If someone solely focuses on a single aspect of a certain way of thinking/thought subscription such as intellectual then they will loose sight of other important aspects that we can interpret about the environment as a whole. Specialization definitely has its upsides, pointing towards precision. With how rapidly this precision and specialization is increasing, along with the rate of technology, is increasingly separatist and eventually leads to stagnation. This tends to happen when you jump down a rabbit hole headfirst without having any idea what is below. But we just keep throwing people down these holes just because they are there and that it is for the "benefit of humanity" to explore them. The specialization isn't a bad thing but without proper knowledge of what that may bring can be devastating. We need people who study the intellectuals and convene on what they have observed about them being in their specialization and how their attitude is to other disciplines. Also intellectuals should not continue themselves to limit themselves to a singular discipline in order to diversify thinking and problem solving. A person that is only good at one thing is bound to make a mistake, maybe not even know it, and continue with everyone thinking they are a god in their field. Current educational systems are flawed in the same way many governments are, egoism and separatist tactics.

I feel like consciousness depends on a few things. I believe for consciousness to arrive in a being, there have to be many biological factors met to be able to function consciously. With saying this i also have come to think that there are multiple levels of consciousness depending on the mental capacity of the subjects biological body. A subject that channels consciousness, born from no perceivable consciousness, so where does the conscious come from? I believe that before the things that could channel consciousness, evolved Ex(single cell organisms and onward), the universe and everything that inhabits it was propelled by the energy flow of consciousness, leading to the inevitability of producing something to channel it through. When the big bang put our universe into motion, There was conflict. From this conflict arose more conflict, every instance of it not by chance, because there was no perceivable consciousness to intervene in physics becoming. This is a way for conscious to develop and build a mode of being for itself to take part in its creation to find itself.

Also, the Mitochondria are the powerhouse of the cell.

Although I do believe certain philosophical ways can be potentially harmful, saying this is very relative in every way possible; it depends on the person, the state of mind when they receive the philosophy, societal influence on the subject, how you define harmful, the option to look at the philosophy from another perspective, etc. I enjoyed how I like sushi said this

I would argue strongly that any ‘philosophies’ that aren’t potentially harmful are not ‘philosophies’ at all.

Mistakes and faults are a necessary part of active pursuits. ALL activities (‘philosophical’ or otherwise) are potentially dangerous - that is precisely where their potential use lies, be this as a point to avoid or a point to actively seek out and confine. — I like sushi

Trial and error is the best teacher. With philosophy, it is good to look at things from an outside perspective from time to time. To make mistakes presents an opportunity to look at it objectively and learn why what you did was harmful. I also enjoy the thought of Murphy's law, with the inevitability of everything that can possibly go wrong, going wrong, this leads to the most possible opportunities for improvement until we get to the point where nothing can go wrong.

I interpret this as; if something has social impact (for example money) it has been introduced to provide a solution to a societal problem. In the long run although, it is only a temporary solution to a bigger problem and is not capable of solving the problems that come associated with it. We need to recognize these social constructs for what they are and that is a blanket solution to problems we have yet to perceive. We should use these social constructs as a means to the end instead of taking them for their face value

Considering we evolved as omnivores, early human diet consisted of things that we didn't have to wait for, this was so we can breed the best possible outcomes for survival. Once we started to develop as a species, so did our plant based diets.

Once we were able to afford to try certain plants to see if they were edible started a domino effect in my opinion. Ever since then we slowly changed into a species of hunter/gatherer/farmers. While our meat eating habits have become extremely inhumane, we have developed plants into something amazing for humanity.

We are at the point as a society that the negatives about meat have started to outweigh the benefits. I think as the highest mode of consciousness on this planet, leaves for us a responsibility to correct any errors we may have caused along the way. I believe there is nothing wrong with eating meat, but i do believe it is wrong to eat meat that you don't have a personal connection to / give the appropriate respect to while killing/preparing/eating. maybe in the future there will be reform to where people enjoy meat responsibly without repercussions.

The function of mass media in my opinion is to give the people what we want and what we think we want. Media is humanities window to the rest of the world and in turn informs us on how to view society as a whole. When I say "what we think we want" I mean to point out that we have to realize who controls the media, and certain motives they may possibly have to indoctrinate ways of life and perception.

Media in the past and currently has always had two sides to it; media/art from a genuine place of human expression and media/art that has a purpose to persuade and confuse the subject. The recent development in technology within the past few decades is an incredible progression to globalization and posses multiple outcomes in the realm of media. Either to liberate humanity (the essence of art) or to impose authority over the ways we consume media and therefore interpret the world. With the assistance of this globalization of media leads to more open minded content being spread but also leads to exponentially more misinforming and indoctrinating media. with the massive influx of this indoctrinating media barraging us 24/7 in the form of; ads, constructed songs, shows, social media, pornography etc. Now also targeting children, is domesticating humanity into docileness.

the truth is, indoctrinating media is here and that the rapid growth of it will indefinitely, shroud people's ability to discern what is good and what is bad for them to consume. I feel to combat this, is to recognize media consumption for what it is, and communicate as much as possible about it. Media is not evil, just maybe the people profiting from indoctrinating are. It gives me hope for humanity seeing the art that is being produced today. Entropy is on both sides of the problem rising exponentially in power and volume simultaneously and the unstable balance of creative expression and indoctrinating control is bound to break eventually. It is up to us when it will happen.