This is what I get for trying to publish during my lunch break. Thanks for the heads up

Ok. Maybe this is the more important question here. What does the word "purpose" mean to you in this context?

Evolution doesn't have sentient intent. Its just a selection process. However, the outcomes of that process are features that do certain things. Again, apply this logic to any other organ.

Lastly, because I got tired of the character limit and know how notifications work in this app: Please, please start from the top of this chain. I think we fundamentally agree here.

Personally, I think we could get into a lot of minutia about how exactly that happens to talk about physical flaws, but at basics, if a single organ, or pair in this case, is missing in a way that's not actively harmful like allowing fluid to leak into the abdomen: I'd say no.

As for whether or not someone born without an organ has a physical flaw, that's actually a great question. Some kind of moral flaw that makes them lesser? Of course not

We do exist in nature, and random though it may be, most things that spread across whole taxonomical classes developed to do something specific. Complex, thinking life obviously does more than reproduce. Whether that sum of the parts is some sort of philosophical purpose is a much loftier topic.

That's true of all organs with greater and lesser effects. If a gall bladder isn't storing bile or a heart isn't pumping blood, those organs are not functioning in their evolved role. That's all I'm saying here.

Any given organ across a large group evolved to accomplish something. Thats not a moral point of whether we can or do use them for that purpose, but it is the thing that those organs do physically. If they arent doing that thing, theyre not doing the biological tasks they evolved to facilitate.

Ok, I'm not going to address everything here because I fundamentally agree with you, and we're arguing past each other. This whole thread started with a reply to you about flawed language, and I think we've proven that point pretty flawlessly.

Again, you're reading this as if its a purpose, or a fault, or an error, for the person who has ovaries. This isnt about the person. Its about the organ, divorced from the wants and needs of the person.

Objectively, if there are ovaries that are never able to produce viable ova, that's an error. That might be a desirable error but it's still the whole purpose of having that organ.

There's definitely better phrases, but I think people ITT are mostly judging the organ, not the person or body.

The only animals other than dogs legally covered by the ADA.

I went to college with someone who had a seeing eye horse. She (the horse) had little boots to wear inside so she wouldn't damage the floors.

The tech CEOs? Power and prestige, even if only in concept.

The government? To get the tech CEOs.

The military? Probably doesn't.

Probably lol. You got close enough for me to know which inscription you meant, which is more than I could do for most essays I've written.

Tbh I'm a bit of anyone who had an elective with a reason to write about it. I went to grad school for Classics and still had to shoehorn Persia into my papers.

And therefore Bahrain must launch a preemptive strike on Iran if I'm understanding this article correctly.

Behistun or Bisotun. Its not a stele but a huge slice of mountainside inscribed for Darius the Great describing the civil wars when he came to power (a little before the first invasion of Greece, but the Greeks in Anatolia get a mention)

7 years ago

Qian Xuesen, and it's even worse than that. He was subject to house arrest, then deported, and between that and returning to Space work, he helped develop China's first ICBMs.

The most surprising thing to me is that we're still just expecting. With all of the university targeting I expected something to pop off before the school year ended.