>> ^hpqp:

Keep believing @marbles, you're starting to sound more and more like our resident evangelist shinybee.


Keep going after the low hanging fruit @hpqp. You and "shinybee" are one in the same. You're both oblivious to the irrationality of your belief systems.

Come on now Pat, tell us how you really feel!

I get where he's coming from--he absolutely should have the right (in countries that value free speech) to insult religions or any individual he chooses as much as he pleases. However, he lost the moral high ground on this one since his whole rationale for insulting religions seems to be "They started it!"

I don't see how "insulting" religion is going to do anything other than create more divisiveness. It certainly isn't going to convince religious people to suddenly embrace atheism, nor even re-examine their own beliefs. As therapeutic for Pat as spewing all this vitriol over the net may be, it doesn't seem likely to achieve his goal of getting religious people to "shut up and maybe see a doctor" (as his FAQ states). As one of the "rational-thinking persons" on this planet, I'm a bit surprised that Pat can't see the irrationality of his own actions and argument.

Downvoted for this line: "I sincerely hope [my insulting you] hurts your feelings, harms your emotional well-being, and damages your self-image to the extent that you have to go and lie down." This from a guy who claims to believe "the purpose of life is joy in the present moment."

Way to spread the joy, Pat.

@chilaxe, I have racist relatives. I have watched them go bananas when a black person does something they don't like. I found her reaction to be way over the top - it appeared to be fueled by something more than just thievery.

Have you been around racist folks in the South? Have you listened to the vitriol and bile that comes out of their mouths about black people? It is astounding, irrational, and deeply rooted in something primal and rage-filled.

There are all sorts of people here, commenting on how irresponsible and weird it is that she risked her life and limbs over a couple of cases of beer. Something set her off. I guessed -- guessed -- that it might be racism.

I could be wrong. I don't know. I'm just looking at the evidence in front of me, paired up with my knowledge of the profound irrationality of deeply racist people.

I just thought the tags were really cool. Sylvester Sylvester Sylvester is funny.

So despite his intelligent articles, he's been a representative for irrationalism in our personal lives for decades.

Hope is an a positive position of bias. There is no certainty that unknown things will end up satisfying hopes. Bias is irrational. Being agnostic to uncertainty is the logical/reasonable stance to the unknown or unknowable. So hope, the feeling that what is wanted can be had or that events will turn out for the best, is irrational.

>> ^IAmTheBlurr:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^Gallowflak:
Pavlov's dogs were trained to salivate because a certain sensory experience was always, every time, followed by them being fed, so it was a reasonable observation and reaction. Superstition is the irrational connection of an actual or potential effect and an imagined cause, which then governs future behaviour.

Hope is irrational as well. There are many cases for irrationality, rationally speaking of course, err wait.

Do you actually think that is true; that hope is irrational? I would contend that, depending on the statistical probability of the outcome that you are hopeful for, hope is almost a default position because no one can entirely know what the future holds, so in that way, there always is hope.
I would also contend that individual hopes might be irrational, but not hope as a concept itself.
Just wanted to clarify what you meant. Obviously the hope that I'll see my dead mother again in an afterlife is an irrational hope but is the hope that I'll get the promotion that I applied for also/equally irrational?

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^Gallowflak:
Pavlov's dogs were trained to salivate because a certain sensory experience was always, every time, followed by them being fed, so it was a reasonable observation and reaction. Superstition is the irrational connection of an actual or potential effect and an imagined cause, which then governs future behaviour.

Hope is irrational as well. There are many cases for irrationality, rationally speaking of course, err wait.


Do you actually think that is true; that hope is irrational? I would contend that, depending on the statistical probability of the outcome that you are hopeful for, hope is almost a default position because no one can entirely know what the future holds, so in that way, there always is hope.

I would also contend that individual hopes might be irrational, but not hope as a concept itself.

Just wanted to clarify what you meant. Obviously the hope that I'll see my dead mother again in an afterlife is an irrational hope but is the hope that I'll get the promotion that I applied for also/equally irrational?

>> ^Gallowflak:

Pavlov's dogs were trained to salivate because a certain sensory experience was always, every time, followed by them being fed, so it was a reasonable observation and reaction. Superstition is the irrational connection of an actual or potential effect and an imagined cause, which then governs future behaviour.


Hope is irrational as well. There are many cases for irrationality, rationally speaking of course, err wait.

Don't worry Baratunde, in the media and to the rest of America, Trump has gone from this odd eccentric rich guy who says crazy shit to get ratings to an absolute tool. He is laughed at by the press and his credibility and the respect of his piers has become nil.

In the racial overtones of the entire thing, I do agree and every single prominent republican who supported birtherism if even with such simple words 'I take him at his word' will not only suffer in their next elections but also in the respect of their fellow Americans. For today there isn't a single person in the country who doesn't know that at its heart, racism has reared its ugly head and far to many a man and women in public office all but put their stamp of approval upon it.

