TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

"Aggressive" atheism versus "gentle" atheism...

Go To

Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#926: Dec 5th 2013 at 4:20:46 AM

[up]

I didn't actually mention Aisha at all, nor do I. I think Mohammed was a typical mediaeval warlord and conqueror: not necessarily any worse than his peers, perhaps somewhat better than some, but still nobody to look up to as a moral leader.

That said, I agree with the need to try and understand historical leaders on their own terms; still, I'd be wary of fetishizing them the way people in the modern age seem to do: "Wasn't Genghis Khan such a badass?" etc. Perhaps he was, but he also unleashed the bloodiest war in human history (by percentage of population killed). Trying to understand historical figures doesn't mean they should be emulated or necessarily admired.

[down] This too.

edited 5th Dec '13 4:29:04 AM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#927: Dec 5th 2013 at 4:25:27 AM

The moment you start thinking of it as "tactics", you're Dramatically Missing The Point. Changing another's opinion is a battle for them to fight; your role is that of a rescuer, a guide, a light in the dark.
You misunderstand me. When I refer to "atheist humanist efforts", some of that refers to changing people's opinions. Much of it is changing closeted atheists' opinions: there's nothing wrong with being an atheist, you deserve the right to come out. Some of it is changing theists' opinions in the same way, convincing them that atheists are people too. But much of it it also fighting for good secular science education, fighting fraud, preventing religious discrimination (including against other theists), and a number of related policy goals that can be fought in the courts and on the ballots. And yes, then it's a good idea to start thinking about tactics.

Sometimes you have to be inspiring and cheerful and Carl Sagan-y. And sometimes, you have to call out fraud and superstition and mob rule for what they are.

Also, I'm sick and tired of the "Muhammad was a paedo" meme. There's plenty of legitimately questionable things he did as a cult leader and a politician, yet the only interpretation I see of his actions is the traditional Islamic one, with outsiders dumbly picking acts, such as his child marriage, which were nothing special in his era. Then again, I'll admit that it's hard to qualify what's "evil" back then by its own standards; the definition seems to be "whatever goes against the interests of the eventual winner", and people seem to focus on the complicated plots and the Bad Ass feats like they've still got the anecdote-centered mindset of Parthenon and Aristophanes, and genocides and horrible sackings are glossed over as legitimate tactics.
Well, yeah. Muhammad was a paedo, most men of that age were. That's kind of a dull point to go after Muhammad for. He's been dead for over a millenium; my problem is with paedos alive and active now.
What did they say to people, that they so wanted to hear? What did they make people go through? How self-centered were they? How sincere, how delusive, how hypocritical and self-serving? Achieving an understanding of these people, grasping the full measure of their character, is a much deeper, meaningful, and impactful approach than simply mocking or insulting them. And it's much more likely to cause the ones who saw them as great figures of might and light and right, to gasp for breath, and ask for a seat, and possibly a drink.
Depends. When the biopic does the job, use the biopic. When the scornful satirical cartoon does the job, use the cartoon. I'm a big believer in being flexible when it comes to advancing policy and culture goals.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
BestOf FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC! from Finland Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Falling within your bell curve
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
#928: Dec 5th 2013 at 5:14:48 AM

The Four Horsemen have talked at some lengths about how they complement each other by taking different approaches and thus probably reaching different audiences. Someone who can't keep up with Dan Dennett's arguments can probably understand Christopher Hitchens just fine.

Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins have talked about how different audiences perceive them - for one Canadian (IIRC) interviewer, Krauss was the funny one and Dawkins the academic one, while I suspect that in the UK they would be seen as about equally funny and academic (depending, of course, on the audience.)

The others, as well, have their own styles and methods: James Randi, Penn Jillette, Michael Shermer, PZ Myers - more recently Ricky Gervais... I'm sure there are plenty of people who might be reached by just one person in that list and wouldn't find the others interesting or convincing, so it's good to have such a diverse cast.

