Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Acleron said:
I don't think we have to worry too much about FTB.


Richard Carrier
Click to expand...

Intellectual artillery?

"In the meantime, I call everyone now to pick sides (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?

Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid."

Sounds like a Beer Hall in Munich.

By the way, nice of Mr. Carrier to co-opt Jen's idea, with a false dichotomy no less.

Typical male.

Shun me Mr. Carrier, because I am with you AND with them.
 
Merton said:
Yeah, I kind of figured that (hence the question mark). 'Twas just a thought I had.



Exactly. I'd say people have a duty to correct their misunderstanding, but the group could easily pick a new name that avoids this confusion altogether, especially since it is in its formative phase.
Click to expand...

My experience is that groups in their formative phase are unwilling to reconsider their name because the project is somebody's or a few people's baby and they are attached to the name they've already decided on. Which is a shame, because names are important and input from people not in the in-group can be valuable. If the National Atheist Party had called itself something like the Secular Progressive Party it would probably have been able to get many more atheists (and theists) to support it than have done so. There were voices right at the beginning saying things like 'hey, this is identity politics'; and 'hey, you say you welcome theists, but you chose a name that automatically excludes them'.
 
Mister Agenda said:
Which is a shame, because names are important and input from people not in the in-group can be valuable.
Click to expand...
Well, apparently Atheism+ doesn't see it that way. They're already talking uniforms for members, and actively shunning anyone who disagrees with them after minor offenses. Even Ayn Rand accepted people who made what she considered repeated and significant errors, and the Inquisition gave you every opportunity to confess and be absolved while they tortured you (that they'd still kill you was a quirk of their philosophy).

It really is disturbing that a bunch of adults can think this way.
 
squealpiggy said:
Hey people! IT'S TIME TO PICK SIDES.

OK. Picked.
Click to expand...

I have a standard response to "You're either with me or against me": I choose "against". Anyone who has so little respect for me as to make such an asinine statement isn't someone I want to associate with.

Carrier said:
1. We believe in being reasonable. This 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, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with.
Click to expand...
In Skyrim there's a religious organization that goes around attacking anyone who has Daedric artifacts. They serve, ironically, the god of mercy in the game--their logic being that the most merciful thing they can do to someone who's fallen so low as to consort with Daedra is to turn them into a ragged pile of amorphous meat. This quote could have come directly from them.
 
RockNroll said:
Not even that: I've met atheists who claims that religion has benefits as regards social cohesion, morality, etc., and therefore it should be promoted by the state.
An incredibly misguided view in my opinion, but there are indeed atheists who hold it.

Also, I've met plenty of theists who are secularists. The smart/non-totalitarian ones tend to recognize the fact that the separation of religion and state is beneficial to everyone, whether they be theists or atheists.
Click to expand...

It's a fascinating little social experiment. Get a bunch of people together who agree about one thing. Then you find that some of them are acting badly. Rather than institute a few simple rules of behaviour, do an analysis of the problem and decide that the issue isn't behaviour, it's ideological stance. Start a new sub-group with a set of values that aren't up for debate or even precise examination, and subject anyone querying it to the kind of abuse that characterised the problem in the first place. It's like a mini-version of the Cultural Revolution.

"So you're against tolerance and civility? Get lost, douchebag!"
 
By the way, the intellectual howitzer of the Atheism Plusalittlebitofthoughtcontrol, the pop gun of Plus, the A-Bomb of the atheists, the Daisy Cuuter to the deists, Rich Carrier opens up with this charming turn of phrase:

"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."

Is C.H.U.D. an acronym that the cool kids at FtB use or is really a reference to that 80's movie C.H.U.D Canibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller?

I either case, it is ridiculously juvenile.
 
16.5 said:
Is C.H.U.D. an acronym that the cool kids at FtB use or is really a reference to that 80's movie C.H.U.D Canibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller?

I either case, it is ridiculously juvenile.
Click to expand...

Oh, so that's what it means. One of the commenters asked Richard that, and he said something like Cannibalistic Mutant Sewer Dweller, which I noticed did not add up to CHUD. More like CMSD. Thanks for the illumination! :D
 
RebeccaBradley said:
Oh, so that's what it means. One of the commenters asked Richard that, and he said something like Cannibalistic Mutant Sewer Dweller, which I noticed did not add up to CHUD. More like CMSD. Thanks for the illumination! :D
Click to expand...
I recognized the acronym from that movie I've never seen, but I was sure the A+sters had assigned it to some hip new set of insulting terms.

How disappointing.
 
zeggman said:
I recognized the acronym from that movie I've never seen, but I was sure the A+sters had assigned it to some hip new set of insulting terms.

How disappointing.
Click to expand...

I say, as soon as we see A+ pins the rest of us start wearing CHUD pins. I mean, in the USA how many of our national symbols started as insults?
 
Dinwar said:
I say, as soon as we see A+ pins the rest of us start wearing CHUD pins. I mean, in the USA how many of our national symbols started as insults?
Click to expand...
Well, if I'm going to wear one, it's going to stand for Cool Humanist Upsetting Douchebags. I've never eaten a human in my life.
 
RebeccaBradley said:
I love it! How about some fake Surlyramic CHUD necklaces....?
Click to expand...


How about real ones? I'm sure Amy would make them if enough requests came in. Carrier should approve, because it serves the valuable purpose of flagging the impure and unholy.
 
16.5 said:
By the way, the intellectual howitzer of the Atheism Plusalittlebitofthoughtcontrol, the pop gun of Plus, the A-Bomb of the atheists, the Daisy Cuuter to the deists, Rich Carrier opens up with this charming turn of phrase:

"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."

Is C.H.U.D. an acronym that the cool kids at FtB use or is really a reference to that 80's movie C.H.U.D Canibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller?

I either case, it is ridiculously juvenile.
Click to expand...

Strangely enough, the supposed problems of the atheist community - abusiveness, sexism, racism - don't seem to apply on this forum. Gender and race are as visible as people want them to be. Enforcement of the no-abuse rule is very imperfect, but it's existence tends to damp down personalisation. Especially annoying people can be put on ignore. Nobody seems to feel the need to find a JREF+ where there is consensus and friendship.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom