Remember the time when Lisa turned into a raging fedora atheist?
Wait, so you believed in the angel?
Remember when Stephan Jay Gould died and motherfucking Richard Dawkins was the one who ended up being the household name?
>>77996033
She was 100% right though.
Till the handhold thing anyway, but that proves that she wasn't a raging fedora atheist.
>>77996202
i thought it used to be Carl Sagan.
>>77996584
Carl Sagan was a popular household name and atheist.
Stephen Jay Gould was an atheist and popular with science nerds, the kind who actually know what they were talking about.
Stephen Jay Gould would frequently debate Richard Dawkins and take him to fucking school. He was like the Harlem Globetrotters to Dawkin's Washington Generals.
Stephen Jay Gould died relatively unknown (he had a magazine column and his books used to be in the science section of bookstores). Richard Dawkins, like some kind of weed, his growth unchecked, ended up becoming the famous atheist.
>>77996644
What's bad about Dawkins? I'm not really familiar with him.
>>77996644
And James Randi, although he's old and doesn't do anything much anymore so Penn Jilette kind of replaced him.
>>77996033
>Calls out the town on believing in an angel skeleton
>an angel skeleton
>Angel
>Skeleton
>Skeletal remains of a divine, otherworldly ghost like entity
>Religious figures and followers actually believed such a thing was possible
Fuck anyone who says Lisa was wrong in this situation
>>77996033
I love this episode.
>Message is essentially "don't get swept up in sensationalism and start doing stupid shit in the name of faith, but also don't be an asshole to people who find comfort in something you don't necessarily believe in"
>Oh that's ridiculous, Lisa! Everyone knows leprechauns are extinct!
>Ah, we elected the wrong Carter...
>Smithers, use the Amnesia Ray!
>You mean the revolver, sir?
>Precisely. Be sure to wipe your own memory clear when you're finished.
>Er, you know, I can't afford to pay you.
>I didn't become a scientist for financial gain. Whatever little money you have will be fine.
>GO HOME, SCIENCE GIRL!
>But I am home!
>Good, stay there.
>Hey, she's going to smash the angel!
>Somebody stop her!
>Mom, why are we getting dressed up? Are we going to Black Angus?
>Well sweetie, you might say we're going to the best steakhouse in the whole universe!
>So we're NOT going to Black Angus?
>I'm going to be honest with you, Lisa. I never did those tests.
I love the recurring theme of Simpsons and Futurama getting prominent members of the scientific community to show up, only to portray them as incompetant frauds.
>I call it a Hawking Chamber.
Why do I get the sinking feeling that this is one of those episodes like Lisa the Vegetarian that /co/ is gonna end up shitting on because it has Lisa disagreeing with everyone?
Despite the fact that this one, like Lisa the Vegetarian, has her learn a lesson about tolerating the beliefs of those different from her?
>>77996698
He's OK when he's specifically talking about biology. Those large animal dissections he did on youtube were pretty educational.
He gets really obnoxiously fedora-tipply, for the lack of a better term. I'm an atheist myself, but there are those guys who completely overdo the nonsense, and Dawkins' got that in spades. And lately he's gone full /pol/ with the racism.
Gould was much more of a "why don't we all just get along?" sort of guy. Even when he was clearly the smartest guy in the room.
>>77996644
Nice digits.
What's so bad about Dawkins? He's vocally against SJWs and PC culture.
>>77996700
Is there something about magic that attracts this kind of person?
It's just Lisa The Vegetarian Mk II, being written by the same guy (David S. Cohen) except without any good jokes because of being produced by Mike Scully instead of Dave Mirkin.
>>77996698
Not the anon you asked, I'm no expert on the guy, but to me he comes off as one of those really obnoxious, pop-culture athiests. Like, the atheist equivalent of a Bible Thumper.
I just know that Patton Oswalt has said dudes like Dawkins and Bill Mahr make him feel embarrassed to be an atheist the same way he imagines the Westboro Baptist Church makes people feel embarrassed to be Christian.
>>77996885
Yes. Back in the 1920s, Harry Houdini was obsessed with trying to prove that psychics were all con men.
>>77996837
Thanks
>>77996837
>>77996202
>>77996644
All this Gould promoting makes me want to look the guy up, he sounds like a groovy grape.
I only ever heard of him from this episode, assumed he was just a scientist who was pretty big when the episode was written.
>>77996885
I mean, it makes sense.
The kinda guy who's really frustrated by those who deceive others, even when it's a harmless kinda deception.
>WHAT THIS GUY DOES ISN'T MAGIC.
>LOOK, I'M GONNA DO IT BETTER THAN HE DID AND TELL YOU FLAT OUT, I JUST TRICKED YOU. THERE WAS NO MAGIC INVOLVED.
>HE'S A FRAUD. A TALENTED, CLEVER FRAUD.
Honestly, I get the appeal. I don't believe in magic, but I find magic shows fascinating since it's basically dudes pulling off live special effects with the intent of deceiving the eyes of tons of live audience members.
>>77996917
He reminds me of a less egotistical Carl Sagan but a whole lot wordier. He's not for everybody.
Here's one of my favorite articles:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1993/08/12/dinomania/
It's an essay on the dinosaur craze that came along with the original Jurassic Park, and a critic on the movie itself. Really takes it to task too, but in a really erudite way.
>>77996858
People think he's mean. He doesn't try to sugar coat the reasons why he doesn't believe in a god. When that reason is something like a persons personal connection to a deity is more likely a delusion, people get upset and they feel insulted. I'm simplifying here, but basically he hurts people's feelings by offering a scientific explanation to spiritual things.
>>77997042
It's more a case of "I have zero knowledge of theology or Christian history beyond my simplistic strawmen."
>>77996962
Yeah I guess. I just feel like with some of these guysPenn Jillettethey get this attitude that basically boils down to:
"I'm too clever to fall for slight of hand and special effects; that makes me the smartest man in world!"
One episode of "Bullshit!" was enough for me.
Speaking of pompous blowhards: Christopher Hitchens!
>>77997041
"I was a “dinosaur nut” as a kid growing up in New York during the late Forties and early Fifties. Hardly anyone knew or cared about them, and I was viewed as a nerd and misfit on that ultimate field of vocational decision—the school playground at recess. I was called “fossil face”; the only other like-minded kid in the school became “dino” (I am pleased to report that he also became a professional natural historian). The names weren’t funny, and they hurt."
Those kids who beat up on SJG and his friend in school I bet went onto a rewarding, high-paying career as a janitor or a gas station attendant.
>>77997042
I dunno, I think it's less "people think he's mean because he tells it like it is" and more "he needlessly comes off as a dick because he feels the need to actively mock the beliefs of others rather than simply bolster what he himself believes in".
Like, you can support logic and science and all that without Tweeting jokes about how dumb it is to believe in god.
It'd be like the pope talking about loving your neighbor and all that, but then slipping in "unless he's an atheist, then you should laugh at him cause he's gonna go to hell, lol".
Needless hostility is just kinda un-chill, you know?
>>77997101
To be fair, I really like the episodes of Bullshit where they tackle shit that's REALLY fucked up (like the one about anti-vaccers or 9/11 conspiracies), just because that's generally objectively bad shit, so their "FUCK YOU, WE'RE SMART AND YOU'RE DOGSHIT PAL" attitude feels more vindicated.
>>77997159
They probably didn't have shitty lives, they probably had overall decent lives
I'm sure not everyone made it, but chances are that most of them were successful as far as having a job, house, family, and money to spend on fun stuff goes
>>77997159
Or more accurately, Al Bundy sitting in a bar at 40 and bragging about his high school football accomplishments as he toils along in his pathetic existence as a shoe salesman.
