Comments on: I’m in Playboy

By: Heidi Anderson

Heidi Anderson — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 16:05:52 +0000

Christ Almighty, I do not understand the hate for Chris.

By: GroovyJ

GroovyJ — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 15:48:51 +0000

“Science can unleash this feeling too.”

True. By putting a special hat on your head and stimulating your brain trans-cranially, science can make you experience the imminence of god in a potted cactus, a ham sandwich, or a used diaper. It can give you the EXACT SAME experience as all that praying and meditation simply by directly activating the part of your brain that is associated with peak experience. The only difference is that it provides the experience easily and reliably, unlike religion.

Science can also inspire awe and wonder, of course, but that property is completely irrelevant, and it would take either deep dishonesty or incredible stupidity to assert that this gives science common ground with religion. You may as well be arguing that belief in science is comensurate with belief in leprechauns because leprechauns have pots of gold, and science has made some people rich as well. Your argument is every bit as cogent as that one, but slightly less honest in that it depends on equivocation to hide its ridiculousness.

By: Mike McCants

Mike McCants — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:55:33 +0000

“scientists who aren’t religious, but are spiritual”

As if the word “spiritual” had a real meaning in this context.

From Wikipedia:

“Secular spirituality denotes various attempts to recognize aspects of life and human experience which are not captured by a purely materialist or mechanistic view of the world, but without accepting belief in the supernatural.”

Materialist? Nope. Religious? Nope. Meaningless? Yep.

By: Webster

Webster — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:25:53 +0000

The real beauty of this article is that it’s written by Chris Mooney so we don’t even have to read it to know that’s it’s a tired repetition of his apologetics. Now if only the pictures were something more interesting than Pamela Anderson. These two has-beens go together nicely with a bit of air(head)brushing.

By: Kirth Gersen

Kirth Gersen — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:37:36 +0000

So, are you telling us that scientists are touching God without knowing it? Or just that people searching for God experience the same emotions as everyone else, and that these emotions actually have nothing at all to do with magical powers? Or what? I’m at something of a loss as to what to “take away” from your excerpt… which may be intentional. Is the sole purpose of this “trailer” to sell more issues of Playboy to people who want to find out exactly what it is that you’re talking about?

By: A little comic relief - Butterflies and Wheels

A little comic relief - Butterflies and Wheels — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:59:02 +0000

[...] Mooney in Playboy is funny, you must admit. The tasteful illustration is funny, given Kirshenbaum’s (laudable) concerns about sexism. The title is funny. The post is funny. The comment is funny. It’s all funny, except for the article itself, which is more goofy than funny. [...]

By: hyperdeath

hyperdeath — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:56:04 +0000

Wow my Playboy piece is becoming quite the Rorschach. I may have to say more about this.

Alternatively, you could actually engage the criticism.

By: johnx

johnx — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:03:28 +0000

Wow my Playboy piece is becoming quite the Rorschach. I may have to say more about this.

Its meaningless blob. Right.

By: ERV

ERV — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:50:20 +0000

Wow my Playboy piece is becoming quite the Rorschach.
If by ‘Rorschach’ you mean ‘clearly and plainly demonstrates that any/all words that escape Chris Mooneys mouth are ultimately lip-service with the intent to support his true goal of self-promotion and celebrity’, then yes.

Yes that article is quite the Rorschach.

By: Doug

Doug — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:09:25 +0000

It really ought to end with “we cannot have spiritual experiences, at least as far as spiritual experiences can be adequately defined as spiritual.”