|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 07/04/2009 : 10:51:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Landrew
It seems to me that 2 wrongs don't make a right. If the first tool is broken, another broken tool won't fix it. |
What is "wrong" about attacking religion as a waste and a danger?
And ridicule is actually a very effective weapon, especially when backed with reasonable alternatives to whatever the ridiculous behavior is (that's what went wrong with McCain/Palin's attempts to ridicule science, they had nothing to offer as a replacement). Far from being a "broken tool," refusing to ridicule ridiculous behavior is to give that behavior a respect that it doesn't deserve, which will have the opposite of the desired effect (as we can see over the last century with regard to evolution eduction). |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2009 : 14:08:12 [Permalink]
|
Dave:
Far from being a "broken tool," refusing to ridicule ridiculous behavior is to give that behavior a respect that it doesn't deserve, which will have the opposite of the desired effect (as we can see over the last century with regard to evolution eduction). |
Not that I'm not a fan of ridicule. Sarcasm works for me. Parody works for me. Pretty much, ridicule works for me. But really, it's pretty easy to demonstrate how ridiculous creationism is without resorting to ridicule. Pointing out the ridiculousness of a ridiculous proposition will usually suffice. The ridicule part just happens to be more fun. The lack of ridicule over the last fifty years says nothing with regard to evolution education, in my opinion. (And really, there has been plenty of ridicule in that war over the years.) A lack of "accommodation" does not mean that there should be ridicule, or that the ridicule will be particularly effective in winning a debate or a war.
But then, neither do I think that it's a "broken tool". It's just that it mostly works on those of us who already agree that whatever is being ridiculed, deserves to be. Good comedy couldn't exist without it. Many humorous essays would go missing, along with such gems as The Onion publications and videos. For our own good, we need that sort of thing. It keeps us from becoming mired in grump, and sometimes it even helps us to focus on what really is ridiculous.
I think the ridicule part is mostly for our entertainment and education. And it's in that way that I find real value in it.
Edited.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Landrew
New Member
44 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2009 : 19:20:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Landrew
It seems to me that 2 wrongs don't make a right. If the first tool is broken, another broken tool won't fix it. |
What is "wrong" about attacking religion as a waste and a danger?
And ridicule is actually a very effective weapon, especially when backed with reasonable alternatives to whatever the ridiculous behavior is (that's what went wrong with McCain/Palin's attempts to ridicule science, they had nothing to offer as a replacement). Far from being a "broken tool," refusing to ridicule ridiculous behavior is to give that behavior a respect that it doesn't deserve, which will have the opposite of the desired effect (as we can see over the last century with regard to evolution eduction).
|
Ridicule is a political tool, not a scientific one. Scientists who ridicule aren't practicing science. There's nothing wrong with ridicule, as long as you don't call it science. |
God bless women, for without them there would be no cookies. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2009 : 21:08:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Landrew
Ridicule is a political tool, not a scientific one. Scientists who ridicule aren't practicing science. There's nothing wrong with ridicule, as long as you don't call it science. |
Name one person who is calling the use of ridicule in attacking religion "science." Just one.
Religion isn't a scientific position. Attacking religion with bare-bones science doesn't work, because the theists who demand that their theistic positions be used for the basis of public policy (the really dangerous ones) use political attacks instead of scientific ones (as should be obvious).
So, rationalists must also use political tools to combat the encroachment of religious values into public policy. And none of them call it "science." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2009 : 21:29:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
The lack of ridicule over the last fifty years says nothing with regard to evolution education, in my opinion. (And really, there has been plenty of ridicule in that war over the years.) |
I'll disagree with you here. When I first started becoming aware of the creation/evolution "debate," 10-plus years ago, the public face of the scientific side really was lacking in ridicule, trying to keep everything respectful and sticking to the facts. "Poe's Law" hadn't been dreamt up. We didn't have "Fundies Say the Darndest Things." Landover Baptist began in 1993. The H.L. Menkens and Oscar Wildes were few and far-between in the run-up to the Internet, while political cartoons showing Darwin as an ape-man go back 150 years (the "other side" has had no fear of using ridicule as a weapon, they just back it up with anything but faith).| A lack of "accommodation" does not mean that there should be ridicule, or that the ridicule will be particularly effective in winning a debate or a war. |
It's a tool that's been underused by "our" side until relatively recently. I'm unable to say whether it will be ineffective until it's had a good run. Recent polls indicating that more American atheists are (at least) "out" is encouraging, but a causal relationship between that and anti-religion ridicule has not yet been established.| I think the ridicule part is mostly for our entertainment and education. And it's in that way that I find real value in it. |
Entertainment is meant to be shared. The best part is when somebody who isn't "in the know" says something like, "people really believe things like that?" in response to a parody of some particularly ridiculous religious beliefs. The conversation which follows gets them thinking. Anecodotes aren't data, but I'm unaware of any fence-sitters who've viewed religion in a better light after seeing it ridiculed. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 07/05/2009 : 09:34:19 [Permalink]
|
Ridicule has little chance, in my opinion, to win any debate.