>>77997195
Yeah but I saw the episode about Gun Control, an issue I have no particularly strong feelings about, and was like, "These guys are funny, but there's no way anyone they disagree with is going to get a fair shake."
>>77997298
Oh yeah, that show worked best when it was exposing actual bullshit that would make people say "oh, THAT'S a thing? that's fucked up".
It was most definitely not a platform for debate. Any kind of argument that wasn't a cut-and-dry kind of one-sided would be SUPER biased.
>>77996796
>I call it a Hawking Chamber.
based Vice Presidential Action Rangers
>>77997298
It's like watching Bill Maher's Religulous. You don't watch it as "intellectual" Bill Maher pointing out the flaws with every religious group or individual if you want to enjoy it. You watch it as "smart comedian" Bill Maher poking fun at some of the more absurd and sometimes dangerous member of religious groups and pissing on the idea of sacredness (and also skipping the last 10 minutes)
>>77997429
Not that he'll take on Mudslimes of course instead the low-hanging fruit like Westboro Baptist Church.
>>77996858
He's a raging self-righteous asshole who uses Atheism as a point of conceit. He thinks not believing in a God makes him SUPERIOR to those who do And he can't even CONCIEVE the notion that he might be wrong.
>>77997429
I honestly can't stomach documentaries like that. It just reeks of "WOAH, WATCH OUT, THIS SMART COMEDIAN IS GONNA RATTLE SOME CAGES, ESTABLISHMENT. IF YOU DON'T LAUGH OR AGREE, THEN YOU'RE JUST TOO STUPID TO GET IT."
I mean, the only exception I can think of is Jeff Ross Roasts Prisoners, and that's mostly because it's 90% fucking brilliant standup special with 10% "hey, maybe don't give a mother of two 25 years for smoking pot once".
>>77997472
Nah, the second half (which is much more serious in tone) is pretty much all about muslims and other violent religious groups and there's a lot of jokes against them throughout
>>77997472
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjqXt_wRkS8&ab_channel=sitcomedychannel
>>77997475
>he can't even CONCIEVE the notion that he might be wrong
This is the kinda thing that I find somewhat interesting when it comes to atheism.
Like, when one considers all the insane shit that goes into how the universe works, is it really beyond the realm of possibility that there's something bigger than ourselves out there?
Not to say that God is totally a big bearded guy in white robes and a golden crown, but it always just seemed sorta short-sighted to me to say with absolute certainty "there's NO WAY there's anything that can be defined as a god out there" considering how little we know about the universe.
Humanity's a blip on the cosmic radar, who's to say that something DIDN'T set all this in motion farther back than we could even possibly conceive?
I dunno, just my two cents.
>>77997429
>(and also skipping the last 10 minutes)
Never saw it, what happens?
>>77997594
Up to that point it's pretty much a comedy with some serious moments throughout. And then this happens
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R1fwrvPM4w&ab_channel=pcgamer999
>>77997578
I believe atheism, despite the nomenclature, is the disbelief that any man made god can be real, or that any god would be magic.
If something lived long enough to acquire godlike technology and create a Universe I don't think atheists would deny it, as they must understand that sufficiently evolved science is indistinguishable from magic.
If we survive we will be gods one day too.
>>77997578
The possibility isn't the problem. The problem is you push it as fact without evidence.
Also, why the fuck are you here?
>>>/pol/
>>>/his/
>>77997608
>Religion must die for mankind to live
Holy shit, the tipping is off the charts.
>>77997042
One issue is he conflates his atheist views and his discourse on evolution. The guy goes into a debate about evolution/creation and ends up just talking shit on religion in general and Christianity in particular, which is unnecessary when it's not the topic.
Also his belief that war wouldn't exist without religion is retarded, and I would think a bit insulting to religious people.
Last but not least he has very little humour about himself. When he was shown in south park his main response was complaining how they had him fuck a tranny and pretending he didn't get the point of the episode.
>>77997649
Easy pal, I'm not pushing anything.
I was just curious about a belief (or lack thereof) that is different from my own and was looking to understand differing viewpoints a little bit better.
>>77996831
Because it is. That's how bad /co/ is at watching cartoons: if a character (even a strawman) expressed things people disapprove of, the character/episode/show is bad.
I want /col/ to leave.
>>77997687
>Last but not least he has very little humour about himself.
I just about piss myself every time someone brings up his bit of honey that got confiscated by the TSA.
>>77996837
Islam isn't a race, brah
He's shit talking a religion that has protected status unlike Christianity
>>77997472
It's less about low hanging fruit and more about not getting slammed by accusations of hatespeech
>>77996698
He has a 0 concept over the very meaning of the ideal he claims to profess, and makes atheists look like a bunch of jihads whose answer to world hunger is purging every Jew, Christfag, and Muddie so there'll be less people to feed.
He's the worst bits of /pol/ and /reddit/ combined into a single caricature.
>>77997578
There's a whole side of the atheist argument that relies on that, interestingly: Russell's teapot (which spawned pastafarianism).
>>77996698
He refutes the god botherers publicly and rather loudly (for an Englishman) when they start spouting off in areas in which they can actually cause harm. Basically he's a product of the British tertiary education system, where saying you are religious is tantamount to declaring your idiocy in public. This doesn't translate well in the US though.
This earns him a lot of hate from the godly crowd of course - and also from the moderate Atheists, most of whom are American - because they've learnt the hard way to tread carefully on these topics in the states.
>>77997748
Care to elaborate?
>>77997708
I think part of the problem is atheism has come to be a singular label for a wide variety of different beliefs. Some are like Dawkins, but some are also much less gung-ho or certain in their beliefs. Agnosticism doesn't help either, in terms of labeling. There are plenty of atheists who would probably get called agnostics were their views explained to others beyond "I don't believe in god."
There's a certain logical conundrum to it too. As a position "I do not believe in any god or religious conception of the world" is not so much an assertion of fact as "there is no god and all religious conceptions of the world are wrong." The former is a negative position, taken in counter point to a positive statement. ie. any religious belief ever. It is a logical default position to take. If no religion can prove itself with an argument on observable, repeatable phenomenon, it is as if the argument was untrue. Otherwise, you'd be able to see evidence of it. The latter causes problems because you can't actually say there is no god logically the same way you could say there is a god. It is precisely because of what you said about "what about the things we don't know?" In an argument, however, you can say "there is not sufficient evidence for this particular positive argument, therefore there is no reason to treat it as true." It's not certainty, or at least it never should be, but doubt.
The universe is a wide and wild place, and it is likely everything we currently know is wrong to some degree or another (not totally, but still missing something). But just because there are still things unknown doesn't mean it's logical to default to a specific god or religion or spiritual reality being true (there's a joke about atheists just believing in one less religion than religious people). You can say some agent set it in motion, and it might even be proven true someday, but until it can be shown, there's no reason to do so outside of faith.
>>77997929
Strong/weak atheism is a distinction that exists for this very reason: I don't believe in God =/= I believe there is no God.
Also apatheism is where it's at.
>>77996033
No, but I remember the time Stephen Jay Gould was the best guest star the Simpsons ever had.
>>77996033
No, but I do remember when it was declared that science and religion must stay 60ft apart at all times.
>>77996796
Stephen Jay Gould came out looking like a saint in that episode. The writers even integrated his idea of non-overlapping magisteria with his character not running scientific tests on the validity of something religion deals with.
>>77996796
Yeah, I can't understand the hate Lisa The Skeptic gets. Its hilarious throughout.
