 |
| Richard Carrier has a vision... |
Richard Carrier is a blogger at Freethoughtblogs. Richard has jumped on the A+ bandwagon along with numerous others despite not knowing who built the wagon, who is driving the wagon or who is going to design the wagon and what it's dimensions it will be. Below I have included Richard's (Richy) blog post. In red you will find my replies to Richy, either poking fun at him or pointing out things that don't seem quite right. I figure if this A+ thing does catch on then he will need to become accustom to this type of thing because it will very likely occur on a regular basis. I will have some comments at the end of this blog but I thought maybe some background would be helpful.--
Richy went to Columbia University. He has written three books. he seems to be educated but there are more ways than one to be a moron. If you go to freethoughtblogs you will find not only his blog but a more complete bio written by either 1-A very egotistical/insecure man named Richard Carrier or 2- Richy's Mommy cause only a mother could lay it on that thick. One line reads "His avid fans span the world from Hong Kong to Poland." it's kinda funny ...unless it's not a joke (sorry Richy) I mean a 2nd grade kid can have avid fans around the globe these days, welcome to the internet. I'm not sure a 2nd grader would brag about it though. So we have a guy who is educated and obviously has some background in skepticism/atheism. Here is what we get from him on the idea of A+.
There is a new
atheism brewing, and it’s the rift we
need, to cut free the dead weight so we can kick the C.H.U.D.’s back into the
sewers and finally disown them,
once and
for all. Who is 'them' ? I was already mulling a way to do this back in June Premeditated
disowning, isn't that a crime? when discussion
in the comments on my post On
Sexual Harassment generated an idea to
start a blog series building a system of shared values that separates the light
side of the force from the dark side A new
Star Wars movie?! Cool! within
the atheism movement, Hey, wait a minute... so we could start marginalizing the evil in our midst, Satan? But we don't believe in him..Darth Vader? and grooming the next generation more
consistently and clearly into a system
of more enlightened humanist values.Indoctrinating,
it is a word Then I just got overwhelmed with work and kept putting it off on my calendar for
when I had a good
half a day or so to get started
on that project. Must be tough finding time to save
the world from evil even
if it's in your midst.
Since then I blogged On Sexual Harassment Policies and Why I Am a Feminist Um, you are not a woman, only a woman can be a true feminist only she knows how it feels (which smoked Note: Smoking is bad
for you out a few of the dregs who
attempted to defend their anti-humanist
atheism You mean trolls? Yea they do that to
people who will fall for it ), but closer to my growing thoughts on what separates us,Who again? and ought to separate us,Who is 'us'? Is us on
third? within
the movement was my post on (Not) Our
Kind of People, which wasn’t really about
any moral divide (since lots of
people who aren’t my kind of people I would
imagine are nevertheless my people as far as
basic values go, and I know they would
agree; If they could understand what you are
saying we
just enjoy different company Now I'm confused), but it
paralleled my more private thinking about
the evil among us.Justin Bieber?
Then I read
Lousy Canuck’s Name fits account of the whole abuse of Surly Amy at TAM See Appeal to emotion fallacy and big fat liar and elsewhere, which enraged me Grroar!Richard angry! (I
had previously only known parts of that
story were
any of those true?). It shows the dregs will now publicly mock
humanist values, and abusively disregard
the happiness of their own people.Their own
people? No they will mock what they find absurd and as much as you dislike it some people put you in that category too it doesn't make them
evil.Well, that starts drawing the
battle lines pretty clearly then.Oh so we go
into battle mode then? That's nice.
So I was chomping at the bit to find time to
write something on this, Try spending less time
at the mirror convincing yourself how superior you are.but still not sure
what to say or how to say it.That, so
far, is obvious, thanks though It especially bugged me because I couldn’t get to it for
lack of available time (which reminds me to mention, be warned, I am AFK
most of this week and so
comment moderation here will be
unusually slow).Yes Richard we all know you are
extremely busy doing other things that
are more important than this very
important movement you keep putting on
the back burner due to
your severe lack of free time...we know. We are just happy for any time you can spare for us, thank you!
Then Jen
McCreight said it for me,She said it for
everyone whether they like it or not more eloquently and
clearly than I could have.Not a real challenge there
Richy This weekend she wrote How I Unwittingly Infiltrated the Boy’s
Club & Why It’s Time for a New Wave
of Atheism,Also known as How I need to
make up for Boobquake objectifying
women, ramp up the blog hits, try and
put myself into a leadership role,
and drum up some
business for friends at the same
time which was so well received By 'them' I'm sure(and quite
rightly Note:opinion) that she
wrote a brief follow-up: Atheism
+. And Greta Christina What?!