But it's fun. And, of course, like anything that touch on an issue, it might pick enough interest in somebody for this person to do his research, which in turn might convincing him.
It's also useful because laughter allows people to feel closer and tighten the bonds among the already convinced and familiar with the subject.
Mostly, it's fun and entertaining. That's enough value all in itself. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 07/05/2009 : 11:29:18 [Permalink]
|
I ridicule and disparage religions, all of them, simply because they make lofty claims with no factual foundations at all. Therefore, they are deserving of no more consideration than any common, TV news liar might be.
It's really one of the best arrows in the quivver, especally when you can point out exactly why you're attacking them -- know what the hell you are talking about before you run your mouth, in short. That blade cuts twice because when it comes to science, very few, if any, preachers do including the over-eduated fool, Dempski and others of the ilk.
There is a really neat trick that they play: learn the jargon of science, then use it to twist scientific findings in their apologetics. I've posted numerous examples over the years, and I just love it when they do that. Because, you see, I might not be familiar with the science being twisted, but I know how to find someone who is and get myself a tutorial as well as some accurate reference. Dog bless Google, eh?
Sarcasm is also a form of ridicule, a highly effective and even beautiful one. Great oratations can be spoken with the simple phrase of: "Yeah, right!" Ridicule has little chance, in my opinion, to win any debate.
|
Y'know what, Simon, I don't care about winning debates. In all of the years that I've been down in the mud, the blood and the puke & piss in this slimy, little alley, to my knowledge I have yet to change a single mind. Kind'a sad, ain't it?
No it ain't! Because, you see, the arguments I write are only secondarly intended for my opponent(s). I am much more interested in reaching those anomyous folks, who will never coorespond with me, but might be reading my work. Perhaps there, I have created cause for thought, and that is all that I desire.
This attitude has gotten me banned, here & there.
"Firm opinions of the dedicated, however unwarrented, cannot be changed even by the Gods themselves."
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 07/05/2009 : 13:00:50 [Permalink]
|
| I didn't mention the lurkers, or those people who are more causally interested in the subject at hand but remain ambivalent about it, and I should have. Dave is right in that ridicule can inform on a subject that a person may have never even considered as completely ridiculous. No believer in what is being ridiculed will likely change, however. But if we pick up a few through ridicule, what the hell? Hopefully, if they do come over, it will be because the ridicule piqued their interest enough to learn more about the subject in question. I kinda doubt that we are talking about high numbers here. But again, what the hell... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 07/05/2009 : 13:40:08 [Permalink]
|
I think, though I admit there is at least an element of wishful thinking in this, that ridicule is effective. Not as science, certainly, but as a powerful means of persuasion. When large numbers of people laugh at one's cherished beliefs, this has a powerful effect on one's thinking. Unlike logical argumentation alone, derisive laughter can make a person reexamine these beliefs. Not all, but very many people will commonly do a great deal to avoid being a laughingstock.
Derisive laughter was indirectly responsible for my own atheism and skepticism. It happened like this: When I was in 4th grade back in the 1950's, our teacher asked the class to put up our hands if we believed in Santa Claus. I put mine up at once, then, with a sick feeling, looked around the class of about 30 students to find that not another girl or boy had raised their hands, and that all were staring at me, grinning at best, and chuckling at worst. My raised hand came shakily came down, and I became an instant Santa atheist. It was soon after that that I began to apply the same caution to my belief in God. I could not see a significant difference between the two unseen magical entities.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 07/06/2009 : 11:14:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
I think, though I admit there is at least an element of wishful thinking in this, that ridicule is effective. Not as science, certainly, but as a powerful means of persuasion. When large numbers of people laugh at one's cherished beliefs, this has a powerful effect on one's thinking. Unlike logical argumentation alone, derisive laughter can make a person reexamine these beliefs. Not all, but very many people will commonly do a great deal to avoid being a laughingstock.
Derisive laughter was indirectly responsible for my own atheism and skepticism. It happened like this: When I was in 4th grade back in the 1950's, our teacher asked the class to put up our hands if we believed in Santa Claus. I put mine up at once, then, with a sick feeling, looked around the class of about 30 students to find that not another girl or boy had raised their hands, and that all were staring at me, grinning at best, and chuckling at worst. My raised hand came shakily came down, and I became an instant Santa atheist. It was soon after that that I began to apply the same caution to my belief in God. I could not see a significant difference between the two unseen magical entities.
|
I think you're spot on Mooner.
(Just look at the second line in my sig.)
I think ridicule can be FAR MORE effective than science itself. People HATE the be laughed at. The immediate reaction can be very bad though.....so use with caution when dealing with people face to face. But the after affects can be profound.
People are more likely to examine their beliefs if they feel that what they believe might be viewed as absurd.