>>77997041
Gould may be wordier, but he wrote the hell out of his articles. Sagan was good, but the best thing he ever wrote is the final three pages or "You Are Here," and that's a lot of people's first contact with the guy.
>>77997263
This. I hate to admit it, but bullies tend to not get comeuppance. Sure, some die of heroin overdoses, but most go on to live decent lives.
I dunno, when I first got into atheism I read the Dawkins book, and the Hitchens book, and the Harris book.
>>77996837
>And lately he's gone full /pol/ with the racism.
Please name one instance of Dawkins being racist, in the actual sense of the word.
>>77998240
Racism is a buzzword
And I'm not being sarcastic
>>77997801
>protected status
Tell that to all those shiites that get killed by sunnis
>>77998355
True but at least white people can't call them names
>>77998490
Honestly I'd be happier with some light banter than getting shot by people who kind of believe in same things but at the same time don't.
Also "most protected status" still belongs to Jews, considering they pretty much get green light and some funds from West so they can bomb Palestinians.
>>77997929
That's sort of the problem of having a disorganized religion: since there aren't any clear barriers between all the little nuances for the average outsider, everyone lumps them together into a single group, moreso than they would with people who call themselves "Sunnis" or "Baptists" or such.
It's good to see that /co/ is practicing being a wholesome christian imageboard!
Isnt she a buddhist? A bit hypocritical.
>>77996962
Penn as far as I remember is fine with psychics and the like just fucking around at parties, it's when they seriously give life advice (like getting people to leave their jobs or move or leave people) or seriously convince people they're speaking to their dead relatives and shit. Or when they're consulted on dying relatives.
Party trick it's fine, if it's seriously fucking with people's sensitive emotional states I could see the problem.
>>77996917
>>77996202
For some reason I want to say I remember reading some Gould stuff when going to a Catholic high school
>>77999383
She's an American Buddhist, they don't have much of a dogma.
> people talking about athiests they like
> how they are athiests
> posting pictures of athiests
> on 4chan, a Christian message board
mfw
Into the trash you all go.
>>77999439
I'm atheist because I don't have a relationship with God but I follow Jesus
So I'm a Christian atheist which is the god tier lifestyle
>>77999425
She is an agnostic suburban girl who found Buddhism and thinks it is neat and calls herself buddhist though has never really practiced it. She also went through a Wicca phase. Reminds me of a girl I dated. I even got her a Lisa as a witch figure once because she herself had made the comparison.
>>77999449
mfw disgusting people are dumb enough to be openly athiest, especially on this Christian prayer board
>>77999493
What really matters is that do you love Jesus
If you don't you're kind of a dick
>>77996917
>Gould
Overrated. He was a proponent of the now largely disproved "punctuated equilibrium" hypothesis for evolution. He played Devil's advocate in an effort to annoy fellow scientists, which did little to contribute to our understanding of evolution's history nor of natural selection. To his credit, he was very funny in the Simpsons episode.
Dawkins rubs a lot of people the wrong way, and I think he does that because he's strident and passionate but without much of a sense of humor; he comes off as angry and unrelatable. Sam Harris is more agreeable, in my opinion. James Randi, while not a scientist, is also very engaging.
Dawkins is indisputabley the greatest Biologist alive today, however. He's a living legend who forever changed the way scientists view natural selection.
> its a Simpsons episode with an athiest as a guest "star"
into the trash it goes
>>77999449
I hope you're not serious.
>>77999464
Buddhism and wicca are meme religions
>>77999504
Love?
Listen to that liberal nonsense.
Every good Christian knows what makes you a follower of Jesus is haing other religions and telling thise people how much they will burn in hell for all eternity.
Lisa needs to brace herself for that hellfire.
>>77999570
Mormons like their memes toodum dum dum dum dum
>>77999587
That is God fearing Christianity, has nothing to do with following Jesus.
Person who follows God = fears and judges everything, follows Old Testament incoherently
Person who follows Jesus = lives as Jesus taught and know God wanted us to enjoy our lives, follows New Testament
>>77999520
>Dawkins is indisputabley the greatest Biologist alive today
This would not reflect well on the field if it were true...
>>77999464
I hate the episode where she converts to Buddhism.
>no Mom, I still believe in God
>converts to Buddhism a day later
>>77999520
>Dawkins is indisputabley the greatest Biologist alive today
People actually believe this.
>>77999587
You're talking about Pharisees, not Jesus
>>77999614
>tfw the Jews really do run America
>>77996962
What Randi focuses on isn't 'harmless kinda deception'. He doesn't expose the average party magician and when he explains a trick it's not to insult other magicians. He exposes the faith healers and indian 'godmen' and conmen psychics who scam desperate people out of millions and sit on massive personal fortunes made out of telling vulnerable people that "yes, I spoke with them and your loved ones are smiling down on them from heaven, and that'll be seven hundred dollars please". Those sort of people do an incredible amount of damage among people in desperation, in exchange for easy money, and absolutely deserve to get their shit pushed in wherever possible.
Penn is a self righteous libertarian prick so it's not surprising that he takes the asshole tack, but don't lump them both in together on that.
>>77997669
It's not wrong though.
It's only a matter of time before someone launches a nuke, because their imaginary friend in the sky told them to.
Superstitious people don't care about/understand the concept of MAD.
>>77999973
The moral views in West are also structured by religion, mostly New Testament, is that bad too?
>>77999985
Morals and Common Sense are interchangeable when you keep in mind that we, as a species, are vengeful assholes.
>>77997298
The biggest problem with Bullshit! is that, besides just being one sided, they're basically ideological nutjobs themselves. It's just instead of crystal therapy or UFO conspiracies, the altar they worship at is the FREE MARKET. So any time that any episode comes up with any sort of relation to the FREE MARKET comes up, they start lying right out of their fucking teeth. They trot out all of their libertarian think tank friends to recite the political talking points under the guise of legitimate scientific opinion. Any time they pull out their CATO friends they end up with episodes like the one where they explain why second hand smoke totally doesn't exist and the only reason why there's taxes on cigarettes and bans on public smoking in certain places is because the GUBERNMINT is stepping on our FREEDOM.
>>77997905
>Basically he's a product of the British tertiary education system, where saying you are religious is tantamount to declaring your idiocy in public.
Tony Blair mentioned how, during his college days at Oxford in the early Seventies, religious believers like he was were the ultimate weirdos and edgemeisters. They'd be referred to as The God Squad and names like that.
>>77998136
>not running scientific tests on the validity of something religion deals with.
A physical skeleton being claimed to be a divine being is most definitely in the scope of science. He was just a mollycoddling appeaser in the episode.
>>77996033
I really didn't like this episode. If there is a character I hate more than Jerkass Homer, its Jerkass Lisa.
>>78000202
Didn't do much for me. It was too weird. One of the worst Lisa episodes.
>>77996033
I remember when she ended up going against her atheist beliefs in the end and buying into the angel like everyone else did.
>>77999449
>implying you can follow Christ without having a relationship with God
LTS is an episode that didn't quite live up to its potential. Homer and Lisa can both be annoying at times; it's not so much of an issue for the former, but the latter comes off hard as a fedora atheist who has the need to belittle others. Much of the episode does a pretty good job satirically although the Springfield mob mentality feels a little formulaic and exaggerated.
The usual Scully ending works better here than later episodes because the writers at this point still bothered giving it a believable setup. It's an episode that might have been brilliant in Season 4.
>>77999973
That's right anon. I imagine a vast, atheist state would never be responsible for nearly a half century long dick measuring contest of nuclear weapons. Nor would such a state ever come within a hairsbreadth of thermonuclear warfare.