:( and
others have taken up the banner:(should
read -banter) Atheism Plus: The
New Wave of Atheism. I am fully on board.Despite
the fact no one knows exactly what it is yet I
will provide any intellectual artillery they need to expand this cause and make
it successful. So far you have been doing a
grand job Richy, a grand job!
Its basic values (and the reason for its moniker) Jen stated
thus:
We are…
Atheists plus we care about
social justice,Who doesn't? Atheists plus we support women’s rights,Who doesn't? Atheists plus
we protest racism,Who doesn't?
Atheists plus we fight
homophobia and transphobia,Who doesn't?
Atheists plus we use critical thinking and skepticism.Who
doesn't?
Amen to all that.What? But I should add to this a contribution by a reader of my
blog, Christine Reece, who back in June
sent me a suggestion for my planned post about
positive atheism’s values, which I filed away for when I finally posted something essentially declaring battle lines great planning ahead for battle the way Jen did. This
in turn will lead to
what I’d like to add
to our discussion of underlying values.
Christine framed her points
as rhetorical questions, which I had
planned to blog about one at a time to open discussion on each, and I might do that if it’s needed, but I’m
starting to think it’s not. Yea who needs
discussion when we can just tell people what they think? We humanists already know where we stand,
and that it’s not with the
atheists who
denounce or reject these values.No
one does So
I now frame them as declarations Que patriotic
music now (freely adapting and expanding on her own words, I hope
she won’t mind–she might not
agree with all of this):I hope she
doesn't nice of you to drag her in anyways
A.
Atheism and skepticism should embrace
diversity (and not just be a bunch of
white guys reading a bunch of white
guys Who
says this is the case? proof please). In fact,
we should be really keen on expanding our experience and horizons in
that regard, aiming to learn as much as
possible, and provide resources to help
all our comrades in arms. Wait, are you at war? When
did war become acceptable? You are only going to provide resources to
people who think like you? Isn't that a bit selfish and self defeating?
B.
Atheist and skeptic communities
should encourage everyone to apply
skeptical analysis not just to religion, pseudoscience, and woo, but to social, moral, and political policies, theories and activists. They
do that now
C.
Considering the history of religion and
how it has even warped
secular life and thought in countries around the world, atheists and skeptics should spend as much time and energy deconstructing
illogical and/or inhumane secular
policies and claims as they do actively
fighting religiously- based interference. We have to be as critical of
ourselves and each other as we would
expect anyone to be of religion, so we
can be sure we don’t make
the same mistakes. We must police
the rot within, if we are to stand
strong against our foes without. "We must police
the rot within, if we are to stand
strong against our foes without."
Somebody has been watching too much TV Richy
D.
In the field of education, atheists and
skeptics should help promote courses and curricula that include logic and
abstract thought rather than
focusing all efforts on science.They do
that now We need to train kids with a
universal toolkit of skeptical and critical thinking about all issues in their
lives, not just the scientific, but the social, political, and ideological as well. Being attempted. Do you really think no one has
come up with these ideas before
now? And we need to take seriously the effort to push for that and
make it happen at the fundamental
and national level. Great original ideas, wonder why no one
has brought
'em up before.
As Christine said, “Teaching people how to think for themselves
in all areas seems much more practical
than providing a first-class science education that they’ll wind up ignoring.” Yes because everyone ignores science
Of course they need the
first-class science education, too. And a model for promoting that is Will.i.am’s
STEM center project–if you ever thought
Will.i.am was lame, think again: see
him talk about this on the Graham Norton
Show, and note that when the actress
beside him says he’s amazing, she’s reacting to the fact that he had previously on that show talked about how he had also given all his UK profits to a
royal educational charity (The Prince’s Trust, which he later mentions in the
video clip; the dude really is awesome,
just read what he’s up to as far as
promoting STEM education).
