Views: 2017

Comment by Kelly Nicola Loewen on November 1, 2013 at 11:53am

Not only is this show groundbreaking in its portrayal of women of colour, transgendered people, and so-called criminals, it also features an atheist main character. 

Comment by MikeLong on November 2, 2013 at 6:12pm


I don't agree with Julia Galef at all. But, again, the whole question seems to be how certain words are defined. For half the program, (maybe the whole program - I could only make it through half) she tries to impose an entirely foreign definition upon the word, "rationality". My research through various dictionaries showed me nothing to support her definition - "The method of achieving your goals, whatever they are". This is the definition of "Plan' - not "rationality". In all her examples (except the chess example, she wrongly used this MIS-definition of rationality to demonstrate her point.

better home-made definition of rationality would be "the opposite of emotion" because that definition is far better understood and accepted that hers. Although the best bet would be to consult dictionaries.

There is nothing inherently wrong in PLANning to achieve one's goals through emotions (Capt. Kirk does it all the time), but that doesn't make them rational (unless you're getting right into brain functions at the electrochemical level).

Comment by MikeLong on November 3, 2013 at 3:00pm

Thanks. Seems I didn't need to finish it. That's precisely how I assumed it went.

"remove the human element"

She didn't actually contrast "rational" with "human", did she? My opinion of her sinks even lower. That's effectively saying that it's not human to be rational. Crazy. I assumed she was going somewhere like "emotional". The two halves of "human" are typically "emotional" and "rational" - even the two brain halves. And to be a successful as a human, one needs to use both halves. So actually she and I agree - as do, I believe, most people. She just used the wrong definition of words in trying make a "talk" out of "Spock is not Rational". (In a similar vein, I've considered writing a book called, "Jesus Was An Atheist". Starting with nothing but the title and applying some fallacious flesh, I'm sure I'd have a best-seller.)

"the typical definitions of "rationality""

WRONG. It is typical to contrast "emotional" and "rational" - not try to squeeze one into the other.

" If you remove the human element then of course rationality should follow only the rules of math and logic etc."

 If you remove the emotional element then of course human should follow only the rules of math and logic etc.

"rational choices can only be made when we analyze and embrace human feelings"

Correct or useful choices can only be made when we analyze and embrace human feelings as well as rationality.

You see, we agree on the conclusion albeit a bit hackneyed.

Comment by Gregg R Thomas on November 6, 2013 at 8:17pm


"They didn't take into account the emotions of the bankers and other speculators so it made many of the "rational" economists look like fools."

Economists track and predict trends in the process or system by which goods and services are produced, sold, and bought.  They do not predict future events that will trigger an irrational response by emotional players in the stock market.  Those people are called psychics.

Comment by Warren on November 14, 2013 at 1:06pm

Wearing orange would be unsettling for me, isn't that the color prisoners wear?

However, in it's infinite urge for the safety program I have at work, they are fitting all the company vehicles with a orange thing on the seat belt, so the cops can see you wearing or not wearing a seat belt at a distance. Wearing a orange shirt would nix that.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service