|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 13:01:45 [Permalink]
|
Humbert:
...but it doesn't seem any of the accommodationists are comfortable dealing with anything but straw men. |
And you know that Plait is an accommodationist by what he said about tone? Or was it something else? Do tell, please. I thought accomodationism has something to do with how we frame atheism. Do you think Phil Plait thinks that some claims that skeptics deal with should not be questioned? Even aggressively?
Or is that what we now call everyone who, even if wrong about it, worries about "tone?"
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Ebone4rock
SFN Regular
USA
894 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 13:37:55 [Permalink]
|
| This whole debate has me totally discombobulated. I don't really understand the point...well I guess I do....but it's the same thing as trying to debate about assholes/nice people in any circumstance. The whole thing is just way too vague to ever be solved. |
Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
 Posted - 07/20/2010 : 13:38:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Or is that what we now call everyone who, even if wrong about it, worries about "tone?" |
The accommodationists' main complaints have always centered around "tone" and "framing" and telling the "asshole skeptics" to shut up because they weren't helping.
| Do you think Phil Plait thinks that some claims that skeptics deal with should not be questioned? |
I don't know. I've seen him criticize religious extremism, but I think he's an accommodationist when it comes to "moderate" religion. I'm open to being proven wrong on that impression, however.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 07/20/2010 13:59:42 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 14:02:34 [Permalink]
|
| I, for one, am sure that "tone critics" and "accommodationists" are merely overlapping sets, and not duplicate sets. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 14:30:26 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
I, for one, am sure that "tone critics" and "accommodationists" are merely overlapping sets, and not duplicate sets.
|
True, but there is a lot of overlap. There's probably also a wide spectrum of positions within the accommodationist set, raging from those who think all religious beliefs are off bounds to those who think we should merely focus our efforts on the most egregious offenders and embrace the moderates.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 07/20/2010 14:31:18 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 17:09:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
True, but there is a lot of overlap. |
No doubt.| There's probably also a wide spectrum of positions within the accommodationist set, raging... |
Funny typo enboldenated.| ...from those who think all religious beliefs are off bounds to those who think we should merely focus our efforts on the most egregious offenders and embrace the moderates. |
Indeed. There are also a wide variety of "tone critics," but I'm not sure that there's any correlation amongst the "tone critic" and accommodationist "styles." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 17:26:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Indeed. There are also a wide variety of "tone critics," but I'm not sure that there's any correlation amongst the "tone critic" and accommodationist "styles."
|
I see a lot of correlation. One of the reasons I'm turned off by the tone critics is because "tone" is so often used as the excuse given for asking vocal atheists to put a sock in it. "Tone trolling" goes hand-in-hand with accommodationism more often than not:
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 07/20/2010 17:51:39 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 17:54:02 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
I'm not so sure. One of the reasons I'm turned off by the tone critics is because "tone" is so often used as the excuse given for asking vocal atheists to put a sock in it. "Tone trolling" goes hand-in-hand with accommodationism more often than not. |
No, I'm not saying that tone trolling and accommodationism aren't correlated, I'm saying that the particular styles of tone criticism aren't correlated with particular style of accommodationism.
You can get, for example, two people who think that religion as a whole should be left alone, but one of them says, "PZ's tone only hurts himself," while the other says, "PZ's horrific behavior makes all atheists look bad!" While they're both saying that PZ should shut up, there are obviously different levels of tone critic stridency. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 17:59:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
No, I'm not saying that tone trolling and accommodationism aren't correlated, I'm saying that the particular styles of tone criticism aren't correlated with particular style of accommodationism.
|
Ah, I see now. Ok, I can agree with that. I think one reason this issue is so thorny is that most of the accommodationists won't come out and openly advocate pandering to superstition, so instead they end up focusing issues of "tone," which I think is largely a dodge on their part (not to say legitimate a debate on tone isn't to be had).
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 07/20/2010 18:02:32 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 19:30:35 [Permalink]
|
Humbert:
I don't know. I've seen him criticize religious extremism, but I think he's an accommodationist when it comes to "moderate" religion. I'm open to being proven wrong on that impression, however. |
In the skeptical community, assuming that there is a division of labor and that skeptics cast a wider net that covers more issues than those who mostly advocate for atheism, what does it mean to be an "accommodationist" when it comes to "moderate religion"? I ask that because I have never ever heard Plait lobby for framing, or call out PZ Myers and so on. Is he an accommodationist because he allows some theists and deists to also call themselves skeptics? Is that what being an accommodationist means? Do I think Bidlack has a huge blind spot? Sure I do. But I also see that he was one of the people who has caused whole governments to stop buying a dowsing device used to find hidden explosives. He saved lives. That's more than most of us do.
