Atheists... Your life is pointless

It is nonsense for you to consider it nonsense.



Try to make sense, Spendius. It is more fun when you do.



I am sure that means something to you. It is a muddle to me.

This is nonsense Frank--



because it is tautological and so obviously so that I felt it condescending to explain it.

I am telling you that the race aspect never entered my head. If "uppity" has racist connections in the US then I made a cultural faux pas. I usually type out "cigarette" rather than our word "fag" to avoid committing one of those.



You can't understand that!!?? Aren't you the little pretend ingenue eh?

Do you know what a MacGuffin is?

Oh--I nearly forgot--where is your progressive enbonpoint progressing to?

Do you prefer white or pink for your angelic manifestations?

C'mon, Spendius. If you want to spread fertilizer, do it on a farm...not in an Internet forum.



I think Jacqueline Suzann adequately dealt with that piece of chicanery, Spendius. Do you know what an Egg McMuffin is?




Don't you wish you knew!

Not sure what is in it, but you are drinking one, I'll have it the way you have it.

...you 2 have been very entertaining in accommodating my chalice of Porto wine while reading these pages keep it up !

Doing my best to hold up my end, Fil.

I haven't felt anything yet Frank.

I can sympathize with you here. Something tells me that getting drunk, or using peoples posts for your own entertainment. Can be violations of freedom of expressions as well. Or could be solicitation. Which too, may be an illness that has not yet been diagnosed. Though some people prance about how some should be banned because of this behavior?

Your composition sucks--the content is not worth mentioning.

Perhaps you are reaching into the wrong pocket!

I am sorry that my qualifications, and standards are not up to your stamp of approval. But I think the next time I am interested in hearing your about my views. I will directly ask you in a post, or send it your way, myself. It did not concern you, And I do not care what you think.

Anybody who goes public deserves all they get. I only write to entertain people. A select few of course. One's with discerning taste coupled with some vague erudition. Erudition is always a bit vague.

Although I dare say I also entertain those who lack such attributes of the civilised, well-educated gentleman in that I offer them a chance to express their bottled up indignation.

Your composition hasn't improved, nor has the content. For someone who doesn't care what i think, you invested a lot of energy into your latest spate of inchoherence. This forum is open to anyone who wishes to comment. I don't need your permission to tell you that your composition sucks.

Geez. How did I know? Then it is also open to people who's composition sucks? Whether you like their composition, or not? Or whether you think it is worth the mentioning? Who cares what you think? Especially if I am not asking you why you think that it does. Or am not even making a post directed at you. If you like to be a brown noser, cool with me. But don't expect anyone to care. Really.

And for someone who thinks that other members are just not that significant. You do not seem to realize, You giving your when I did ask you to explain them. Nor gave any inclination I cared what you thought about what I had posted. Says that you think you are way more important than you think others are. Or in the ways you explain how they are not. Or you take yourself way more serious than you think that others should view themselves.

Next time, just mind your own business. Instead of worrying about licking some other guys ass****.

Here we go again. You claim you don't care, yet you write more this time than you did the last time. Yes, this site is open to those whose compositions suck, and it's open to people who wish to tell them it sucks.

You've to all kinds of straw men there. I have not mentioned my alleged significance in regard to others here--i'm not responsible for your paranoia. ONce again, it doesn't matter if you solicit comments or not, others are entitled to comment. I'm not surprised that you're now stooping to vicious, obscene remarks. From what i've read of your drivel so far, you have little else to rely one.

RST was right I should not have responded to you the way I did. You should be complemented for your achievements and be proud of them which you seem to be. I know I would be. Moral philosophy is something that is very emotional to me and I have become discouraged by the little interest that most people show for it.

There are many people who talk about it but even so the numbers of them are very few when compared to the population of the world.


Short version.

Moral philosophy's main problem, rl, is arriving at a rationally defensible theory of right and wrong. According to Aristotle rightness and wrongness cannot be decided on any general principles but have to be viewed situationally.

I think the reason few people show interest in ethics is that the subject is incomprehensible. Which makes it an ideal subject for endless talk.

It is highly likely that your ethics are conditioned by your situation and are meaningless, possibly dangerous, (i.e. wrong by your own argument) to others in different situations.

Economic growth in the USA, a good by all estimations to you, might contribute to washing away whole communities living in low lying areas who cannot afford sea defences. Selling military hardware and expertise to dictators is a good in terms of economic growth in the USA, and in the UK, and ends up blowing away schoolgirls playing in the park with cluster bombs.

And that is simple compared to the sexual question.

People, generally, don't wish to wrestle with such issues, and many more.

The speaker in your video is getting nowhere. And knows it. It's a gig. Entertainment. The fossil fuels consumed in the event is a bad to others. And also in all the events on the guys nationwide tour.

Lets see you do some actual moral philosophy. Talking about moral philosophy, invidiously and as a badge of honour, is not moral philosophy. It's self-congratulatory waffling.

Reasoning Logic, thank you for the clips they both contain good information. I had come across the mirror neurons before. Have you ever watched a movie where the actors don’t seem to be able to act? Professional actors can get into their role to the point that their mirror neurons can convey the genuine emotions of their role. When actor does not have that ability we don’t believe he has the ability to act. The explanation for why pornography is now a multi-billion industry is that people like the monkey in your video experience the sexual experience through their mirror neurons. That reminds of the last film that Natalie Woods made called “Brain Storm” where the experience of one person whether driving a race car or skiing downhill were recorded on a machine and could be replayed on a machine with a helmet that would let others experience it as they were doing it. Of course one of the helpers in the laboratory had discovered a tape of a beautiful woman having an orgasm and made a continuous loop and burnt his brain out.

“Brainstorm” was released in 1983 and art does indeed imitate life. To a degree we do experience what others experience by our mirror neurons. Our mirror neurons may explain why so many people are attracted to sports. That the joy of winning is vicariously enjoyed by seeing the mirror neurons projected from their sports heroes. It may also explain why some people are so charismatic and why people are so apt to follow them anywhere.

As your video suggests much of religion is in direct opposition to morality. One passage in the bible actually says that your true bliss is found in bashing your children’s brains out on the rocks. The Catholics purged this reference from their bible but it remains in the protestant bible. Many preachers have tried to explain this reference but it speaks for itself.

I think that the reason many people don’t find morality very important is that is innate and they accept the standard explanation that religion is the keeper of the flame of morality.

What morality are you talking about?



A video is not evidence for that.



Where is the passage? Then we might be able to see for ourselves whether it speaks for itself. We can hardly be expected to take your word for that considering what had preceded it.