>>78000234
I still don't know what to think of this episode. There are some great jokes throughout the episode. However, much of it is too preachy and the ending falls short. I did like the conversation between Lisa and Marge at the end, but something was missing from this episode.
>>78000235
>2015
>still thinking that communist states were atheist
Protip: All they did was substitute the Church for worship of the party and the leader.
This episode has a lot of genuinely funny (and even hilarious) moments, but some of the satire (while often decent) gets too heavy handed and preachy. It's obvious what David S. Cohen's views of organized religion were and the episode lacks any balance except a half-baked ending. Worse, this was one of the early introductions of liberal activist Lisa that would be her dominant characterization through the Scully era.
It's pretty good. Homer capitalizing on the angel was pretty funny, as was the rest of the episode. But Lisa was way too abrasive in this episode, even though I agree with her point of view.
In Lisa the Iconoclast, she had physical evidence to assert her claims, whereas in Lisa the Skeptic, she was actually right, but she took a dump on a lot of people's beliefs, eg. Marge's.
I've seen some really heated debate over this one about whether Lisa is rationally irritable or simply beyond her character. I'm not too concerned over it, honestly, and this is a fairly funny episode on the whole. A little one-sided at times, but they at least somewhat gave some other perspective at the end. Heck, I'd say the little Marge vs. Lisa bitterness was very well-done.
I thought the point was that both "sides" were too stubborn to find a middle ground. It is very much a Lisa versus the ignorant mob episode, as she does stand her ground which is admirable, but the fact she adopted such a vicious me versus everyone else mentality just made her even harder to listen to. I always thought it's an allegory for religion versus science debates. Most of the time they're endless because one side is arguing something that can't be proven or disproven, so if the other side gets a superiority complex and disrespects the other side it just has no end. In the end all the squabbling was over a stupid mall prop. Even if Lisa had the right idea, she was just as guilty of being mindlessly angry over nothing as the mob.
Marge came out looking the best because she just gave it time to explain itself, without getting self important.
It's episodes like this that make me hate Lisa. Lisa's attitude in this episode reminds me of Family Guy's "You're either a super smart left wing atheist or you're a troglodyte idiot" attitude.
I don't like preachy entertainment that go either left or right.
In the latest episode Lisa finds a sexist ancient computer that turned a Suffergate house into a titty bar
>>78000402
^You know, I've never conceived this episode as a praise for atheism. Actually Lisa is meant to be more spiritual than several characters, and the object in conflict in this episode is so ridiculous (a fossilized angel) that it only represents the trendy beliefs of a crowd. IMO it's not anything different than the whole town being conned by Lyle Lanley, and if I was in Lisa's position I'd certainly behave as inconsiderately as she does because the situation is so damn wacky that I hardly could think that the topic required any debate.
The fact that this thread is still up is proof the mods are incapable of doing their job.
>>78000260
Worship and dogma doesn't necessarily equal religion anon.
>>78000405
It's not so much praising atheism as it's Lisa's "100% correct" attitude and crapping on many's beliefs (Her mother's included).
Lisa is suppose to be the smart open-minded girl but this episode doesn't show that. It shows her as stubborn and almost a bitch to everyone who holds a different opinion to her. She does raise some valid points in the episode but it's her attitude to those who don't agree with her that ruin the episode.
This episode almost contradicts the smart, sweet, lovable, open-minded girl we have known since the beginning.
>>77998525
>Also "most protected status" still belongs to Jews, considering they pretty much get green light and some funds from West so they can bomb Palestinians.
Dune coons don't count as Homo Sapiens though, more like a side branch of hominid.
>>78000418
But Lisa is smart, sweet, lovable and open-minded before and after this episode. The fact that she is shown once or twice to be as a rather egoistic and unkind girl doesn't mean that we have to blame these episodes; they are just taking a new point of view at her in the same way that Marge Be Not Proud did with Bart. If anything, it enriches the character. And a good proof that it's not really a simple "Lisa's 100% right" is the ending. Lisa was right at saying that the angel was a fake, but in the end she got scared at the first presumably solid proof of his existence. Yes, we know that the Springfieldians are wrong, but this ending proves that this statement is true regardless who defended it. If Lisa wasn't portrayed as the dissident voice, it would still be ridiculous. Was Marge blamed even a single time when she was the only person in Springfield who suspected that Lyle Lanley was a crook?
>>78000418
>as it's Lisa's "100% correct" attitude
But she is correct this episode.
>>78000433
Being "correct" doesn't make you likable, especially when you're a fictional character who can be made to be correct by the writers
>>78000432
I understand Lisa was proven right at the end and that her squeezing Marge's hand opens her mind, I get what you're saying and it's true. Lisa was and still is (most of the times) the same Lisa we all like/love. It's just I believe, everyone's beliefs aside, this is a poor episode and it almost ruined the way I portrayed Lisa. I like Lisa most of the times but episodes like this make me hate her.
I don't like seeing Lisa with that attitude as it reminds me a little too much of Seth McFarlane's attitude on Family Guy and to say the least, I don't like Family Guy.
Like I said before, I hate when shows get preachy/stubborn to the one point. I don't like propaganda in my entertainment (not implying this episode has propaganda in it).
>>77999464
You're just repeating "she's an American Buddhist". Buddhism in the US isn't a religion, it's a " belief system " for wannabe spiritual atheist hippies.
Yeah...Lisa the Skeptic does not enrich Lisa. Too lazy to repost what I said earlier, but being an egocentric young girl in the midst of a mob of people so hyperbolically stupid that Lisa should have been able to understand that her appeal to intellect would have no effect (which kinda shatters the entire episode's believability), coupled with the fact that all characterizations were obviously manipulated for the sake of a by-the-numbers science vs. religion satire that ended with an awfully tacked on 'Marge and Lisa walk off into the sunset' moment intended to magically clean the slate with its sentimentality, all means that this is not a character-enriching episode by any stretch of the imagination.
>>77999587
>Lisa needs to brace
Oy vey, look vat you did.
Yeardley Smith remarked on the DVD commentary that Lisa's line about Marge being wrong is about as mean-spirited as she ever gets on the show. I don't really see this episode as a character profile for Lisa. I can't comment much on how (or if) it is a breach of her character, I see the episode as more of a Simpson version of "A Very Old Man with Enormous Wings". Although, this shows Mike Scully's dismissal of character for the sake of plot conveniences, which returns in full force in his later episodes.
Could it be that Lisa was attention-seeking, like she was in Bart Star when she wanted to join the football team as the only girl, but was disappointed when other girls were already on the team? And she almost seemed disappointed when she couldn't argue about using the skin of an innocent pig on a football (in the same episode).
>>77997927
His jar of honey was too large to carry onto the plane so he had to throw it out and tweeted about how bin Laden won.
>>78000501
I like the comparison to Bart Star. Lisa as becoming a parody of herself, either for the sake of a joke or a plot device, rarely to develop her character.
>>78000509
Note that I said "if anything". I'm not even saying her character is being enriched in this circumstance, but IMO it's closer to this extreme than the one you're blaming. I agree she is more cynical than usual but on the other hand I don't really find the point where her portrayal is being damaged (actually in the situation she is living and even judging by previous traits I think it's a fairly logical response). It happens to me lots of times, for example when I'm watching an episode based on negative opinions and in the end I'm still waiting for the cringeworthy scene that everybody is complaining about, and I guess this situation is likely to be the same. I wouldn't say Lisa was specially great in this episode when compared with the classic standards, but in its context there is nothing that I found overacted or inadequate in her.
I hated that bullshit when Marge says to Lisa "You know Lisa, when that angel started talking you were squeezing my hand pretty tight", as if that meant Lisa had some underlying notion there could something spiritual out there. Yeah no fucking shit she squeezed your hand; she's an eight year old and a fucking statue started talking and floating out of nowhere. Doesn't matter how smart a person is, that sort of thing will take them by surprise or even shock them if they don't see it coming.
>>78000234
I don't understand why Lisa being a know-it-all bitch is supposed to be an issue. That's been a big part of her characterization since for fucking ever.
>>78000433
>>78000446
>>78000402
Reminder that Brian has been established as a hypocritical pseudo-intelectual closet racist since at least season 5.
I don't understand how you guys can be this bad at watching cartoons.
>>78000446
You can't always worry about likability when people you love are falling for nonsense to their detriment. And same writers who made her correct were the same ones who did the lazy last-minute "squeezing her hand" pull. I always saw it the same as >>78000530
The episode just has a shit message all around.
>>78000418
>Lisa
>open minded
In what fucking universe? She preaches open-mindedness but she never applies it. Ever.
>>78000526
So yes, the Scully era sucks at characterization and everybody seems to be exaggerated. But I wouldn't put this specific example in the statement. She is facing a quite jerky mob (which is not something that this episode invented, in fact a good portion of episodes is based on the Springfield town as a whole making stupid decisions and supporting ridiculous thoughts to the point of radicalism), and in that sense I could easily understand her kind of disrespectful and cynical acts because none of them were hyperbolized. As said before, the fact that I didn't find the straw that broke the camel's back is probably the basic source of my disagreement.
>>78000576
The mob is hyperbolized in the sense that it has always been hyperbolized throughout all of the show's run. My problem with Lisa's behavior is that the intended realism of her response is intended to clash with something so exaggerated that it damages the credibility of the situation.
>>78000446
But what the fuck is /co/'s obsession with liability?
A character being likable doesn't make them good and vice versa.
>>78000585
Although I understand your point, I think the plots in the Simpsons universe don't work because the situations are credible but the reactions to them are relatable. For example: despite Homer going to space was a very cartoony, surreal premise, it worked because his fears and lack of responsibility were well-portrayed; and in the end it could be concluded that, if a guy like Homer had the opportunity to become an astronaut, this (with some humorously exaggerated traits, though) would be what happens. That's what I feel about Lisa here, not even going to analyze which plot line is more or less credible.
>>78000616
think there is a difference. In Deep Space Homer, there's a clash between the outlandish and the realistic, but the latter is meant to ground the former in credibility. We can buy that Homer is an astronaut because the characters react realistically to it. In Lisa the Skeptic, Lisa's repetitious arguments, in addition to her own self-parody ("who wants to complain with me?") does very little to feel natural in response to a mob of people who willingly destroy science museums. This clash of degrees of credibility is ultimately nonsensical. How can an intelligent person like Lisa even react with the pretense of seriousness to such people? I can understand her frustration given she does have to accept the mob as part of her immediate world (thanks to the writers), but given the sheer manipulative nature of the satire that thrives on Lisa's predictable reaction to over-exaggerated fanatics, it feels forced and very much like a plot device, far from natural.
>>78000506
Like, not as a joke?
Cuz that's an alright joke
>>77996885
It's an entire profession which is about realizing how easy it is to get people to believe a complete lie. So yeah, magic is full of hardcore skeptics.
I didn't like the "Who wants to complain with me?" line either, but I could accept it as a joke. The rest was not anything that looked bothering, nor repetitious, nor self-parodic. You make a difference between this episode and Deep Space Homer, and I have to agree with you in the fact that the Season 5 episode is probably working better as a contrast between outlandish and realistic stuff, but it's because both realities are separated and don't influence each other. In Lisa The Skeptic both the wacky (mob) and kind of grounded in reality (Lisa's reaction) situations are not so delimited. I don't see where is the problem there, though. You say that Lisa is not meant to react seriously against the mob, and I think that's not a fair argument just because of that ambiguity in the differences between one and other world. Remember that she is actually facing people who know her and probably have an established relationship; yes, Lisa could simply ignore them but it's more difficult to do that with your fellow men. On the other hand, she is forced to be a main character of the story - not only she discovered the skeleton and tried to make a theory, but Homer decided to benefit economically from the Springfieldians' beliefs and set up the angel in the Simpsons' garage. Lisa could have easily complained about them adoring the angel and I could agree with your statement if they were not having influence on her daily life, but both the fact of being the discoverer and having a merchandising campaign in her own home made a solid connection to the story. And not only that, it added a new reason for her to act: now it's not only for the sake of proving the truth, but also because of moral issues (she's also blaming Homer for using the angel idea to his own advantage).
>>78000509
That's how it is with about everything in the Simpsons, you just take notice here because you don't like that characterization. Which is itself irrelevant to whether it's good for the show or not.
>>78000687
About the satire being manipulative or not...well, I'm not going to contradict you in the fact that it is, but I wouldn't say it is too much or makes a problem in the general enjoyment of the episode. That's a pretty subjective thing.
>>78000662
>>78000558
>don't get caught up in spectacular marketing schemes
>respect other people's beliefs even if you find them stupid, if they are to change their minds they'll do it independently of you
I don't see it.
The point is, I find the idea of a mob that willfully rampages through science museums and are so exaggerated for the sake of satire to inhabit one degree of credibility that rarely clashes with a more realistic world of character emotions and the like. For example, take the various Jon Lovitz and Albert Brooks characters. Usually they're an extreme stereotype, good for humor but rarely would we expect one of the series' main characters to react with a genuine emotional response to someone who is so obviously a one-note comedic construct. Could you imagine if Marge tried to talk to Jacques about her marital relationship the way Homer chooses to do with Lurleen? The former is a one-dimensional stereotype, the latter has depth.
>>77998136
You're full of shit, if you've got a weird skeleton dug up then why shouldn't it be tested? Just because people freak out about it being an angel doesn't make a difference.
Especially because the only reason he didn't test it is because the mall people paid him off to keep up the con.
>>78000727
Even though each has a notable effect on the narrative, there are carefully marked degrees of seriousness. Take Lisa the Iconoclast. It is believable that Lisa might take on people who hold Jebediah Springfield to some ideal; never are his supporters exaggerated to the point that they lose their credibility. I can swallow it that Moe or Apu would turn her flyers away, and the museum curator is 100% believable. But the angel supporters ARE grossly exaggerated to the point that they are obviously plot devices. They are all homogenized as 'the mob.' They are hateful, extreme, etc. This mass of people whose outrageousness might have worked in the context of a light satire or a quick joke (like most mobs in the series), are now meant to be taken dead seriously, Lisa's logical response standing in stark contrast to their manipulation by the script. It's just such a huge disparity between modes of realism. No one expects any character to react seriously and genuinely to Duffman or Disco Stu, even if they did represent a certain side of an issue being dealt with in the episode; I find it ridiculous that the writers force Lisa to react seriously to the equally cartoonish mob of hyper-fundamentalists.
>>78000712
>terrorists fly two planes into buildings
>America starts two unending wars
>Americans gladly welcome Orwellian fascist police state
>Honey given literally same treatment as jews in Poland 1942
>no one says a goddamn thing
bravo burgerland
>>78000666
It really doesn't help that there are people out there who use the same tricks that magicians use, except they try to pass it off as legitimate mental powers or magical ability or connection to god or whatever to con vulnerable or gullible people out of their cash. It'd be pretty fucking irritating to have people misusing your passion and means of living to cheat and steal from people, both because it's a shit thing to do and because it reflects poorly on you.
