(Obnoxiously atheist) new cookbook preview

[Soycrates]

I released a preview of my new book on vegan food and philosophy today: you can check it out here! It contains recipes with cheap ingredients, as well as an overview of the study of consciousness from a philosophical angle, and a summary of ethics both practiced and theorized.

Some of my statements (and even a recipe) are obnoxiously atheist, especially the "Better-Than-Heaven Grilled Peanut Butter and Banana Sandwiches" dish in which I flagrantly mock the concept of an eternal afterlife.

1. What do you think of the preview?
2. Do you suspect that anyone reading it who is religious might be upset by these comments, or do you think they'll laugh and shrug it off?

[miniboes]

Seems interesting, I'll have a read tomorrow!

[brimstoneSalad]

"Better-Than-Heaven" isn't really an atheist thing to say. I would assume somebody who said that was religious.

I don't think religious readers will think anything of it at all.

[Soycrates]

"Better-Than-Heaven" isn't really an atheist thing to say. I would assume somebody who said that was religious.

I don't think religious readers will think anything of it at all.

The title of the recipe is called "Better-Than-Heaven" and the recipe description talks about how not only is the concept of Heaven terrifying when you really examine it, but it's also highly unlikely. (I wasn't expecting people to freak over the title, obviously...)

Edit: Also, while discussing ethics in one chapter, I generally discredit the concept of God as the source of moral conduct. (Though I also discredit Nature as the source of moral conduct / the fallacy of appealing to nature, so it's not just a tirade against religious beliefs)

[brimstoneSalad]

I don't think they'll take offense to the beginning, but they might to the end.

"And the best part of it all: this sandwich actually exists!"

Maybe instead say it's provable, or confirmed to exist?

That is, if you want to avoid offense. And the stuff after that might be offensive.


Personally, I take offense at listing Ayn Rand in your list of recommended atheist philosophers.

[Soycrates]

I don't think they'll take offense to the beginning, but they might to the end.

"And the best part of it all: this sandwich actually exists!"

Maybe instead say it's provable, or confirmed to exist?

That is, if you want to avoid offense. And the stuff after that might be offensive.


Personally, I take offense at listing Ayn Rand in your list of recommended atheist philosophers.

I'm not trying to avoid offense, just wondering if it would be offensive. I'm also not trying to incur offense.

Also, everyone should read Ayn Rand. Not everyone should like her.

[brimstoneSalad]

Also, everyone should read Ayn Rand. Not everyone should like her.

That's like saying everybody should do meth.

A few people may be able to try it responsibly, understand its flaws, and decide it's not for them.

Is it a good policy statement for the vast majority of the often weak willed and irrational public?

I find throwing people into cults like that with a sink or swim mentality is irresponsible.

Some people unprepared with critical thinking skills might actually like what they read, and there you went and made a new Randroid.

Rand is not remotely as transparently absurd as the Christian Bible is; although it is arguably more absurd, it takes some measure of knowledge to understand that and seeing past the fancy and persuasive rhetoric is not something many people can do.