(I am not who I think I am, I am not who you think I am, I am who I think you think I am)
Therefore - If I think you think I'm a moron then maybe I should re-examine my beliefs. (Clearly this works best if the individual in question has some level of respect for you.....though this is not a required prerequisite for ridicule  )
Will this work with everyone? Of course not. But our job is to get people to start thinking (possibly for the very first time) WHY THEY BELIEVE WHAT THEY BELIEVE. It's a start.
Confronting with facts usually hits a brick wall. Confront with laughter and ridicule.....followed up with facts just might hit home......eventually.
A little mean? Sure. But facts alone clearly have not been working. Reality has taken a seat at the back of the bus. Time to raise our voices above the noise. I'm a firm believer that the so called "militant atheists" are on the right track. At least they are trying to do something, anything, rather than just sitting on the sidelines to spare people's feelings.
No more hand holding. No more nicey nice. No more NOMA (what a joke). Deluded fantasies are affecting our quality of life. These morons are hurling us back into another dark age. It's time they got slapped in the face and laughed back into the holes they crawled out of.
We need more Dawkin's more Harris's more Hitchen's.
End Rant.
|
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2009 : 09:24:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
Originally posted by Landrew
Originally posted by R.Wreck
1. Saint Peter...
...265. Benedict XXVI
|
I'm not sure I understand this posting. Are they "idiots" because they are theists? For most of them, I don't think science existed to a degree that you could base atheism upon it. I'm certainly not a theist myself, but I don't think anyone living in a christianized society in those times had much of a choice any other than theism. If it's a character judgment, fair enough, but I'd like to see the biographical evidence.
|
Nah; just fuckin' around. We try not to be serious all the time. It's bad for the digestion.
|
Filthyis partially correct. Although the old tongue was somewhat in cheek, I believe the popes belong on the list. They professed to believing the most preposterous story ever told, in all it's grand absurdity, although that alone is not sufficient, as we'd have to include a good portion of the populace for the last however many centuries also. And a good many who otherwise would not be considered idiots profess to the same beliefs. These jamokes earn their way on to the list by believing that they were divinely selected to run the creator of the universe's branch office here on earth, and that as such nothing they say can possibly be wrong (although I'm not sure exactly when the infallibility myth started, and I don't really care). They commanded an organization that has, over the centuries, been directly or indirectly responsible for an incalculable amount of pain and misery having been inflicted on the denizens of this orb. Now some of them may have taken the job just for the jewel encrusted capes, the big house, the funny hat, and that cool popemobile (I gotta get me one of them some day), but even so, they're idiots.
I agree that ridicule is a necessary weapon in the arsenal of reason in the war against ignorance and stupidity. I had read somewhere that ridicule helped in the decline of the klan, but the only reference I could find (link) said:
| After World War II, folklorist and author Stetson Kennedy infiltrated the Klan and provided information to media and law enforcement agencies. He also provided secret code words to the writers of the Superman radio program, resulting in episodes in which Superman took on the KKK. Kennedy's intention to strip away the Klan's mystique and trivialize the Klan's rituals and code words may have contributed to the decline in Klan recruiting and membership. In the 1950s, Kennedy wrote a bestselling book about his experiences, which further damaged the Klan. |
Anyway, sometimes you need to point out how ludicrous something is in order to remove it's mystique, and I believe that's just what needs to be done for organized religion.
(Edited to format link.) |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
| Edited by - R.Wreck on 07/07/2009 14:40:05 |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 07/07/2009 : 10:08:34 [Permalink]
|
Papal infallibility is actually very limited and certainly does not apply to everything they say -I believe it has only been used a couple of times. It is also pretty recent as it started in 1870.
Yes, Superman fighting the Klan was indeed features in several episodes of the radio show in the 40ies. Also, here.
It is a neat little bit of nerd history. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
| Edited by - Simon on 07/07/2009 15:34:48 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2009 : 00:39:10 [Permalink]
|
Robert McNamera. The VN vets here will understand.
Edit: Gretchen Carlson, Patrick Mahoney and Brandi Swindell.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
| Edited by - filthy on 07/08/2009 03:10:28 |
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2009 : 11:32:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
Papal infallibility is actually very limited and certainly does not apply to everything they say -I believe it has only been used a couple of times. It is also pretty recent as it started in 1870.
|
Thanks for the link, Simon. Papal infallibility, indeed! What a load of hogwash! I guess it is fitting that an organization based on and steeped in utter nonsense should invent such a concept, and a bizarre set of rules to go along with it. |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 07/08/2009 : 11:41:54 [Permalink]
|
Great link, fil. Another bunch of christo-fascists having a tantrum because the government declines to promote their agenda. For cryin' out loud, the first statement on the Mission page of the God and Country Festival website specifically states:
| Our mission is primarily about spreading the Good News of Jesus Christ. |
What makes these morons believe that the taxpayer should lay out tens of thousands of dollars for their little Jebus fireworks show? |
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
The List of Complete Idiots