>>77999383
She became Buddhist in season 13, Lisa the Skeptic was season 9
>>78000072
>second hand smoke totally doesn't exist
I was genuinely shocked when South Park slipped that bullshit into My Future Friend & Me; it's one of the most easily disproven conspiracy theories, with concrete proof that it was started by tobacco companies. The fact that they tried to push this "all of this stuff about drugs is lies from mean ol' liberals!" crap on top of it was just bizarre. Ffs, you guys already did the 'drugs aren't that bad' in "Ike's Wee Wee"!
>>78000403
It spelt Suffragette
>>78000721
>if they are to change their minds they'll do it independently of you
That's not true.
So when exactly did 4chan turn into an un-ironic version of that Landover Baptist Church forum?
>>78000752
>>78000727
It seems we are getting the point of subjectivity here, but whatever.
In first views I really liked this episode just because I felt well supporting Lisa. Why am I saying this? Well, it's obvious that, because of the fact that I've always been biased towards it, what some of you find as annoying and obnoxious in her attitude doesn't bother me and I can easily find a justification and even be able to relate to it.
However, the episodes you bring up like Life On The Fast Lane and Colonel Homer are very unlike Lisa The Skeptic in that they're mostly 100% grounded in realism. The behavior of the mob is exaggerated, I admit it, but not really more than the typical "Springfield as a town" idea from the classic era, which has provided episodes like Marge vs the Monorail or Bart After Dark. To sum it up, I'd say there is a kind of cartoony feeling in the characterization of the mob that I like. Would it be better if they tried a more realistic development of them as a pressure group with at least some differing nuances? I dunno, but it's not that this way bothered me.
On the other hand, Lisa was taking the mob seriously because she was directly related to it (because of close relationship, plot devices). Is it odd to blend the wacky and hyperbolized reaction of a mob with the importance given to their acts by Lisa? Probably, and I understand your point. Why I don't despise it while you do is maybe too much subjective for discussion. I guess that, raising the episode as a "what if" (even if the situation seems grotesque, I appreciate it because it allows IMO to make an accurate portrayal of Lisa facing it), I can forgive the touches of unrealistic behavior way more, and in fact when analyze the episode I'm never even giving the mob the category of character, but a juncture that Lisa finds and has to deal with.
>>77997429
I cant see his name and not think about him being anti-vaccination
>>78000791
When moot resurrected /pol/.
>>77998593
>atheism
>a religion
Stale bait.
>>78000791
Because we had to purposely be the opposite of the liberal hipster atheist-dominated Reddit/Tumblr axis.
>>78000791
When flags were added to /pol/ the userbase fled to /co/ and /tv/ and the mods did nothing about it. /co/ has become very shitty and /tv/ is now almost completely unusable.
>>78000752
The fact that you take them seriously doesn't mean they're meant to be, anon.
>>78000786
To elaborate, if people never encountered any conflict with their beliefs they will likely never have reason to question them. No, that doesn't mean someone has to actively attack someones beliefs, simply living in a way counter to their beliefs can be enough. But without some external push a change may never be possible.
Also, it's tolerance, not respect. They are two very different things.
Homer: What am I gonna do with 10,000 angel ash trays?
Bart: I could take up smoking.
Homer: You damn well better!
"Why? Why was I programmed to feel pain?"
I think this is an above average season 9 episode. The plot is not that good but it has pretty good gags throughout. 8/10
I think what bothered me more about Lisa in this episode was not that she didn't believe that the skeleton of the angel was real, it was that she stated that angels aren't real. Then she insulted her own mother's beliefs, which were much more reasonable than the mob's.
>>78000785
See? This is a prime example of why I can't take you fags seriously. The whole fucking point of that episode was to show a biased view that entirely pushed tobacco and its industry as a good thing, as a parody of anti-smoking campaigns.
Or was the
>wow without tobacco farmers importing slaves we wouldn't have black friends!
Joke too subtle for you?
>>78000872
see its the little jokes like that why i like The Simpsons in this era.
>>78000791
When fedoras became a meme. Suddenly it wasn't contrarian enough to be an atheist. A large part of 4chan's identity is being "different" for the sake of it; there's a reason why the word hipster gets slung around from time to time.
Well, this one's a bitch for me to review. In fact, I have to say this is one of the episodes I am most conflicted on in the entire series.
For starters, the satire (or lack thereof) in this episode. This would have been far more effective if some of those who believed in the angel had been portrayed as reasonable, intelligent people, but the fact that a character like Dr. Hibbert or pre-Zombie Simpsons Flanders would go along with trashing a science museum is just plain wrong. Those scenes would have been far more effective with characters such as Lenny, Carl, and Moe (although Moe as a religious zealot is a whole different can of worms). Also, this is one of the worst examples of Lisa being a preachy bitch, and quite honestly, if she acted like this all the time I would understand why some people would hate her. Where the fuck is the girl that didn't ruin the Jebediah Springfield myth for the whole town because it brought out the best in everybody? This time, she has to prove she's right so much that she will basically shit on everybody who cares about her, going so far as to estrange herself from her own mother because Marge believes in angels? Now, I disagree with quite a few of Lisa's political views, but the reason I love her character is she always keeps such an open mind about things. The biggest classic era exception, Lisa the Vegetarian, involves as a conflict her learning that she needs to keep an open mind. This isn't Lisa Simpson, this is a psycho activist bitch, and to be honest this starts from the very beginning. I'm sorry, but halting a construction project because some fossils might be buried is rather contrived, and her insistence that there's something there...she brought the whole angel conspiracy on the town by even getting involved.
>>78000786
That's besides the point, stupid. Besides they did get confronted with their beliefs when it was revealed the angel was a fraud. Lisa calling them idiots didn't achieve that.
>>78000920
Against overwhelming odds, I don't outright hate the episode, I just hate the plot. Quite a few of the jokes are great. the boat giveaway is a nice setpiece (and I love the callback to it), Lionel Hutz is gold as always, the honor students and detention students both going on the dig, and Homer forcing Bart to take up smoking are all quite good. Stephen Jay Gould turned in a pretty memorable guest performance and I actually like the ending and resolution to the plot, I just hate the way it gets there. The good in this episode would be like taking a piece of dog shit, and then deep-frying it and slathering it in ketchup. Some bites it would still taste like shit, other times you'd be able to forget how bad it is, and I'm willing to forget its flaws just enough to bump it up to my lowest "pass" score, an 8/15. Note that this makes it the worst of Season 9, and in fact the second worst non-clip show of the classic era (2-9)
Why are a bunch of basement dwelling neets who hate other people and common courtesy talking about something inherently meant as a social experience and a cultural institution.
>>78000234
She's an atheist, so what? Religious people belittle each other's religions all the time, ok you don't say those things out loud but what do Christians think of those hundreds of Hindu gods, pretty crazy eh? And oh yeah, they also think Hindus are all going to Hell forever. They can't say it because it's faith, but they wouldn't be Christians if they thought Hindus weren't hellbound. Lisa did what any sane person should do, speak out their mind and expose idiocy. She was very brave. Replace the angel with a witch and the skeleton with a living human and the "war" against science to a battle against witchcraft and you arrive to Christianity how it used to be.
I think the Smithers-Burns kiss was too much. Burns shouldn't know about Smithers's feelings.
>>78000912
Or maybe people got sick of fifth column assholes sabotaging western culture in a time when the entire western way of life is under assault by pretty much everyone europeans have ever wronged in the past 500 years.
>>78000972
Atheist? I thought Lisa was a Buddhist?