But that’s not enough. It never is The skill to
think critically, skeptically, and
rationally in all areas of life must
also be promoted and cultivated. In fact, I think it’s time we
push for communication studies to become
one of the standard (and tested) fields
in primary and secondary education,
right alongside language, literacy, history, math, art, athletics, and
science.We test kids now, they
aren't passing at the rates they
should and the testing system is flawed. None of this is news Richy you are not breaking
new ground here. How
communications manipulate people is so fundamental to our lives now, it is a
scandal we aren’t fully equipping kids for how to approach and deal
with it. That field would include logic (especially identifying
fallacies and being able
to diagram and analyze real-world claims and arguments), defensive rhetoric (how to
identify methods of manipulation in communication), and a basic
understanding of how
advertising, filtering,
framing, and statistics can be abused to mislead and misinform in all media. I would suggest we start by training anyone who had anything
to do with starting the A+ sub-group
I mention this last point,
even though it is the least controversial thing
about Atheism+, because it really does
underlie how many atheists lack this
understanding in themselves and instead
even denigrate its importance to policing racism, sexism, and irrationality in the movement itself. The
idea that we should not be criticizing each other when we say
illogical or ignorant things is
self-defeating and self-destructive, and
the very first corrupt value we need to kick to the curb. Richy, I want you to stop.Take a deep breath. Hold......now exhale. Now Richy go back and
read everything above this line one
more time....oh it's already
posted....Ok next time then okay?
Promise?
Which leads me to the first
value we must lay as the foundation of
Atheism+:Can we assume there are going to be some new and/or
original concepts involved here? No? I didn't think so. Carry on
Captain Obvious!
– : –
1. We believe in being reasonable.
DuhThis
means, first,
that we believe in
being logical and rational in forming beliefs and opinions. Which means anyone who makes a
fallacious argument and, when shown that they have, does not admit
it, is not one of us, and
is to be marginalized and kicked
out,Kicked out? Of the clubhouse? Noooooo! as not part
of our movement, and not anyone we any
longer wish to deal with. And if they refuse to
be quiet and go? Do we have any A+ police forces or at least
dogs ? Put that on the list Richy
Being reasonable also means
we believe it is right and good to
politely negotiate to find mutually acceptable compromises in matters of policy
and coexistence, which includes
agreements on the use of resources. But
that does not mean capitulation: compromises must be mutually acceptable, and both parties
must genuinely aim at that; if
there is no such compromise to be had, then
we are in one form or another
enemies, and we must admit that. Following
that realization we should immediately schedule a duel between parties at
sunrise ..or a cage match. What do we do
if the other party doesn't want to be an enemy
and instead wants to agree to
disagree and move on? Ignore them and
hate them anyway?
I do not think it is in our
interests any longer to cooperate in silence with irrational people, when it is
irrationality that is
the fundamental root cause of all human evil.I
thought it was money or greed, man
I don't know anything! Anyone who
disagrees with that is simply not someone we can work with.
Really? Everyone must agree? Richy do you remember back when you talked about being reasonable? For about 2000 years people have been saying money and
greed are the
root of all evil. Shouldn't you give a grace period before
insisting they agree with you? We need to
make the
requirement of rationality in all our dealings with anyone
fundamental. Even if we cooperate on limited projects with
people who will be rational
only in that limited sphere of cooperation (for example, interfaith projects for the common good), we still cannot hold our tongue and not continue to denounce their irrationality
in any other sphere, because to do so would be to become a traitor to our own
values.Do we kill traitors? I'm unclear on that
still Because being rational
and reasonable is what we
stand for.Um, yes you have given some great
examples so far...thanks And it will
always be what we stand for. Openly
and passionately, and without compromise.Kinda like god and his
love right?
Although we must still give leave to people in political
situations who have to hold their tongue, simply for pragmatic reasons and not because they are actively
denying or undermining our
values in this regard. So anyone in politics
gets a pass? If not how and who is going
to decide what is actively denying or undermining A+ values (whatever they are)
For example,
the NCSE is and has to
remain religion-neutral and thus
cannot “affiliate” with Atheism at all, much less Atheism+, even if many
who work there are atheists or
even Atheist+ enthusiasts. As with
many other businesses and enterprises, it simply would not be
appropriate to their mission. But we aren’t all working for the NCSE.Picked a pretty easy example
there Richy, try a more
challenging example and see what reaction you get.
Reasonableness is not
enough, however. In my book Sense and
Goodness without God, Uh oh Richy it's
not polite to promote your work for sale when starting a sub-group. If you were making copies available to the public at
no cost it
would be different but not
everyone can afford your book and
even if they could the involvement of
profit could harm your credibility in the eyes of some people. Maybe you should
offer the book at no cost
just as a gesture of support for
the
A+ cause. and in my formal
demonstration in chapter 14 of
The End of Christianity, I
lay out the empirical and logical
foundations of objective moral facts on atheism. And the three
principle values I discover to be fundamental truths about how all humans ought to govern themselves are reasonableness, compassion,
and integrity, generally in that order.Wouldn't empathy fit
better than compassion? Empathy- the intellectual identification with or
vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another. This would give an incentive to correct the cause of a problem due to
a better understanding of how the victim
feels rather than simply feeling sorry for the person which is
basically what compassion is. Integrity would imply morals. Are you suggesting we tell people what their
morals should be? I think you have done
so on several occasions prior to now. That's a dangerous role to
take or put on others Richy sounds more
than a little like religion.
So the second value we must lay as the foundation of
Atheism+ is:
– : –
2. We believe in being compassionate. That means we believe it is
important to have empathy for other
people (men, women, white people, black people, rich people, poor
people, and anyone suffering illness or misfortune or unfair treatment,
and so on) and to act in the best interests of human happiness (rather than
in the interests of our own vanity, greed, or self-righteousness, for
example). Didn't
most people learn or
were taught this in kindergarten? What
atheists are acting against the best interests of human
happiness? Are they doing so on purpose or do they simply
think differently than you?
Remember Richy one man's
terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
This
does not mean we can’t be angry or mean or harsh, except when we consider them and enemy
or kick them out of the group
cause there will be no hard feelings on
either side right? when it is for the overall good (as when
we mock or vilify the town neonazi);funny
you should mention the word nazi ridiculing
the ridiculous is often in fact a moral obligation, by creating t shirts and
parody jewelry right...oh maybe
not. You are going to need to clarify what is allowed Richy and insults are
appropriate when they are genuinely
appropriate Can
you provide some guidelines on this because I'm almost positive some
people are going to have trouble with this one. I'm thinking about the characteristics you used to describe the
people who made Surly Amy cry waaaay back
at the beginning of your post. It
was a long time ago wasn't it? (because, in short, human
happiness would be destroyed if we didn’t marginalize that which can
destroy it)The old destroy
them before they destroy
your A+ credo huh?. It also doesn’t mean
that we won’t act against evil, ignorance, and
all the sins of vanity, greed, or self- righteousness. Wonder Twin
powers, activate! To the contrary, it
is our compassion that compels us to do so. Our compassion entails we will
and must
always be the enemies of the uncompassionate. I'm confused again. Are you gonna
show the
uncompassionate compassion or not? Are you only going too show compassion until
it gets boring/tiring and
then destroy them?
Why do I feel like I'm at a square dance?
And this is where the biggest divide exists in our movement
today. Everyone who attacks feminism, disagrees or attacks? How would you define each instance?
There is a
difference. Just because someone doesn't agree that doesn't
make them wrong by default. It also does not mean they are attacking. .or promotes
or defends racism or sexism, or denigrates or maliciously undermines any effort
to look after the rights and welfare
and happiness of others, is simply not
one of us. What if they are one
of the 'others' and don't
agree with the manner in
which you are "looking after" them? They
have rejected compassion as a
fundamental value. Regardless of what they say,
that is in actual fact what they
have done. So they have no say in
the matter? A+ is going
to tell people what is factual and what is not in regard to social matters
and differences? You know that is a very
dangerous way of thinking don't you? Did you always want to
be king when you grew up or is this a new thing for you?
Indeed, as the Surly Amy
story shows,Boo hoo there are clearly
many of us who disregard the happiness of
others just to hurt them, mocking or
insulting Like you have suggested be done? (or even threatening)
them merely to please one’s own vanity
or self-righteousness,never to defend what they believe in, right? in complete disregard of the pointless misery it causes
another human being. That is fucking evil. There really is noo
such thing as evil Richy. I have allowed
you to get away with using the term up til now but you really should know better.
