The Civil War Within Skepticism

A forum to talk about other sites and things you've found in the jungle that is the internet.

Please take a moment to read the rationalia guidelines: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3449

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:37 pm

Gallstones wrote:
You grossly exaggerate the importance of this Skepchick thing, and your own opinions.
It's not just Skepchicks. It's Pharyngula, PZ Myers, James Randi Foundation, TAM, Greg Laden, Ophelia Benson, DJ Grothe, and hundreds of bloggers, commenters, etc. The discussion threads are rife with discussions of these issues.

Gallstones wrote:You get all butt hurt by mine and predictably launch into personalizations. Weak.


I launched into personalizations? This is typical your bullshit, Gallstones. You come here for the sole purpose of attacking me (see above reference to "pathological" etc.), and to derail the thread by pointing out how worthless you think the topic is, and then you bitch, piss and moan when I respond? Give me a break.

Gallstones wrote:You make shit up and treat it as if it really happened.


Like what?

Gallstones wrote:
I care as much about you commenting in any thread I start as I do about this alleged schism.


That doesn't change the fact that you popping up in a thread for the sole purpose of talking about how uninterested you are in the thread is pointless and stupid. You could be spending your time in more relevant and worthwhile threads like "Listening Too: The Fifth Galaxy" where you wowed the crowd by posting a youtube video. That thread is worth so many more fucks. Why don't you give them over there?
Coito ergo sum
 
Posts: 32039
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby PsychoSerenity » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:39 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
Pappa wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
Pappa wrote:No, it doesn't mean "I wish the issue would just go away". It means "This issue isn't worth giving a fuck about".

It's not the first time PZ, Dawkins and others have got themselves overly frothy because someone on the Internet had a loud and stupid opinion, and it won't be the last. The respond irrationally at times, just like everybody else. Quelle surprise!


So, do you think the sexual harassment allegations raised by Skepchicks/Myers camp, such as Elevatorgate, Swingergate, etc., are much ado about nothing much?


For the very vast majority of what I've read about it, yes.


That was the opinion taken by Thunderf00t, and those in his camp.

The schism, the civil war, appears to center around those who think it is such a big deal that anyone expressing the opinion you just expressed ought to be banned from "freethought" blogs (aka PZ Myers and Skepchick camps), and those that are saying "hey, wait just a cotton picking minute here" (which is the Thunderf00t, and apparently the Pappa, camp, as well as the Dawkins camp, among others). So, you are on a side of this civil war. It's kind of like many civil wars -- it's hard to be neutral, because being "neutral" or "apathetic" or "indifferent" or "not giving a fuck" puts you four-square against the Myers/Skepchick wing of the skeptical movement, and right in line with Thunderf00t et al.

No it doesn't, - I can also not give a fuck that Thunderf00t got himself banned from blog that I don't read, and think that his making a video about it is just as self-obsessed and irrelevant as some of the stuff Skepchick keeps going on about. I really don't think this is going to shatter the core of scepticism.
[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]
User avatar
PsychoSerenity
"I" Self-Perceive Recursively
 
Posts: 7333
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:57 am
Location: Devon, UK

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:39 pm

Pappa wrote:You're grossly exaggerating the importance of all this.


Or, perhaps you are underestimating exactly how pervasive and insidious this trend is.

But, by all means, make your case that it is unimportant? Why?
Coito ergo sum
 
Posts: 32039
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Clinton Huxley » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:43 pm

It don't amount to a hill of beans. Beardy professor and podcast co-host argue with hairy blogger. Stop the press!
"I grow old … I grow old …
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled"

AND MERRY XMAS TO ONE AND All!

Image
User avatar
Clinton Huxley
19th century monkeybitch.
 
Posts: 23013
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:34 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:44 pm

PsychoSerenity wrote:No it doesn't, - I can also not give a fuck that Thunderf00t got himself banned from blog that I don't read, and think that his making a video about it is just as self-obsessed and irrelevant as some of the stuff Skepchick keeps going on about. I really don't think this is going to shatter the core of scepticism.




Look, it's fine if some of you don't give a fuck about this. There are many, many threads I don't give a fuck about. What puzzles me is why so many of you feel the need to come to this particular thread and announce your lack of fuck-giving, while the myriad other threads in which you have no interest do not have that pleasure. By all means, keep on keepin' on, as it will likely eventually get further, substantive, commentary going, and far be it from me to tell you what you can and can't post. If you honestly think it makes sense to go to a thread to say "this thread: I give not a single fuck about it" then, go for it.
Coito ergo sum
 
Posts: 32039
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Clinton Huxley » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:45 pm

CES, if those who didn't give a fuck hadn't commented on your thread, it'd be empty.
"I grow old … I grow old …
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled"

AND MERRY XMAS TO ONE AND All!