If you can find where Plait has said that religion shouldn't be criticized, I'd like to know about it. Sending me off to prove to you that he isn't an accommodationist when you said he is one is just wrong. And you know it.
I have often called for more civility on this forum. Does that make me an accommodationist too?
See, I'm getting to the place, as Dave noted, where I think too many people have become crazy sensitive. I'm starting to honestly believe that the most interesting thing about the "tone" debate is that we are even having it. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 20:10:30 [Permalink]
|
Kil said:
| See, I'm getting to the place, as Dave noted, where I think too many people have become crazy sensitive. I'm starting to honestly believe that the most interesting thing about the "tone" debate is that we are even having it. |
Yeah. The "tone" debate itself if pretty much a pointless and retarded exercise.
It's like telling me that I can't wear a black t-shirt and be a skeptic. I don't really give a fuck what any other human thinks about my black t-shirt, and unless you have some very solid scientific evidence that says black t-shirts inhibit the ability to think critically.... well, I have a very specific phrase and accompanying hand gesture to share.
But then this whole "tone" issue isn't really anything like a debate. It's one group (compromised mostly of accommodationists) telling another group that they are dicks. Which is ironic in the extreme really. "Hey, you guys are being dicks! You aren't going to convince anyone with an argument that calls them a dick!"
So as soon as the "tone critics" can point to legit evidence that says being a dick hurts your ability to persuade, then a real debate can be had. Until then, they can....
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 20:12:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
In the skeptical community, assuming that there is a division of labor and that skeptics cast a wider net that covers more issues than those who mostly advocate for atheism, what does it mean to be an "accommodationist" when it comes to "moderate religion"? |
Accommodationism is necessarily active. Skeptics who simply ignore the Culture War between science and religion aren't accommodationists. Accommodationism involves (generally) either claiming that people shouldn't criticize moderate religious beliefs for fear of turning moderates into fundies, or claiming that religion can somehow inform science.| Do I think Bidlack has a huge blind spot? Sure I do. |
Bidlack's big speech from a couple years ago basically said, "accommodate me."| But I also see that he was one of the people who has caused whole governments to stop buying a dowsing device used to find hidden explosives. He saved lives. That's more than most of us do. |
Which doesn't, of course, make him immune from criticism for things which have nothing at all to do with the lives he saved, like his deism.| See, I'm getting to the place, as Dave noted, where I think too many people have become crazy sensitive. I'm starting to honestly believe that the most interesting thing about the "tone" debate is that we are even having it. |
You're going up another level. The "tone" and "accommodation" debates are "meta" debates, in that they are debates about how the science/religion debate should be carried out. You're going up to the meta-meta-debate. |
- 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 - 07/20/2010 : 20:19:06 [Permalink]
|
| Of course, I didn't say that Bidlack shouldn't be criticized for holding on to an irrational belief. But then, it isn't going to be me who kicks him out of the skeptical community. He's a credible skeptic in most other areas of concern to skeptics. Am I making an accommodation for his religious beliefs? I don't think so. I'm not shy about criticizing religion. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 20:33:25 [Permalink]
|
Dave:
You're going up another level. The "tone" and "accommodation" debates are "meta" debates, in that they are debates about how the science/religion debate should be carried out. You're going up to the meta-meta-debate. |
Yeah. Huh. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2010 : 20:49:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Of course, I didn't say that Bidlack shouldn't be criticized for holding on to an irrational belief. |
It read that way at first. It read like, "sure, he's a little wacky, but look at this great thing he did instead."| But then, it isn't going to be me who kicks him out of the skeptical community. |
Look, I obviously don't follow the blogs or forums or sites or books or articles of the people that you say are trying to drum people out of the skeptical community, because I've never actually read or heard anyone say anything like that. The antiaccommodationists I read simply say that accommodationism is stupid, dishonest and/or condescending. They are having a debate and criticizing the flaws of those that are (mostly) on the same side (atheist and/or pro-science and/or pro-skepticism), not making threats to kick someone out of the club. Anyone who does so seems to be missing the point.| He's a credible skeptic in most other areas of concern to skeptics. |
What would you call someone who publishes great UFO skepticism articles, but has clearly bought into climate denialism? What would you say if Robert Lancaster turned out to be a Bigfoot hunter, 9/11 Truther and Moon Hoax proponent? Bill Dembski considers himself a critical thinker and skeptic of evolution dogma, does he belong in the skeptical community?| Am I making an accommodation for his religious beliefs? I don't think so. I'm not shy about criticizing religion. |
If you were to say that criticizing Bidlack's religious beliefs were likely to drive him away from skepticism, you be accommodating him. If you were to say that Bidlack's religious beliefs have something of value for the skeptical movement, you'd be accommodating him. You're doing neither, so you're fine. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
The ‘tone’ debate