Anyway, I felt the fault fell on both sides with Lisa and the mob. Neither side wanted to hear or embrace what the other(s) believed. Lisa was little more aggressive in wanting the mob and her family particularly her mother to take her stance in the scientific facts of what the skeleton was, but for me it didn't really bother me when she took her stance against the mob, it only started to bother me in the clashes she had with Marge and when she told her she felt sorry for her. Other than that, I thought it was an ok episode and I give it a 3.5/5. A lot of the gags and lines in the episode made it worthwhile.
>>78000992
Anyway, she is far away from literal christian. And I don't think buddhist even have a thing they could call god.
The Simpsons often does a good job of representing both sides of controversial issues equally, but this is one case in which it doesn't. Actually, both sides are portrayed negatively, but Lisa is clearly shown to be the one that is right. The religious people are portrayed as complete yogurt-heads. I don't agree with them, but most religious people I know are just as intelligent as most other people, and I also don't think are anti-science like Ned Flanders, Reverend Lovejoy, Moe, et al. Also, Lisa comes off as incredibly supercilious. Aside from that stuff, this episode is okay (particularly the apocalypse part).
>>78000791
When the contrarian thing became to be religious.
for the longest time this was one of my least favorite episodes of the first 9 seasons. always found the whole science vs. religion thing ham-fisted and forced, and thought lisa was overly dislikable and stubborn.
just rewatched for the first time in years and i really enjoyed it. satire-wise, the whole "religion vs. science" thing feels like a proxy for the wider satire of corporations misleading and exploiting the public in the name of profit. i think this is what saves the episode from a satire point of view and gives it some weight because it's clearly thoughtfully done - they set up the mall at the beginning with lisa trying to get them to do an archaeological survey in the name of science, which turns into them doing one in the name of publicity, which leads to the angel, which loops back to the mall opening at the end. everyone running to the mall at the end, completely forgetting about the angel, because there's 20% off everything is classically simpsonian take on american consumerism. it feels right at home in the classic era.
>>78001050
in fact the whole "religion vs. science" element of the episode isn't so much used as a satire as it is as an exploration of marge and lisa's relationship, and as fuel for (some very funny) jokes throughout the episode. the marge/lisa dinner conversation is the heart of the episode and says all it needs to say really. lisa is stubborn, but this is because she is young, passionate and naive. (she doesn't strike me as "a bitch" (to quote this thread) at all, and to be honest that criticism reeks of sexism) by the end of the episode she learns to be more understanding of those with faith as it doesn't necessarily make them stupid or bad people. it's delicately done, and the episode doesn't really hammer it home too much (not that it's subtle), which is nice. i think the whole "dealing with family members who are religious" is something a lot of people can relate to, and it's quite a complex subject for an episodic half-hour comedy, this episode had exactly the right ambitions.
there are clunky bits... i always find the bit where the mob destroy all the scientific buildings in town a bit cringeworthy and over the top... it all feels a bit lazy and unnecessary to the plot/point of the episode. but even then it delivers a couple of decent gags ("why was i programmed to feel pain" & the news report where brockman reports on the mob burning down scientific buildings, only for the building in the background to be a christian science center, are great).
>>77998212
A lot of them mellow out too, as they get older. I know a lot of reformed bullies.
>>78000920
Moe's a polack, why wouldn't he be religious?
I don't see how stopping a construction because there are likely archeological remains is contrived, it happens all the time.
>>78000944
>this guy has a numeric rating for every Simpsons episode
>it's on 15
That is a unique autism. Cherrish it.
http://www.redkid.net/generator/simpsons/7.php
Oh shit, that MS Paint autist has gotten out of /co/.
>>77997905
This.
In Murricah (aka backwater land), criticising someone's religion and/or their penchant for refusing to adhere to empirical scrutiny is one of the gravest sins one can commit.
>>78000980
What the fuck are you talking about? Challenging the status quo is notoriously western. It's only fitting that you have people who "attack" it.
>>78001005
Buddhism is originally a bastardization of Hinduism, and while Buddha was more into the whole reincarnation thing he never denied gods. After that it gets more complicated the more Buddhism travelled, as some forms treat Buddha himself as a God and others just mixed Buddha in with their previous gods (Shinto Buddhism).
American Buddhism, again, is just new age hippie bullshit.
>>78001063
I used "bitch" as a bit of a hyperbole. She's a child, I understand you're meant to be forgiving to them.
It wasn't sexist in the least, just a gendered insult. If it was a guy I'd have said "dick" (for instance: Dawkins is a dick) and I'm sure you'd have no issue with that.
>>78000260
This anon made my point for me: >>78000415
The problems with organized religion, or even just religion in general, are not exclusive to them. Russia has gone through a slew of charismatic, authoritarian leaders of various political and religious stripes. The common factor isn't any of their ideologies or histories, but the people who accept, justify, or even glorify their rule. The issues some hard atheist seem to think "getting rid" of religion will solve can't actually be solved by getting rid of religion. They originate much deeper in humanity. It's like prohibition and thinking it'll in anyway address the vices of mankind. The problem was never alcohol, and people still want it anyway. It's a remarkable unpractical viewpoint of the world, rooted more in idealism than any sort of conception of how such a world would work.
>>78001362
I didn't say other dogmatic organizations couldn't share the same issues as religious organizations, just that that doesn't make them religious.
And yes, tribalism and conflicts exist outside of religion, only an uneducated or obfuscatingly stupid person would think otherwise.
>>78001429
Oh never mind, you were agreeing with me.
>>78000840
Hard Atheism is a religion no matter how much hard atheists deny it.
>>78001460
It literally isn't.
>>78001460
It may be similarly annoying, but no.
>>77996033
Is that Charles Bronson?
>>78000763
I want to laugh at burgers but sadly France is welcoming the Orwellian nightmare as well: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/after-paris-attacks-proposed-french-law-would-block-tor-and-forbid-free-wi-fi
How come no one is blaming Paul and Linda McCartney for turning Lisa vegan in the first place?
>>78000712
Based Dawkins
>>78000944
How can it rate worse than Trouble With Trillions? That episode felt like the writer was making shit up as he went along with the script, rather than laying out the plot beforehand, and the humour basically disappears by the second half.
>>78000992
Buddhists technically are atheists, as there is no deity in that religion.
>>78002631
Depends on the branch.
>>78002705
Except Buddha himself rejected the very idea of a deity.
>>78001965
No Dice.
>>78002631
There's a shitload of deities in buddhism, you pleb.
>>78002802
No there isn't.
>>78002817
I don't know what your life counselor told you at yoga class but there's a lot about buddhism that you don't understand. I suggest some very basic reading on Buddhism before continuing to discuss the subject. Even a basic encyclopedia article should improve your understanding a lot.
Namaste.
>>78002886
Are you referring to Vajarana? Theravada? Mahayana?
>>78002766
Not exactly. A god is someone who accumulated enough good karma to reincarnate into the godly realm. They are powerful and enjoy a pleasant existence, but can no longer achieve enlightenment so eventually they fall do to a loss of karma and reincarnate as a lower form of life, usually human.
I don't get why she was against the businessman who organised the whole stunt at the end.
They were both out after the same goal. Only the businessman wanted money too.
>>77996560
That doesn't mean she'd gone back on her position.
She was a little girl who would obviously be scared of that. Hell, it's a little creepy to see that skeleton there under a red sky.
Even if she did doubt - briefly - that's completely forgivable anyway because, again, little girl with typical little girl outlook on life.
Wasn't it nice when you could actually defend Lisa as a character in some way?
This show, in particular this episode, taught me to reason a lot for myself as a child. What I just told you, I have held as an opinion from when I saw it onwards.
It taught me to justify my position with arguments.
