Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[Skeptic Ginger]

There is a huge spectrum of libertarianism (from classical liberal to tea party).

It's pretty extreme when you say the police force would do a better job if it were privatized. I asked Shermer at one of his book reviews of his Libertarian book if New Orleans contracting with Blackwater after Katrina had been a good idea, and would he like the police to be privatized and he said, "yes".

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Penn Gillette is a very open Libertarian but his assoc with JREF is mostly
at TAM as far as I can see, being close magician friends with Randi.
Described as an Objectivist on his wiki article, but even if it were true that hardly makes JREF "over run" with them. Not even sure if he would identify with the label.

Not over run, there are quite a few. But the forum has been a bit overrun recently. It's so bad I quit arguing with them. They overrun threads with so much dogma the discussions end and the threads become nothing more than echo chambers.

 

[Axiom_Blade]

Interesting comment. The JREF, no, but Shermer does have a whole book on unbridled Libertarianism being the hope of humankind.

Which book is that?

 

[Edx]

I have long suspected that many of the oppressive customs against women in religion and elsewhere were well meaning but misguided attempts to 'protect women'.

I dont think you know how right you are.

I think that many feminists are now doing the same thing. In fact, that is one of the big issues for many on the anti-FtB/A+ side. Many of the things the FtB/A+ people want assumes that the(a) woman can't make an educated decision on her own. Or can't succeed on their own, despite women largely moving into many well paying jobs and even becoming the majority in many. For example, being a vet is now commonly looked at as more of a "woman's job" where as 50 years ago, it was almost exclusively men.

Women are entering STEM fields, just not all of them, and not at the same rate. Hey guess what? Many of the people who would have gone into STEM in the last 20-30 years went into finance instead, because MONEY.

Reminds me of this video I saw on Anita Sarkeesian. The damsel, is her!

 

[recursive prophet]

Bolded Part: Be still, my leaky heart! Oh, if that were true. We have a number of voices who call for reasonable discussions but just as on A+, we have an equal number who just simply HAVE TO be the first to call out the woo or sock-puppet or JAQ-off. We're very adept at dog-piling here but our moderation tries to rein us in and will not, usually, take part in the beat down.

You're a very cool and funny poster Fool. Been meaning for some time to send you a kudos pm, but personally I hate getting them here. It triggers a Pavlovian response from a period in my past on JREF when 8 out of 10 I received were dope slaps from staff. Might this be a way to just send comments as I can on TR and SC, both of which use vBullitin? Or is this a quick reply to the thread? I'll soon see. And don't y'all laugh too hard at an old fool stumbling along. If you're lucky you may live long enough to become one of the net's Rip Van Winkles also. I was on the cutting edge with CPM, 3 decades ago.

Disappointed that Apostate seems to have dropped out. He still has time to preen at A+, but apparently found skeptical analysis of what's been going down there too much of a challenge. I suspect we're all getting a bit bored with it at this point. Gonna be hard for them to top some of their past actions/arguments, and having driven off all the soft targets it looks to me like even they are starting to yawn.

 

[kbonn]

Disappointed that Apostate seems to have dropped out. He still has time to preen at A+, but apparently found skeptical analysis of what's been going down there too much of a challenge. I suspect we're all getting a bit bored with it at this point. Gonna be hard for them to top some of their past actions/arguments, and having driven off all the soft targets it looks to me like even they are starting to yawn.

He said that the thread was a spoon killer (no idea), and that it seems to have died, so he'd engage elsewhere.

The thread clearly hasn't died, so seems just a big dishonest to me.

 

[d4m10n]

He said that the thread was a spoon killer (no idea), and that it seems to have died, so he'd engage elsewhere.

I think spoon-killer is the new ball-buster. Also, dudebro can be a verb.

Damn, where is my SJW-to-English dictionary?

 

[brodski]

He said that the thread was a spoon killer (no idea),

Spoons are the SI unit of social justice energy*. A SJW who "doesn't have the spoons to prove that you're wrong" has tired of the fight and instead intends to declare victory as is their right. A thread which is "a spoon killier" is one which will tire a SJW.