Then again, whenever I list these people I fail to mention women (except maybe Ayaan Hirsi Ali.) This is a big problem in the atheist movement, but fortunately it's one that the big names seem aware of. PZ Myers has been especially vocal about the need to include more women in the movement and to make it more inviting, which isn't helped at all by the behaviour of a surprisingly large number of men in secular events and organisations. (Rebecca Watson, among others, has been the target of some particularly nasty behaviour - unfotunately including one very ill-conceived comment from Dawkins, which sparked a minor scandal.)

There have been a couple of high profile incidents recently in secularist and science advocacy movements where prominent male figures have harassed women; while part of me suspects that the relatively high ratio of such events is due to a higher standard of honesty (or higher incidence of whistleblowers,) rather than a higher incidence of such incidents, I must of course admit that it's fully possible that these movements (especially because they're so male-dominated) are particularly bad places for women to be.

Of course, whether or not the high incidence of reports is due to extra attention paid to the problem and a higher willingness to report, we shouldn't start thinking that the reports are the problem. The incidents and the attitudes behind the incidents are the problem, and steps must be taken to change things for the better.

edited 5th Dec '13 5:17:02 AM by BestOf

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#929: Dec 5th 2013 at 5:25:44 AM

But much of it it also fighting for good secular science education, fighting fraud, preventing religious discrimination (including against other theists), and a number of related policy goals that can be fought in the courts and on the ballots. And yes, then it's a good idea to start thinking about tactics.

I really hate it when one's left with no choice but to play dirty.

[up]Yeah, let's not be like the catholics.

But why is the movement such a dude thing, though?

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
BestOf FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC! from Finland Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Falling within your bell curve
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
#930: Dec 5th 2013 at 5:39:43 AM

First of all, it's self-perpetuating. When you have a group where most of the members are male they tend to start talking "male talk" and engaging in all sorts of behaviour that is socially acceptable and "fun" in a group of men. Quite naturally, when women try to enter that group they often end up leaving because it's boring or annoying.

So that's one reason.

Another reason is that boys are usually encouraged to study and work in fields that are associated with men, and in academia these fields include mathematics, philosophy, and almost all fields of science. These fields, then, tend to produce people who are enthusiastic about science and skepticism (and thus secularism.) I hope there will come a point when all of these fields have a 50-50 split between men and women, but as it is it's a bit more likely for a boy to grow up a skeptic than it is for a girl, at least to the extent influenced by peer pressure in terms of academic and career choices.

There are also other cultural attitudes that seem to direct boys towards things like activism and non-traditional points of view more often than girls, but it's very hard to make any sort of reliable estimates of this.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#931: Dec 5th 2013 at 10:17:12 AM

There are also other cultural attitudes that seem to direct boys towards things like activism and non-traditional points of view more often than girls.

I thought women were the heart and soul of social movements, at least in the US?

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
NoNameGiven from Nowhere Since: Jul, 2013
#932: Dec 5th 2013 at 10:25:29 AM

Atheism and religion will never cohexist peacefully.

edited 5th Dec '13 10:48:21 AM by NoNameGiven

"That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death itself may die."
BestOf FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC! from Finland Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Falling within your bell curve
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
#933: Dec 5th 2013 at 10:28:38 AM

You shouldn't make a blanket statement like that. You should at least define conditions in which they can't coexist. Otherwise you're implying that even if both sides are unaware of or indifferent to each other's position there can be no peace.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#934: Dec 5th 2013 at 10:29:33 AM

Also, define peace.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
demarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#935: Dec 5th 2013 at 10:29:35 AM

Maybe he was ironically demonstrating Handle's point?

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#936: Dec 5th 2013 at 10:34:55 AM

No, wait, he was talking of Athiesm, not Atheism.

Can this Athiesm thing coexist with religion? I honestly don't know.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
NoNameGiven from Nowhere Since: Jul, 2013
#937: Dec 5th 2013 at 10:47:51 AM

[up]'Kay, 'Kay, Adolf, Atheism. There, happy now?

"That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death itself may die."
demarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#938: Dec 5th 2013 at 10:50:29 AM

And now he just Godwined the thread...

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
BestOf FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC! from Finland Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Falling within your bell curve
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
#939: Dec 5th 2013 at 10:50:36 AM

[up]The Grammar Nazi meme isn't considered Godwninning. At least, I don't think it is.

[up][up]Well, your statement is still silly - to put it lightly.

edited 5th Dec '13 10:51:18 AM by BestOf

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
NoNameGiven from Nowhere Since: Jul, 2013
#940: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:02:37 AM

Well, What I said earlier is true, though, Atheism and religion will never cohexist peacefully. Ever. In no occasion, under no circumstances.

"That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death itself may die."
Achaemenid HGW XX/7 from Ruschestraße 103, Haus 1 Since: Dec, 2011 Relationship Status: Giving love a bad name
HGW XX/7
#941: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:08:17 AM

[up]

Explain this please.

I live in a country that is primarily Presbyterian, with significant minority populations of Baptists, Catholics, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, and Atheists. I have never attacked any of them, nor have they done the same to me (for the sake of completeness we've had one Islamic terrorist attack - it was a fiasco, and not aimed at atheists either).

edited 5th Dec '13 11:08:43 AM by Achaemenid

Schild und Schwert der Partei
NoNameGiven from Nowhere Since: Jul, 2013
#942: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:12:05 AM

[up]I don't get it, explain what? So there was only one attack where you lived... And?

edited 5th Dec '13 11:12:17 AM by NoNameGiven

"That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death itself may die."
Antiteilchen In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good. Since: Sep, 2013
In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good.
#943: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:12:46 AM

such as his child marriage, which were nothing special in his era.
It actually is a valid point to bring up, when religious people claim that morality is unchangable and that thousand-year-old rules should still be followed.

I also disagree with the sentiment that it was okay back then to be pedophile/misogynist/homophobic/whatever just because everyone else was. That stinks of totall moral relativism. Everything goes as long as a majority agrees.

Soban Since: Aug, 2009 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
#944: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:13:05 AM

I'm a Theist and one of my best friends is a Atheist. We get along very well. Thus it can be said that we co-exist peacefully. Your statement is incorrect in at least one instance.

NoNameGiven from Nowhere Since: Jul, 2013
#945: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:15:59 AM

As individuals, you two co-exist peacefully..... Try discussing religion. Either you two won't get anywhere, or you two will end up fighting.

edited 5th Dec '13 11:24:22 AM by NoNameGiven

"That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death itself may die."
Antiteilchen In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good. Since: Sep, 2013
In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good.
#946: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:22:07 AM

Depends on the religion and on the atheism. There are apathetic atheists who never think much about spiritual matters and religions who don't demand to adhere to specific rules etc.

Karalora Since: Jan, 2001
#947: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:24:28 AM

Define your terms narrowly enough and idiosyncratically enough, and you can declare yourself right by fiat. Doesn't actually prove anything, though.

TheHandle United Earth from Stockholm Since: Jan, 2012 Relationship Status: YOU'RE TEARING ME APART LISA
United Earth
#948: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:25:18 AM

It actually is a valid point to bring up, when religious people claim that morality is unchangable and that thousand-year-old rules should still be followed.

Good point indeed. It makes me wonder about your second point, though; don't you see how universalist and potentially dogmatic it is? Also, do you think that the current understanding of morality is the ultimate be-all and end-all? My point precisely is that it is very hard to see from here which "normal" contemporary habits will be seen as monstrous by our descendants.

Maybe the future is vegan, and eating flesh is, well, a beastly, inhuman thing to do? Or polyamourous, and all these conflicts of jealousy and exclusivity and obligated family will be seen as horrible senseless sources of misery? Or maybe our current, conflicted views on sexuality? Maybe it's democratic governments selling weapons to monstrous dictators? Who knows? The future isn't going to prove you, or me, or anyone right; it's going to be weird as all hell, to us, and we will seem brutal and ignorant and alien, to them.

So don't be so quick to judge, lest you be judged in turn.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
NoNameGiven from Nowhere Since: Jul, 2013
#949: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:25:26 AM

[up][up]And?

edited 5th Dec '13 11:25:37 AM by NoNameGiven

"That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death itself may die."
Karalora Since: Jan, 2001
#950: Dec 5th 2013 at 11:28:05 AM

I think my statement speaks for itself.


Total posts: 1,038
Top