And watch your mouth, what if your mother reads this?And
if you are complicit in
that, or don’t even
see what’s wrong with it, or worse, plan to engage in Christian-style
apologetics for it, yea cause
atheists are known to copy the successful (sarcasm) tactics
used by religion to
defend themselves defending it with the same bullshit fallacies and tactics the Christians use to defend
their own immorality or that of their fictional god, then I don’t want
anything to do with you. You can't mean that
You are despicable. No Richy, don't say
that!You are an awful person. How dare you! You disgust me. Same to you
pal You are not my people. Finally you got something
right! I'm not your people Richy and
I'm never going to be. I care
about women's rights and the disabled. I have acted on behalf of people who were victims of internet bullies. I have been threatened and when I don't react
my children often
become targets. I don't
disagree with many of the things you want to see happen but I refuse to become
a part of a group that isn't going to represent me completely. I owe it to
myself to be my own person and not
cheapen myself by allowing others to dictate
what it is I stand for and how I am going to deal with people who disagree with me. I have no desire to uninclude anyone in my travels
through life. If I don't interact with
those who oppose me how will any of us ever
learn? How will we ever manage to
accept those from other backgrounds and
cultures? I don't like your proclamation Richy and you have lost much respect because of it I would think but I
don't want you out of the fight I want you to listen and I want you to try and understand the world is never
going to be made of gumdrops and rainbows. We will always have work to do and we need all the help we can get or we
are never going to do
anything but make a lot of noise and
spin our wheels while
refusing help from strangers.
Even the most
rudimentary application of The
Golden Rule would have caused any of the
people who treated Amy as they did, or Rebecca Watson, or any of the many women and
men who have been targeted by
this shit, to stop themselves well beforehand. “Wait. Would I want people to
treat me this way?” No, you fucking
wouldn’t. So alas, you are a hypocrite. If I
behaved in the same manner as them it shouldn't
surprise me
In Sense and Goodness without God (V.1.1.1, pp. 295-96) Keeping an eye on book sales are we? Why not just make the point? Because you put it in a book does
it help validate your point? No, it does not. I
made the point that all biblical religion is fundamentally fucked because at
its root it fails a most fundamental
moral test: it valorizes Abraham, who is
willing to murder his own son to prove his faith–which means he placed
faith above compassion, above even
basic human
decency.No it is fucked because it is based on fiction and tries to
base social structure on imaginary stories
and characters Almost every evil perpetrated
by religion today can be traced to that
diseased debasement of humanity, in the fundamentally corrupt values
represented in that story. The values are not
inherently evil Many atheists are building the
same corrupt edifice, and instead of “faith
in god” trumping human decency, they are
placing their own vanity and self-righteousness above human
decency.That is a human quality that will not be changed by simply
demanding it Basically, it makes them feel good
to hurt people. And that’s what makes them evil. And you are in these people's heads Richy? You know for a
fact they feel good when they hurt
others? Tell us exactly how you know or we may have
to kick you out of the club
for being full of shit.
Indeed, “I don’t like you,
so I am going to make you personally
miserable” is their value system, rather
than “I don’t like you, so I am
going to have nothing to do with you” or “I don’t like something you said or
did, so I will still respect you as a person and look after your basic welfare, but I am also
going to explain in a logical and
empirical way why I think you are wrong, and what I say
might be harsh, but I will take
the greatest care to ensure it
is, to the best of my knowledge, relevant
and true. But I’ll hear you out if you
think I’m wrong about
that.” No, that would be reasonable, and
reasonably compassionate, behavior. Which these
atheists know not of. Richy
you need to take more naps you
know that don't you? You are very skilled at walking over yourself
and ignoring the tread marks left on your forehead I'll give you that.
(I am by no means talking
about respecting actual criminals, however. Their punishment is due. But
even them we won’t needlessly torment. Their punishment must be productive,
and deserved.) What about basic human
respect?What about after they
have paid their dues to society?
And so I am declaring
here and
now,All hail King Richy! Long live the
king? that anyone who acts like this, is not
one of us, there
you go with that "us" thing again and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement,
and not anyone we any longer wish to
deal with. In fact it is especially
important on this point that we prove that these
vile piss-ants are a minority in our movement, by making
sure our condemnation of them is
vocalized and our numbers
seen. We must down-vote their bullshit, call it
out in
comments, blog our outrage.
And what of personal agendas? Do you foresee
anyone using A+ as a way of personally attacking another for reasons that may have nothing to
do with atheism or any of the other things
A+ stands for?
Don’t assume that because
someone else did that, that it’s covered and
you can give it a miss. No, we
need to show numbers.Like the army! So speak out wherever
you see these two sides at loggerheads, and voice your affiliation, so it’s clear how many
of us there are, against them. And
this very much is an us vs. them situation.Richy
are you over 18? Act like it please The
compassionate vs. the vile. You can’t
sit on the fence on this one. In a free society, apathy apathy of what? is an
endorsement of villainy.
