Comments on: Mooney takes up “spirituality” in Playboy

By: jeremy

jeremy — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 03:50:30 +0000

“There is, after all, a common interest between scientists and believers: Secular or otherwise, we cannot have spiritual experiences without an Earth to have them on.”

Except for those believers who are working towards armageddon of course.

By: The Silence of the Media Whores [erv] |

The Silence of the Media Whores [erv] | — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 01:25:56 +0000

[...] to care so much about feminism and evaluating women based on their minds and not their bodys actively chose to contribute an article to Playboy. And he could not pass up an opportunity to comment on the physical features of the [...]

By: Martin

Martin — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 09:48:46 +0000

Wow my Playboy piece is becoming quite the Rorschach.

I wish he would leave me out of this.

By: The Semantics Of Spirituality – Camels With Hammers

The Semantics Of Spirituality – Camels With Hammers — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 01:44:54 +0000

[...] Chris Mooney’s article in Playboy about the spirituality of scientists has sparked some interesting debate in the atheist [...]

By: Stewart

Stewart — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 00:22:31 +0000

For some reason I’m not enabled to comment on Dan’s “discovery” of the word “litotes,” but only the previous one. I’ll never forget when and where I first encountered the word. Early 1970s, first (Australian) broadcast of Series Two, Episode One of Monty Python’s Flying Circus, the Piranha Brothers sketch. Litotes was one of the reasons grown men would pull their own heads off rather than see Doug Piranha.

By: Camels With Hammers

Camels With Hammers — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 23:51:18 +0000

hahaha, I never knew there was a word for that! “Litotes”. I love it, thanks!

By: Camels With Hammers

Camels With Hammers — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 23:49:14 +0000

Well, I was specifically responding to Mad Scientist acting as though the question was beneath anyone, Mooney or otherwise, taking the time to answer. He said outright:

“Are scientists so stupid that they don’t know that, or are normal people so stupid that they’d think otherwise? Is it such a vital issue in society that it must be addressed?”

I am not saying the only way to do it is to do it as Mooney is doing it. I am, in this case, just not appreciating the kind of atheistic response which holds the ignorance of the masses in contempt rather than has any desire to reach out to them.

By: Sajanas

Sajanas — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 15:15:41 +0000

I’ve become more of a Bunnahabhain spiritualist lately, as part of my conversion from Glenfiddich Orthodoxy.

By: Microraptor

Microraptor — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 06:49:39 +0000

Mooney’s going to get carpel tunnel if he keeps patting himself on the back like that.

By: SC (Salty Current)

SC (Salty Current) — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 01:49:17 +0000

Knowledge, in the Einsteinian worldview, thus becomes the new sacred. It is the dearest thing we have.

That isn’t really the basic meaning of the word, which lies in its opposition to “profane.” In the actual sense of the terms, science’s unyieldingly profane approach to knowledge and the natural world is precisely its strength.