Image
User avatar
Clinton Huxley
19th century monkeybitch.
 
Posts: 23013
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:34 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Hermit » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:49 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:I launched into personalizations? This is typical your bullshit, Gallstones.
:irony:

In addition to this irony, there is another. I seem to recall that it was you who started with the personal comments here: "If some of you don't give a fuck, then why would you comment in the thread? Is it your habit to go through all threads about which you have no fucks to give, and notify everyone of said dearth of fucks?"
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 15931
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Pappa » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:50 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
Pappa wrote:You're grossly exaggerating the importance of all this.


Or, perhaps you are underestimating exactly how pervasive and insidious this trend is.

But, by all means, make your case that it is unimportant? Why?


Coito, you're so caught up in it, you're almost frothing at the mouth in these 8 or so threads. Yes, people like PZ, Thunderf00t, Skepchick get themselves all worked up. But really, from this perspective it's just a storm in a teacup. How many times have you seen this kind of think happen in the blogosphere? It's basically a continuous feature of the medium. All they are are people shouting out opinions over the intertubes and getting gratification when they cause a stir, or conversely, getting overly excited about trivial things. Seriously, I don't fucking care. I'm not on any side of the war, because there is no war. Get some perspective man.
User avatar
Pappa
Non-Practicing Anarchist
Non-Practicing Anarchist
 
Posts: 56199
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:42 am
Location: Le sud du Pays de Galles.
About me: I am sacrificing a turnip as I type.

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:50 pm

Clinton Huxley wrote:CES, if those who didn't give a fuck hadn't commented on your thread, it'd be empty.


Perhaps. We'll see, though. Most of the threads in the OP though result in fairly vigorous and substantive debate, though. They don't always get off the ground right away, of course.
Coito ergo sum
 
Posts: 32039
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Azathoth » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:52 pm

I find it all highly amusing. Don't stop posting this stuff Coito. It gives me my daily lulz.
Outside the ordered universe is that amorphous blight of nethermost confusion which blasphemes and bubbles at the center of all infinity—the boundless daemon sultan Azathoth, whose name no lips dare speak aloud, and who gnaws hungrily in inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond time and space amidst the muffled, maddening beating of vile drums and the thin monotonous whine of accursed flutes.

Code: Select all
// Replaces with spaces the braces in cases where braces in places cause stasis
   $str = str_replace(array("\{","\}")," ",$str);
User avatar
Azathoth
blind idiot god
blind idiot god
 
Posts: 9418
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:31 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:53 pm

Hermit wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:I launched into personalizations? This is typical your bullshit, Gallstones.
:irony:

In addition to this irony, there is another. I seem to recall that it was you who started with the personal comments here: "If some of you don't give a fuck, then why would you comment in the thread? Is it your habit to go through all threads about which you have no fucks to give, and notify everyone of said dearth of fucks?"


That isn't a personal comment at all. It's a question. People came here saying they didn't give a fuck. I just asked if they did so consistently, or if this thread was special to them in this regard. What is personal about that.

And, no, Gallstones, as usual, was the first to come in with a personalization. She's done that before too. She likes to run into the room, smack someone, and complain when they hit back.
Coito ergo sum
 
Posts: 32039
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby PsychoSerenity » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:55 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
PsychoSerenity wrote:No it doesn't, - I can also not give a fuck that Thunderf00t got himself banned from blog that I don't read, and think that his making a video about it is just as self-obsessed and irrelevant as some of the stuff Skepchick keeps going on about. I really don't think this is going to shatter the core of scepticism.


Look, it's fine if some of you don't give a fuck about this. There are many, many threads I don't give a fuck about. What puzzles me is why so many of you feel the need to come to this particular thread and announce your lack of fuck-giving, while the myriad other threads in which you have no interest do not have that pleasure. By all means, keep on keepin' on, as it will likely eventually get further, substantive, commentary going, and far be it from me to tell you what you can and can't post. If you honestly think it makes sense to go to a thread to say "this thread: I give not a single fuck about it" then, go for it.