This also applies to the
sexists and racists and other dirtbags who try to make themselves seem reasonable through the specious tactic of merely not using curse
words or insults, Those tricky bastards!as if that is all that it takes to be a reasonable person. No,
when you see apologists for sexism
and racism and other anti-humanistic
views of the world, views that have at their core a fundamental lack of empathy
for other human beings and a
pathological disinterest in seeing how things look from perspectives not their
own, Richy...you are guilty of that very thing
in this post many, many times. views that
place narcissistic self-interest above
genuine concern for how other people are doing, even when
they try to mimic what they think “sounding reasonable” looks like, you
needn’t resort to invective or insults, but on the same even keel they are pretending at, simply declare
that they are not one of you, but are one of them.Run on sentence that makes no sense The people we want nothing more to do with. Until and
unless they realize their own sins Sins?and repent Repent?of them. Feel free
to calmly explain why.You need to make up your
mind Richy are we to explain or to dismiss and cast out?
(But be empathic enough to
assume at first that someone being an
ignorant dufus is really just ignorant
and misinformed, the difference being?and not a douchebag;
give them at least one shot at being
educable, before kicking
them into the sewers to wallow with
their peeps.) Exactly how do you kick someone "into the sewers"?
And of course the third
value we must lay as the foundation of
Atheism+ is:
3. We believe in personal
integrity. That means we believe in being
honest and forthright, and
consistent in our values.This blog is not an
example then? Hypocrisy to us is among the greatest sins, There you go with the sins again, what's up with that? Am I
in church or something? and we will denounce it everywhere, and purge
it whenever we discover it in
ourselves.
This may seem
uncontroversial, a no brainer, No brainer is a
term that has come to mind several times while reading this but it really needs
special emphasis, it needs to be something
we consciously define ourselves by, so that it is ever on our minds when we decide who to be and what to praise or denounce or fight for or
against. It must actually shame us
when we are discovered to be
hypocritical or dishonest in any significant way, and our integrity ought always drive us
to correct ourselves when that happens. Our integrity ought to be
important to us.Don't you need to have some
integrity first?
We must integrate this ideal of personal integrity
into our
very self-identity. Those
who don’t, those who aren’t shamed by being exposed as liars or hypocrits,
those who persist in being dishonest or inconsistent even when
their dishonesty or inconsistency has
been soundly proven, is not
one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not
part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with. Noted.
The nexus of these three values does entail there can be
such things as unreasonable compassion (like destroying
your own happiness through excessive
giving, or not giving babies vaccinations because needles hurt) or unreasonable
honesty (like aiding a murderer by telling them
where their target is hiding Too
much TV again Richy) or dishonest compassion (like
tricking someone into losing a lot, by being generous to them now like
gambling?) or uncompassionate honesty (like
being unnecessarily frank about someone’s appearance but what if you really do look fat in that dress?)?, or even dishonest
reasonableness (like merely pretending to be reasonable). These are all moral
failures. But there can be honest debate about where
the boundaries are drawn
when values come into conflict,
as long as that debate is always
governed by the most fundamental
value of being reasonable (as defined
above).Yes thank you for making the rules for us
Richy
In a post later this week or next I will explore further
what I think the values of Atheism+ could be, beyond the general principles I
have laid out here. I can't wait And I will consider these posts a living document. If from
sincere and constructive criticism in
comments I am led to alter or revise what I’ve said above in any way (beyond
clarifications that can be
well-enough addressed in
comments themselves), I will do so, PLEASE do and announce the
changes in the comments, so there is a
record of them. Because I think the
values of Atheism+ are to be built collaboratively, and don’t have
to be dictated by me alone. You think
that? Funny you never once mentioned it til now...not once
In the meantime, I call
everyone now to pick sides Oh goody! dodge ball!