That said I believe the heart of this entire debacle isn't racism, but rather that Republicans are frightened. Their consistences are frightened. The future is bleak for the republican party as their base continues to shrink and the number of those who vote democratically continues to rise. This isn't the end of this issue and if Barack Obama is reelected, something similar will certainly appear again. Just remember that the republicans can be blamed only so far as their fear will drive them to irrationality.

>> ^chilaxe:

If there's not the political will to end farm subsidies, it still seems rational to tax expensive drains on society like soft drinks, cigarettes, and the unnecessary use of transfats in restaurant food.
Just pointing out there are deeply rooted irrationalities in the system, like farm subsidies, doesn't seem like a good reason to not take positive action and make the world a better place.


A better place for whom? How do you know soft drinks don't contribute to people's happiness? Cigarettes are harmful to your health, but what about the social smokers that only have a smoke when they meet with friends for a drink? What about responsible people who choose to indulge? They should be punished?

To me, that's the kind of social engineering that simply does not work to cull and reduce certain behavior; it only serves to make people poorer. The tax, I'd argue, is the expensive drain on society.

If there's not the political will to end farm subsidies, it still seems rational to tax expensive drains on society like soft drinks, cigarettes, and the unnecessary use of transfats in restaurant food.

Just pointing out there are deeply rooted irrationalities in the system, like farm subsidies, doesn't seem like a good reason to not take positive action and make the world a better place.

@NetRunner


•"Right and left neurological arrangements are genetic"

-This doesn't really seem that controversial anymore.
-http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/11/02/born_to_party/
-In our 2nd to last conversation, you seemed to be using genetics as an argument for income redistibution. (We can't expect people asking for our money to stop drinking, drug-use, laziness, irrationalism, and sports-watching and start reading and being economically savvy because of their genetics.)


•"Right and left can't live together under one polity"

-We can be sure the Right and Left will always hate each other and seek to dominate each other, but that doesn't mean a single polity isn't viable.


•"Our government gives unchecked power to the party with 50% + 1 support (domination)"

-The party which is out of power tends to behave pretty upset, regularly comparing the party in power to fascists, so "domination" seems within the acceptal range of descriptors.
-They would tend to prefer unchecked political power, rather than the kinds of compromises that characterize things like the handling of Guantanamo, Afghanistan, and the recent healthcare bill, but the political parties always have to compromise in the end.
-(And they scream bloody murder about it.)

@NetRunner re: The Grasshopper and the Ants


I find the moral to be that short-term thinkers suck.

I like Christopher Hitchens, but I think he was a grasshopper in this case... it was predictable that his life would likely be cut short because of his unhealthy irrationalities. (Alchoholic, obese, probably bad diet, maybe a smoker at some point in his life, etc.)

>> ^MrFisk:

Freedom of speech is the primary thread that the Bill of Rights, and thus, the U.S. Constitution dangles from. However, it is not absolute - e.g., I cannot yell "fire" in a crowded theater.
Now, I hold free speech especially dear to my reasoning. I believe that John Milton's Areopagitica is essential - i.e., "Let [Truth] and Falsehood grapple." (That is the key to explain my Glenn Beck submissions.)
And don't get me wrong, I'm all for drawing Muhammad, but I downvote this because this guy is a moron and don't think that you should blame an entire religion for something a handful of douche bags espouse. The real shame is that these handful of douche bags has been given such a loud voice by the media it quivers others into submission.

If moderate Muslims exist (the ones critical of Muslim irrationality), then they are doing as good a job of hiding as moderate Christians did in the 14th Century. And for similar reasons. Because of this, yes, it is fair to blame the entire religion, which can be described as a religion of conquest like no other before it.

The underlying mechanisms are probably the same. The definition of "insanity" is fairly arbitrary. It's quite plausible, although certainly not proven, that as Homo grew more intelligence, it also grew more unstable mentally. A lot of our intelligence is pattern recognition - the ability to deduce cause and effect, for example. When an intelligent being is hit by a flying stone, they quickly deduce that it wasn't the stone that hurt them, but whoever threw the stone. What if someone gets hit by lightning? Who threw the lightningbolt?

It's difficult to draw a line between rational thinking and overanalysis to the point of schizophrenia. We're just used to thinking of mental illnesses as something very separate from the normal functioning of our brains. In reality, we all exhibit "insane" traits to some extent. They can be quite useful when they don't become overpowering.

>> ^geo321:

I have to say I disagree with his thesis. While people had a failure of understanding the cause and effect to recreate and analylze the world of the past...and today. The flaw in his reasoning is that he's leaving out people's ideologies; their learned belief systems. He's lumping in irrationality with insanity.

I have to say I disagree with his thesis. While people had a failure of understanding the cause and effect to recreate and analylze the world of the past...and today. The flaw in his reasoning is that he's leaving out people's ideologies; their learned belief systems. He's lumping in irrationality with insanity.