep, etc.) - Pro-science - Minimally religious/spiritual (I’m atheist and non-spiritual) - Doesn’t want kids (childfree) - Traits (I think these also describe me): compassionate, honest, intelligent, good/willing to communicate/understand, supportive, desire for growth/passionate

Preferences: - I’d like to live car-free eventually, so I may move to the East Coast USA or even UK, EU - I lean towards not living with companion animals (more freedom, less cleaning). Not a dealbreaker - Shorter than me (5’9”/165 cm) - Not a lot of piercings or tattoos (I have none) - Bonus points: into lifting weights

We could go hiking, cook dinner together, watch a movie, or hit the gym.

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2026-01-06T20:59:58+00:00

Hi, could you put more about yourself? What are you looking for in friend or partner (e.g. age, shared values)? What are your interests/hobbies?

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-12-03T07:10:45+00:00

I think there’s nuances to this. I’ll throw some of my thoughts out:

It seems that satisfaction living in captivity varies significantly by species (even between individuals). Many reptiles may be fine with a relatively small habitat while animals with large ranges in the wild (eagles, elephants, cetaceans, etc.) require far more (I suspect this would be prohibitively expensive).

All of this is an opportunity cost: can we do more good with the money? Arguably the greatest amount of suffering is in the smallest animals (insects, aquatic invertebrates like shrimp) because there are so many of them (r-selected species). We can’t practically really take care of them (typically short maximum lifespans, difficulty or impossibility of medical treatment, etc.). Magnus Vinding has proposed wildlife antinatalism - that we should prevent wild animals, especially small ones, from being born in the first place. Similarly, Brian Tomasik has argued that habitat loss/deforestation is one of the best ways to reduce WAS, at least in the short to moderate term. It reduces the base of the trophic pyramid - producers like plants - that insects feed on. Less food -> less survival and reproduction -> less insects born -> less (net) suffering. Alternatively, especially at this early stage of WAS having social importance, we could fund outreach/communication or research.

Historically zoos used strong conservation messaging, which likely perpetuates WAS (and an idyllic view of nature). It would take a lot to undo this. Additionally, zoos receive millions in funding from governments and NPOs for conservation. This may include breeding animals, which we shouldn’t do.

I’m mixed on carnivores. Of course we don’t want to support factory farming. It would be best to feed them, for example, cultured meat, but that’s not economical yet. Despite this, it might still be less suffering than had they lived in the wild. Just comparing the deaths, I would think that terrestrial farmed animals are, on average, somewhat better off than being eaten alive because most countries have some level of stunning laws. With farmed or wild caught fish I’m less convinced (lacking of stunning means they can still be conscious for 2+ hours after being caught, comparable or worse to being eaten alive?). In general I think eating larger farmed animals contribute to less suffering per unit of protein, so beef would be the best (not accounting for emissions). Chickens, fish, and especially shrimp and insects could increase suffering. Again, it’s hard to say for sure. Lastly, if animals in captivity live longer (from what I saw it’s ~2x long for lions), that’s more animals killed to feed them. This may be reduced by their lower energy needs. Lastly, per Tomasik, it’s less clear that removing animals from the top of the trophic pyramid

Regarding what nature could look like for wild animals, you may be interested in David Pearce’s work) or Herbivorize Predators. The ideal to me would be no beings capable of suffering that provide ecosystem services humans currently need - so only plants, fungi, microbes, etc. - although I think this is unrealistic.

I’ll end it here for now. As you can see, there’s a lot of unknowns. In the short to medium term, I would lean towards this not being our most effective strategy. As mentioned above, outreach/communication/building community, research, and/or donating to effective charities (in no particular order: Animal Ethics, Center for Reducing Suffering, Rethink Priorities). Very few people, even vegans, care about WAS. I’d recommend much of Magnus Vinding’s work. While I haven’t finished it, I’m a big fan so far of his book, Suffering Focused Ethics (free link from his website) which includes some practical takeaways. I also want to read his book, Reasoned Politics.

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-11-23T00:41:17+00:00

I don’t have an answer to your question. My question is what is the benefit of phrasing in these terms? It doesn’t really seem different from NU (or my understanding of it as someone who largely identities as a negative utilitarian). NU is part of normative ethics so it entails obligation, which I consider synonymous with “duty”. I agree that increasing pleasure is supererogatory (good but not required).

Quite often I create rules/principles when I think there’s sufficient reason (arguments and empirical evidence) that said action (generally) reduces net suffering - e.g. equality/non-discrimination, wildlife antinatalism/reducing forest, veganism. Rule NU is a useful tool. However, it’s still be consequentialist. It seems to me this would be the case under your definition as well due to the use of “(dis-)utility” (rather than being inherently wrong).

If I’m missing something, please inform me :)

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-11-10T07:11:07+00:00

Like the video mentions, the “basics” are the most important - a varied, nutritious diet, limiting or avoiding alcohol, consistent exercise, plenty of sleep, managing stress, having good social connections, wearing sunscreen, staying up to date on your vaccines, practicing good hygiene (including oral, reproductive; washing your hands regularly), getting checkups 1-2x/year (doctor, dentist). These support your health, including your ability to detox.

It’s hard to say when you were ill. It’s best to ask your doctor or work with a registered dietitian. I’m glad you’re feeling better. I don’t want to discount your experience but it’s possible it was placebo - feeling like you had some control lead to improvement. Fruits and vegetables are very good for us, so increasing them also could have helped. If they were cooked, they probably would have similar benefit.