(not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social
media): are you with us, or with them; are you now a part of the Atheism+ movement,
or are you going to stick with Atheism
Less? Atheism Less? You mean with less
self-serving rhetoric, less abuse of the word misogynist? Less of people who
declare themselves the defenders of the things everyone agrees about? Less hypocrisy? I'll take that thank you
Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who
to avoid. Oh, we know who to avoid now
Needless to say, Richy got a little too excited about the big new plan and he musta went all crazy. In the comment section he short circuits and ends up apologizing for his language and attitude. He couldn't even make it through the comments on his own blog without acting exactly the way he describes "the enemy". It will probably take me a while to address all the reasons why A+ is a bad idea.The people who thought up the A+ idea are amazed that anyone has an issue with it. "Why can't we start our own subgroup?" They ask. Well maybe pull your head out of the ground and look around. The A+ idea has, from square one, been presented as 'us or them' by many A+ people.
Jen
McCreight in her blog outlining the framework for A+ encourages everyone to 'Join Up!' and says the only people she is going to want to talk to in the future are people who are A+. In case you were worried Jen wouldn't know it was okay to speak with you, this is your lucky day! Jen just so happens to know a woman who can help. Surly Amy will be able to meet your needs. Jen even reminds you to pick up your A+ ceramic jewelry from Surly Amy..oh and don't forget to tip your waiter/waitress. I'm sure Surly Amy is donating a portion of her profits to some of them causes A+ supports.Isn't she? Then we have good ol' Richy. An educated guy who should be able to function without needing to behave like the little nerd brother Hitler always wanted. From what I hear he has in the past been a sane fella. Then we get this blog where not only does Richy call for purification of atheism but he manages to slip some book promotion in too.What better way to get attention for your work than to drama things up? More readers, more revenue it is simple and there is nothing wrong with it.....unless. Unless you are gaining readers and revenue by causing harmful, irresponsible, and childish drama and bogging down the secular movement. I'm not saying that is what is happening but there has got to be some reason that so much uncharacteristic behavior is being observed.
If that's not the case and this A+ is the real deal then I would like to see freethoughtblogs and the bloggers who are up in arms over this rogue element of atheism clean their own house up THEN move on to start a new segment of atheism using their proven model.
You don't just one day blurt out "A+!" when you have no real framework and no discussion.You post blogs about the issues you want included in A+. You read the responses and the arguments and come up with something you think most people will get behind. You keep the issues to a minimum because with every social problem you take a stance on, it's going to be that much harder to find support among a large group of people. It's like making a pizza, with every added topping you see a decreased chance everyone wants to eat it.
You do not take a "with us or against us" attitude with people you share an important common interest with. You work with those people and you try to educate them if there are disagreements. Despite Richy's claims that a large portion of the population takes pleasure in demeaning, hating, and threatening harm to others I think it's pretty clear that isn't the case to anyone paying attention. People like PZ Myers and some of the other freethought bloggers have the habit of yelling "misogynist!" without justification. The problem is anytime someone has a problem with a single female they are instantly labeled as hating all women.PZ Myers has on more than one occasion been guilty of this. One would think that such an educated man would realize his behavior is unfair.. When you are a well known public figure (even if you aren't) you should limit undermining the credibility of others unless you know what the hell you are talking about IMO. Labeling
someone misogynist ,(or any other behavioral type) when there is no way you can know it is true because
you don't know that person, is not a position you can defend like you
would evolution. When it comes to science it is often much easier to prove your position is based on facts. With social issues that is much harder to do. Sure there are things like equal treatment for all people which are obvious. But when you get to other more complicated issues sometimes there are no right answers.One instance of disrespect against one woman does not prove misogyny just as one instance of disrespect against a man does not equal someone being a misandrist. If it did then it could be said atheism is overrun with those who have a hatred of men.It works both ways.
Please be clear I am not saying we don't have problems I know we do. I also know we will never be perfect and the internet does not always equal real life. There are countless things said on the internet that would never have a chance of actually happening in real life. Let's keep that in mind. When you ride a plane, or drive in your car there is a threat of death. Planes do crash, so do cars. You either accept the risk and go for a ride or you walk. Public blogging about issues people feel strongly about comes with it's own risks. Either accept them and blog or don't and just read.
I'm sure there will be more to be said about this in the future.
One thing you can count on is I am not going anywhere people like me are the ones people like Richy didn't consider. I'm an asshole but I'm a fair and honest asshole. I guess you could call me Asshole+ ....how ironic.
Note: There are many freethought bloggers for whom I have a great deal of respect. I have had interesting conversations with them and consider several my friends. They are not who I'm talking about here unless their behavior fits
Remember you better be able to support everything you say in comments. I do not put up with stupid, I point and laugh at it.