I'm not saying I don't give a fuck about the thread, I'm saying I don't give a fuck about the argument between Thunderf00t, Myers and Skepchick. This thread is about you declaring an internet argument to be a "War Within Skepticism" that is somehow important enough that everyone who considers themselves a sceptic must be on one side or another. Most people in this thread seem to be saying they think you're wrong and that they don't think it's that big a deal.
[Disclaimer - if this is comes across like I think I know what I'm talking about, I want to make it clear that I don't. I'm just trying to get my thoughts down]
User avatar
PsychoSerenity
"I" Self-Perceive Recursively
 
Posts: 7333
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:57 am
Location: Devon, UK

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:57 pm

Pappa wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
Pappa wrote:You're grossly exaggerating the importance of all this.


Or, perhaps you are underestimating exactly how pervasive and insidious this trend is.

But, by all means, make your case that it is unimportant? Why?


Coito, you're so caught up in it, you're almost frothing at the mouth in these 8 or so threads. Yes, people like PZ, Thunderf00t, Skepchick get themselves all worked up. But really, from this perspective it's just a storm in a teacup. How many times have you seen this kind of think happen in the blogosphere? It's basically a continuous feature of the medium. All they are are people shouting out opinions over the intertubes and getting gratification when they cause a stir, or conversely, getting overly excited about trivial things. Seriously, I don't fucking care. I'm not on any side of the war, because there is no war. Get some perspective man.


I know, I love it. It's like a soap opera. It's fun to anticipate the next episode.

PZ Myers has me rolling on the floor laughing. The Skepchicks are like a train wreck, or a two headed snake. Just can't look away...lol.

Where I see the serious importance, though, is in the fact that prominent and influential skeptics, relatively speaking, are having an impact, and the ridiculous views of the Skepchicks, white knighted by folks like PZ Myers, and their myriad followers, are starting to take hold as almost the prevailing view of things. This is why we're seeing Skepchick-esque "policies" being adopted by conferences and conventions. That's what caused Thunderf00t to comment, really. The PoLOLicy (as he put it) adopted by a convention to "remedy" the supposed sexual harassment "problem."
Coito ergo sum
 
Posts: 32039
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Coito ergo sum » Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:00 pm

PsychoSerenity wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
PsychoSerenity wrote:No it doesn't, - I can also not give a fuck that Thunderf00t got himself banned from blog that I don't read, and think that his making a video about it is just as self-obsessed and irrelevant as some of the stuff Skepchick keeps going on about. I really don't think this is going to shatter the core of scepticism.


Look, it's fine if some of you don't give a fuck about this. There are many, many threads I don't give a fuck about. What puzzles me is why so many of you feel the need to come to this particular thread and announce your lack of fuck-giving, while the myriad other threads in which you have no interest do not have that pleasure. By all means, keep on keepin' on, as it will likely eventually get further, substantive, commentary going, and far be it from me to tell you what you can and can't post. If you honestly think it makes sense to go to a thread to say "this thread: I give not a single fuck about it" then, go for it.

I'm not saying I don't give a fuck about the thread, I'm saying I don't give a fuck about the argument between Thunderf00t, Myers and Skepchick. This thread is about you declaring an internet argument to be a "War Within Skepticism" that is somehow important enough that everyone who considers themselves a sceptic must be on one side or another. Most people in this thread seem to be saying they think you're wrong and that they don't think it's that big a deal.


Sure, well, I can respect that some folks don't think this is a big deal at all. I disagree with that. I think it is a big deal, and some of the reasons for that I have stated. I think it is more pervasive than others do, and that it will have a larger impact than some of you do. Fair enough.

However, if one "doesn't give a fuck" about the issue, then by definition almost one doesn't think the problem identified by the Skepchicks and Myers is a big problem at all. That is precisely what Thunderf00t argued. So, in a very real sense, not giving a fuck is siding with Thunderf00t on that issue.

If you do think the problem identified by Skepchicks and Myers is, indeed, a serious issue in need of a remedy, then, again, you have picked a side.

Right? Or, is there a third option that I'm missing?
Coito ergo sum
 
Posts: 32039
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Postby Pappa » Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:06 pm

Yes there is the third option of not giving a fuck about what any of them think.
User avatar
Pappa
Non-Practicing Anarchist
Non-Practicing Anarchist
 
Posts: 56199
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:42 am
Location: Le sud du Pays de Galles.
About me: I am sacrificing a turnip as I type.

PreviousNext

Return to The Wilder Web

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests