"hostility is a better test than civility I find" - FXR

[FXR]

Originally Posted by Seamus

Probably not,but I'm not with you.

By definition an atheist is simply a person who does not believe in gods.A mode of behaviour is neither implied or may be inferred

Consequently 'as an atheist' I don't give a flying fuck what PZ Myers says.He can shoves his patronising attitude about 'accommodationists' up his arse.

Bollocks and hyperbole.

There is no 'should' apart from a disbelief in gods. I really don't care what other atheists choose to do personally.What they may NOT do is tell me what I 'should' think,feel,say or do,about anything.

Seamus I have to agree to a great extent. PZ Myers is a not an atheist precisely: he's a professing atheist. As a single human brain his success and self image is intrinsically dependent on being occupied with a position that relates to not believing in the brains concept of a god. As an individual human being it appeals to me he's anti-religion but only because I am and one more anti is one less pro.

But he's still a belligerent American whose words receive more attention around the world due to the phenomenal dominance of American culture all over the globe in the last century. As a result humans thousands of miles away end up discussing the latests thing that's upset another human brain on another continent. Atheism in the human brain when it becomes a collective produces it's own versions of gods. Technology makes the world smaller. It's evolution.

[FXR]

There is no such permanently achievable state as "happiness". People who spend their time trying to quantify or identify it as a goal that can be pursued and achieved are regurgitating the religious idea of there being a heaven that can be earned.

On Tuesday 29 th March 2011, I was sitting in a Spanish restaurant with a beautiful girl who has surprised me by asking me out. The meal was exceptional.
During the meal my brother rang to let me know his wife had suffered a second miscarriage.

As I put down the phone I tasted one of the most delicious starters I've eaten in years. I remembered that I'd had another bad pain in my chest that morning. That brought to mind the fact my father had died of a heart attack two years earlier.

The girl asked me how business was just as the main course arrived. Luckily it was that day that the shares I'd bought in a computer firm 10 years ago had tuned into a profit of €X,000000000000. She told me how glad she was that I accepted her invitation to dinner because nobody ever asks her out. I could see I was on a winner and I ordered more wine. Strolling down by the river after the meal she told me she had AIDS. Was I happy that day?

[FXR]

Originally Posted by The Irreverent Mr Black

Oh, my! FXR has all the benchmarks today.

Whether it's precisely defining atheism (PZ Myers isn't, because FXR knows what lurks in the minds of men, muahahaha), or attributing the pursuit of happiness to a religious idea, he's got it nailed.

FXR, how long is a piece of string?

I just like being happy, so I pursue that state because I like it. Who gives a fuck if it's not permanent: I'll take what I can get.

A piece of string is precisely as long as the particular piece of string in question.

Why do you think an illusory state is worth pursuing? Wanting to be happy is wishing for a perfect world which doesn't exist. Why not strive to be calm and logical in order to be in as good a position as possible to react to everything that might happen?

[Xeno]

Originally Posted by FXR

A piece of string is precisely as long as the particular piece of string in question.

A fine answer. You could take it on.

Why do you think an illusory state is worth pursuing?

Endorphins, Oxytocin, Serotonin and their physiological effects are illusory? Please write up the paper and let us know when it is published.

Wanting to be happy is wishing for a perfect world which doesn't exist.

No, actually it is wanting to be happy. After all, a perfect world does not exist. I also like to be not hungry and to scratch my balls when necessary. Alas, it is not a perfect world but one gets by.

Why not strive to be calm and logical in order to be in as good a position as possible to react to everything that might happen?

Let me assure you that I follow the sequence logically, impartially and calmly. My balls are itchy. No-one seems to be around. I scratch them. Job done. Now I can be happy, not irritated by anything itchy.

Logic is so wonderful.

[FXR]

Originally Posted by The Irreverent Mr Black

Wanting to be happy is wanting to be happy, FXR.

I can smile while kids starve to death in Africa, and so can everybody in the world who smiles, because kids are always starving to death in Africa.

Remind me of the kids in Africa and I will stop smiling, but not forever.

You seem to be dwelling on absolutes. Life is not like that.

If you look at the paragraph I posted previously it's the opposite of looking for absolutes so I don't know where you got that from.

[FXR]

Originally Posted by The Irreverent Mr Black

Bollocks.

- looks quite absolutist to me.

- that looks like an unsubstantiated claim too. Care to explain why the pursuit of happiness must equate to a religious heaven?

Oh, you could finish other business first, of course.

The paragraph is about the fact that you can't sum up the situation described simply by saying simply that someone is A. happy or B. unhappy. From that you've managed to come up with the idea that's it's absolutist.

Look at the other thread?

[FXR]

Originally Posted by The Irreverent Mr Black

1. Probability theory. "Unlikely" would be more plausible than "no such".

2. So why are people who seek happiness necessarily reurgitating religion?

3. (Optional) Isn't it like 4AM in Ireland about now?

Mr Black it is indeed 4 am in this part of the world. I have to get going soon but I'm sure if I come back you'll be able to remind me exactly where I left off and give me the links. You're very good like that, thanks

I asked you a question on the other thread. Decide what you want to do. If you want to continue this discussion and the previously mentioned discussion on atheisms then say so.

[FXR]

Originally Posted by The Irreverent Mr Black

And you "know" all this by what means, FXR?

By what means, through which of your interests and in terms of which relative subject do you know the name of P Z Myers, Mr. Black?

[wolty]

Answering a question with a question (even to make a point) is IMO poor form.

A link to how PZ has explained his rationalising of atheism will be forthcoming I expect.

[FXR]

Originally Posted by The Irreverent Mr Black

And you "know" all this by what means, FXR?

It's an opinion based on observation of a behaviour and the application of a term in order to distinguish it.

Firstly I'm using the term "professed atheist" to distinguish one type of atheist from the basic term atheist. All it means to say there are humans who are atheists is to say that there are people who don't believe the earth is overseen by some space yoke master.

Atheist does not mean a person who tells others they are an atheist. Seriously I think people should keep that in mind. You don't know for sure if the Pope is not an atheist. If you want to say he's not then the same question to you: how do you know?

I'm using that term to class P Z Myers as a professing atheist because he is famous for doing just that. He is invited to speak in other countries on that basis and other humans will pay money to hear him speak.....about atheism.

I know it kind of upsets some people to use the term "professing atheist" but if you don't like it you can suggest a better one. I don't have anything against him in particular one way or the other.