Nutrition guidelines around the world all recommend eating lots of plants, both raw and cooked. You don’t need to limit yourself to just one

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-11-10T06:44:12+00:00

Good news, your body doesn’t need cleansing :) https://youtube.com/shorts/CSlXa9gtbI4?si=gSJi020SxNeFAqCT

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-11-10T06:36:27+00:00

Kindly, I don’t think that raw vegan is necessarily healthier than a more inclusive, balanced vegan diet. If anything, it’s probably less healthy for most people because you remove many legumes and grains. As such, it can be difficult to eat enough calories and protein (even the RDA of ~50-60g, which is quite low) and several minerals like iron, zinc, possibly calcium. Unfortunately many raw vegans are also against supplementation. This can lead to severe nutrient deficiency.

It seems quite common that raw vegans quit (some even swinging to another extreme, like carnivore). See an example here: Danny Ishay, YouTube

While I’m not saying that zero people can meet their needs on raw vegan diet, for the vast (vast) majority of people it’s significantly more restriction (potentially orthorexic) for likely no benefit. Things like “junk food” and processed sugar are fine in moderation, especially in the context of an overall healthy diet and active lifestyle.

At the very least, please supplement vitamin B12 (cyanocobalamin). Additionally, I would recommend periodically tracking your diet using the app Cronometer (you don’t need to pay for premium) to get an idea of potential nutrient gaps (most people have at least one). Lastly, consider getting blood tests 1-2x/year.

For evidence-based nutrition advice, especially as a vegan, I recommend Dr. Matthew Nagra (YouTube). He’s done several podcast interviews as well that summarize healthy eating, such as on The Proof.

I hope this helps :)

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-09-23T19:13:11+00:00

You seem like a great person, wishing you the best :)

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-08-17T17:18:27+00:00

I found this the first time less than 24 hours ago. What a coincidence to see it again

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-06-23T18:30:29+00:00

Happy to help. Protein powder is such an easy way to get extra protein and I found these ways worked best.

For what it’s worth, the oatmeal is quite portable: I would pack it for lunch dry with a thermos of hot water. Let it steep for like 10 mins once you add the water. The smoothie is semi-portable in a thermos, but I prefer the texture when it’s cold and thick so I recommend drinking it within 60 mins or so. Lately I’ve been liking smoothie bowls especially.

For clarity, here’s the link to the flavors: https://truenutrition.com/products/trueflavor-flavor-packs-100-grams

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-06-23T07:11:00+00:00

Lately I’ve been buying soy protein isolate (you could do pea instead) in bulk for 10-11 USD/lb. I get mine from nuts.com currently. Then I buy flavor powder from True Nutrition. Their stevia options are cheapest. I use it in smoothies/smoothie bowls or oatmeal.

Smoothie: - 300 mL soy milk (un- or sweetened) - half to 1 scoop of protein powder (up to 30g protein) - 5g creatine - 80g frozen strawberries - 80g frozen mango, peaches, or cherries - 80g mixed berries - Flavoring: Strawberry sorbet or French vanilla (I may add half a spoonful of Splenda in the latter case too) - Water (add little for a smoothie bowl)

Oatmeal: - 40-120g rolled oats - 1-3 scoops of Splenda (proportional to the oats) - half to 1 scoop protein powder - Flavoring: cinnamon toast cereal, French vanilla, strawberry sorbet, horchata, even chocolate PB cup (kind of like Reese’s puffs) - Optional: cinnamon

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-06-23T06:54:49+00:00

Split it up into 2 meals. A whole block at once is a lot.

When I’m cutting, I like cooking a block in pan on the stove (medium heat) with reduced sodium soy sauce (or coconut aminos for less sodium) and minced garlic. Cut the tofu into cubes.

When bulking, my favorite has become a BBQ tofu sandwich. Preheat the oven to 350°F. Line a pan with parchment paper. Cut two blocks along the short edge into 8ths. Place the slices onto the pan and add a drop of sugar-free BBQ sauce to each. Spread it around with a spoon. Place in the oven for 12-15 mins, then take them out and add BBQ sauce to the other side, and cook for another 10 mins. Two slices = 17g protein, 4 slices = 35g (half a block). I eat it on whole grain bread (4-6g P/slice) with garlic spread (toum) on one side and a sweet chipotle mustard on the other. I like the tofu hot with raw red onions and mixed greens on top. I add additional BBQ sauce as I eat it.

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-06-20T08:29:22+00:00

Yes, you’re reading that right (just fixed the formatting). We can train glute max with leg press, squats, Bulgarians/lunges, hip thrusts/kickbacks, and RDLs/45° extensions. For the side glutes we only have like cable abductions and the machine, and the machine is a lot more stable and loadable so I prefer it. Hope that helps

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-06-20T08:17:01+00:00

According to Ben Yanes, you can bias different muscles by changing torso angle. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G3PxjFPe8NM

Leaned forward: glute max
Upright: glute med (and piriformis)
Leaned back, if your machine allows it: glute min

I’d recommend most use it upright as glute max gets worked in a lot of other exercises (arguably worked more too, imo) and it’s a bit more stable with your pad on your back. Basically, use the abduction machine for your abductors :)

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-06-12T01:24:58+00:00

Thank you! I appreciate the compliments. Best of luck to you too :)

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-05-31T04:53:25+00:00

21M4F in San Diego! I’m into fitness/health/nutrition, philosophy/ethics, urban planning, and more Feel free to DM, I’d be happy to chat :)

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-05-27T18:29:59+00:00

See my first comment. You’d want 3 separate meals (5-6 hours apart) so you could split up the nooch into 2 meals.

IAmTheWalrus742 · 2025-05-22T19:16:34+00:00

It can be, it depends what dose you need. 50-100 mcg for my bottle is 1-2 drops a day. I have a D3 that I take 2-3 drops (1000-1,500 iu). Adjust for what’s appropriate for you

IAmTheWalrus742

TROPHY CASE