>>77997042
the reason people think he's mean is because he's grumpy as fuck and quite abrupt.
It's still a pathetic reason to dismiss him, speaking as an atheist, and I'd still say that to anyone who does.
But he still conducts himself poorly, and that's half the time why they dismiss him.
It's not an excuse, but it's important to know that about people and if he did, maybe e'd realise that he's hal his own undoing when trying to convince people.
But he is actually quite nice and softly spoken if you watch closely on his speeches interviews etc.
he just needs to be a bit more polite for his own sake.
Tell peopel they talk shit, yes, but with a tone and manenr that doesn't knowingly offend them. Then, the only offensive thing is the thing you are telling them and if they react like babies to that, that's their decision and they have no excuse like 'But he was meeeaan.'
TLDR Be upfront but don't be a cunt.
>>77997429
Saw it and looked up half his stuff. It's mostly bullsh*t
>>77996704
Could have been one of The Fallen. Or a Nephellim.
>>78003649
>bullsh*t
Just say bullhonkey you faggot.
>>78000961
Because neets are people too.
>>78002012
Every western country does.
Just as they always did.
>>77999409
I agree.
There's neat parlor tricks ("OOOH, I GUESSED YOUR FAVORITE BAAAND!") and then there's instilling vulnerable people with false hope in exchange for a hefty profit.
>>77999973
>Implying that war, conflict, and violence are born purely out of religious tensions and not because it is human nature to engage in competition and fuck with people to take their shit
>>78000383
This guy gets it.
>>78002602
>Mr. BURNS, I think we can trust the PRESIDENT OF CUBA.
>Oh, alright. Okay, now give it back.
>Give what back?
>Oh...
So is "fedora" a substitute for "I'm a brainwashed imbecile who believes in fairy tales in 2016 and the only rebuttal I can offer to atheists is a meme that implies they're uncool fat guys who live in a basement?"
>>78005438
Hey there, aptheist here.
Fedora is meant to symbolize how some people deem themselves "euphoric", as in inherently superior to other people because they don't share the simple needs they may have. Most commonly those would be the need to believe and the need to fuck. Some people who profess that are indeed fat neckbearded turds who wear a fedora and are super proud of owning a trench coat.
It's definitely a strawman, but it's not like many atheists can do any better. Just look at yourself.
>>78005438
No, it's a substitute for you getting euphoric from being so much better and more enlightened then all those sheeple who worship a sky wizard.
>>78005534
>aptheist
Apatheist. I certainly am not apt.
>>78005438
Basically, yeah.
They know their shit is retarded, but they get butthurt when people point it out.
>>77996202
Dawkins was always superior though...
>>77997101
>not liking bullshit
>>77996858
He's not a G-d fearing Christian, so naturally 4chan hates him.
>>78000980
I love this. You guys act like atheists are part of some big secular agenda. Please, name for me a single member of congress that's not religious.
>>77997472
>bill maher doesnt go after muslimes
Have you been living under a rock? Just Youtube "Bill Maher Islam" and see how many results you get. Now do the same thing with Christianity (or any other religion for that matter) and count the results.
>>77996837
>>77997905
So his crime is not being politically correct.
Good to know.
>>77997578
If Universe was designed, then who designed the designer? If designer was designed, who designed that one? Are there turtles all the way down or are we going to admit that incredibly complex systems CAN just happen?
It is conceivable that God might exist, but for all intents and purposes he might as well not, because there's no properties to deduce from claim that someone had to create the Universe. And to suggest that there's one book that accurately describes God is plain absurd. If I lower my standards enough for Bible, it will also be low enough for Quaran, whatever Hindus read, Wicca, all the ancient polytheistic religions, Zoroastrianism and whatever cosmology I randomly come up with the next minute because maybe THIS is a divine revelation.
>>77996033
that part really did justify the whole stupid episode
>i didn't do the tests
i love that he was so willing to make fun of himself
the rest of it was irritating. nobody believes angels are wingety people, and certainly nobody believes they can die and leave a corpse.
>>78006407
Nah it's being a dick about it.
It's not a crime, just a reason people may not like you, including people who agree with you.
>>77999864
>that image
>that text
You're one dense motherfucker.
>>78006443
Well, presumably if an entity that predated literally everything else exists, it seems likely it also created and is exempt from things like causality.
>>77999520
>"punctuated equilibrium"
>largely disproved
d'oh ho ho.
>>78000791
After 4chan became more sincerely conservative and religious, it also got a lot dumber.
Coincidence? I think not.
>>78006443
It's entirely possible (by extrapolation) that an incredibly complex system just happened, which lead to intelligent design. The question of whether our universe was created by intelligent design is not null and void simply because you can argue that intelligent design happened by happenstance or was itself created by intelligent design (which itself happened by happenstance). And hey, who's to say it isn't turtles all the way down?
>It is conceivable that God might exist, but for all intents and purposes he might as well not
That's how I personally live my life.
>It is conceivable that God might exist, but for all intents and purposes he might as well not
But absurd is certainly not impossible. There's a definite possibility that, by happenstance, of the religions existing in all of the worlds inhabited by intelligent beings of the universe, one is mostly correct.
Hey don't diss Zoroastrim, it's alright.
>>77999520
>largely disproved "punctuated equilibrium" hypothesis
It's still debated, but not as widely accepted anymore
>Dawkins is indisputabley the greatest Biologist alive today
????????????????
>>78006625
How is he being a dick? He only says his honest opinion that religion is bad. Why do atheists have to pretend that they think religion is good? I don't just not believe in God, I think it's bad that anyone does. Deliberately basing decisions off of superstition is wrong.
>>78006727
Ah see, this guy is clever, I posted a lot of shit and boom, that's the only point that needed to be made.
>>78006820
Incoming fedora maymay retort.
>>78000791
/pol/
>>78006727
>My worldview makes no sense that proves that there's an entity that doesn't have to make sense running the show
Hey, Thomas Aquinas, I thought you were dead.
>>78006793
As I said, effectively lowering my critical standards to accept one religion will mean I have to accept all of them.
It takes huge lack of perspective to be religious. To be unable to even conceive that other worldviews might be right. At best religious arguments, however weak support Deism. Only with shutting down all logic and reason you can come to believe you should pick one.
>>78006820
He comes off as condescending. Whether he's correct that he's smarter than the person he's talking with is irrelevant, he'll still come off as a dick because of it.
You can think what you want, if what you think is that one of your opinions makes you smarter than people with a differing opinion (and you have no shame in affirming so), you'll appear as a dick to your opponents and neutrals alike.
>>78006820
What's it like to be socially retarded?
Anti-theist atheists are like those fundamentalists who might treat you well at first but the moment they find out you're Catholic they'll go on a rant about how you're part of a pagan cult that corrupted Christianity and will go to Hell.
Are you starting to understand why no one likes vocal atheists? It's even worse for you fags because you have no divine instruction to preach your beliefs so any time you need to debate someone it's purely to stroke your own egos like a chronic masturbator.
>>78006748
PE cant explain something like, for example, the human eye. You need gradual change for that.
>>78006903
>As I said, effectively lowering my critical standards to accept one religion will mean I have to accept all of them.
I guess.
I can accept that most any religion can be correct by happenstance without actually believing in any of them.
>To be unable to even conceive that other worldviews might be right.
Well that's an issue that's far from unique to religious beliefs.
>>78006865
Why is something not making sense not conceivable?
>>78000791
It's called "4chan syndrome." Being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, no matter how stupid it is.
>>78007000
Because poorly constructed arbitrary assumptions you yourself demonstrate to be nonsensical do not prove that logic is left the building.