*The term actually arose from a metaphor used by a disabled person answering a question about what it was like to be disabled- the discussion too place in a cafe, the disabled person used spoons to represent a "currency" of energy that had to be expended just to do day to day tasks, when they had "run out of spoons" they woudl have no more energy to do anything that day. It seems to be a fairly neat metaphor which has been appropriated by the SJ community.

 

[RandFan]

I'm debating privilege on facebook right now.

ETA: That's rather out of the blue. Not sure why I posted that here. Sorry. Never mind. I'm not even drinking. Who knows.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Which book is that?

The Mind of the Market.

Shermer should have stuck to skepticism.

 

[adamwho]

The Mind of the Market.

Shermer should have stuck to skepticism.

Why? I think business and politics could use some (non-ideologically based) skepticism.

 

[brodski]

Why? I think business and politics could use some (non-ideologically based) skepticism.

OK. But what does non-ideologically based skepticism have to do with Shermer's book?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

He said that the thread was a spoon killer (no idea), and that it seems to have died, so he'd engage elsewhere.

Spoons are the SI unit of social justice energy*. A SJW who "doesn't have the spoons to prove that you're wrong" has tired of the fight and instead intends to declare victory as is their right. A thread which is "a spoon killier" is one which will tire a SJW.

So, basically, he found having to actually defend their ideas, rather than having them a priori assumed to be correct, too much mental effort to do.

 

[brodski]

So, basically, he found having to actually defend their ideas, rather than having them a priori assumed to be correct, too much mental effort to do.

Or it could just be a massive thread that wasn't worth wading through in order to contribute to. We've all seen threads like that.

 

[zooterkin]

Spoons are the SI unit of social justice energy*. A SJW who "doesn't have the spoons to prove that you're wrong" has tired of the fight and instead intends to declare victory as is their right. A thread which is "a spoon killier" is one which will tire a SJW.


*The term actually arose from a metaphor used by a disabled person answering a question about what it was like to be disabled- the discussion too place in a cafe, the disabled person used spoons to represent a "currency" of energy that had to be expended just to do day to day tasks, when they had "run out of spoons" they woudl have no more energy to do anything that day. It seems to be a fairly neat metaphor which has been appropriated by the SJ community.

Here's the long version - http://www.butyoudontlooksick.com/wpress/articles/written-by-christine/the-spoon-theory/

 

[jhunter1163]

So, basically, he found having to actually defend their ideas, rather than having them a priori assumed to be correct, too much mental effort to do.

He also didn't have any mods who would come swooping in to ban any dissenter who seemed to be getting the better of him.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Or it could just be a massive thread that wasn't worth wading through in order to contribute to. We've all seen threads like that.

He was contributing. Then he stopped.

 

[s_pepys]

Why? I think business and politics could use some (non-ideologically based) skepticism.

i think the problem with the shermer, libertarian, sj thing is that its really hard to apply skepticism to politics.

it is, by its nature, ideologically driven.

its the whole problem i have here (with a+) in a nutshell. whether its tories, labour, tea-partiers, libertarians, feminists....etc

opposition can cry that the other side is woo too each other all night.

there are no right answers where politics is concerned.

 

[s_pepys]

just read this at pharyngula. seems pz's taking a small amount of flack for being male.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/03/20/apparently-i-need-to-clarify-myself/

in his defense (strange!), i think shes mischaracterised what he said in her article.

he even ended with "what can we do better?" didnt he?

interesting anyhow.

lxxx

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

just read this at pharyngula. seems pz's taking a small amount of flack for being male.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/03/20/apparently-i-need-to-clarify-myself/

in his defense (strange!), i think shes mischaracterised what he said in her article.

A SJW mischaracterising what another person is saying in order to score a cheap point? Never!

The thing is, though, he's also mischaracterising what she said.

His article said, in part, "it's not a list for men, though, it's a list for everybody". Her reply is "by saying that you're removing the focus from the group to which you belong to which this list needs to be applied - men". And his reply is "I'm not removing the focus from the group to which I belong - I'm included in 'everybody'".

She is actually mischaracterising what he said less than he is mischaracterising what she said.

So, anyway, is this the beginning of an implosion where all the SJWs are going to start turning on each other?