Giving Each Other Pleasure

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Atheists" are never going to have a common goal any more than "men with facial hair" would.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Does the author frame this "maximizing pleasure" as some kind of moral obligation?

[KittyAnn]

I love to cook for others and give them a tasty pleasure ...
I love to make surprises for others and look at thier smiling faces....
I love telling others nice things that will make them feel special like never before

[Angrboda]

Does the author frame this "maximizing pleasure" as some kind of moral obligation?

Lucretius and others in Greece did frame the question in that way, even if the author does not.  Not having read Onfrey, I can only claim ignorance.

[henryp]

OP: Why shouldn't this be a goal for every human, atheist or not? The same as not intentionally giving pain.

(oh shit, hope Valk isn't reading)

I think the most sensible goal is to experience as much 'pleasure' as you can.  And oftentimes other people not having pleasure, or experiencing pain is a consequence of doing what you want for yourself.

Oftentimes, there's some synergy in what's best for others is best for you.  But looking out for #1 is the most reasonable way forward.

[The Grand Nudger]

What was the general reason (in the book) for having such a goal?

Onfrey posits a post-Nietzschean philosophy from which we have established that gods are dead. But, most of our lifestyles, philosophies,etc., are rooted in the religious traditions. So, he calls his search for a post religious philosophy "Atheology". Giving others pleasure (As opposed to suffering) is a major focus. The book is the only one I have found translated from the French.

you might enjoy this one-

An eloquent case for regarding nature itself as the focus of religion—as the metaphysical ultimate deserving religious commitment.

The beauty, sublimity, and wonder of nature have been justly celebrated in all of the religious traditions of the world, but usually these traditions have focused on beings or powers presumed to lie behind nature, providing nature’s ultimate explanation and meaning. In a radical departure, Donald A. Crosby makes an eloquent case for regarding nature itself as the focus of religion, conceived without God, gods, or animating spirits of any kind, and argues that nature is metaphysically ultimate.

https://www.amazon.com/Religion-Nature-D...0791454541

[chimp3]

Does the author frame this "maximizing pleasure" as some kind of moral obligation?

No! He posits a new exploration of philosophy and morality devoid of its hobbling with ancient religious philosophies. You are able to read it yourself! A good read!

---

Does the author frame this "maximizing pleasure" as some kind of moral obligation?

Also, I never mentioned "maximizing" pleasure. My OP was a simp!e one. You are welcome to answer my OP straightforward!

[The Valkyrie]

OP: Why shouldn't this be a goal for every human, atheist or not? The same as not intentionally giving pain.

(oh shit, hope Valk isn't reading)

You called?

I received and gave pleasure over the weekend, hence my absence.

But that's definitely an A69 discussion.

[Amarok]

This is not an Area69 topic although it could easily veer off that direction. I read Michel Onfrey's "Atheist Manifesto" a few years ago. He posited that a goal for each atheist should be to give other people pleasure. Music, art, cooking, wine, massage.

 I enjoy cooking for others. I enjoy their "Ummms". My son serenades me with his music. My friends and I swap heritage tomatos in the summer. My daughter has taken her skills as a model and photographer to send me amazing photos of my grandson. 

Pleasure, anyone?

Does not sound like a very good philosophy

[brewer]

OP: Why shouldn't this be a goal for every human, atheist or not? The same as not intentionally giving pain.

(oh shit, hope Valk isn't reading)

You called?

I received and gave pleasure over the weekend, hence my absence.

But that's definitely an A69 discussion.

Seeing that it's you, at the very least could you define "pleasure"?

Don't-Stop might be taken two ways.