The tweet that got Dawkins banned from NECSS

Hotblack Desiato · 28-01-2016 11:23pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Perhaps the online echo-chamber effect

If you think this place is bad, have you seen the Christianity forum?

allows you to forget, for a little while at least, that atheism is squarely in a minority position in the offline world.

More popular is right, obviously...
Don't forget it's not that long ago that in most societies expressing an atheistic viewpoint would leave you liable to losing your head or being toasted at the stake. This is still the case today in some places. Why can't followers of religion leave such matters to their god to sort out?

Hotblack Desiato · 28-01-2016 11:24pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

When I say that Atheism is in crisis, I mean that as an ideology

Atheism is not an ideology
Atheism is not a religion
Atheism is not a movement
Atheism is not a belief

it hasn't made much progress, it's still an ideology that is squarely in a minority, and it doesn't appear to be gaining any traction on a global scale to pose any serious threat to theism.

Why is religion in crisis in all enlightened societies then? Everywhere in the world where ignorance and poverty are in decline, so is religion.

py2006 · 28-01-2016 11:44pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

When I say that Atheism is in crisis, I mean that as an ideology, it hasn't made much progress, it's still an ideology that is squarely in a minority, and it doesn't appear to be gaining any traction on a global scale to pose any serious threat to theism.

Atheism is certainly not in crisis. I'm not sure how it could be. Religion certainly in this country could be considered in crisis because of its decline. You only have to look at the dwindling church attendance and the age range of those that do attend. I can see churches closing and having to share with other parishes (which was mentioned somewhere recently)

Also I'm not entierely Atheism is an ideology?

magicbastarder · 28-01-2016 11:51pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Atheism is not an ideology
Atheism is not a religion
Atheism is not a movement
Atheism is not a belief

that's the worst poem i've read today. it doesn't even rhyme.

One eyed Jack · 29-01-2016 12:27am

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

If you think this place is bad, have you seen the Christianity forum?

I have to be honest, I rarely ever venture in there as the discussions, well, they're just not particularly interesting as here tbh. Here at least there's a broad range of topics all in one forum, whether it be science, politics, education, sociology, etc, and there's a bit of humour thrown in too!

More popular is right, obviously...
Don't forget it's not that long ago that in most societies expressing an atheistic viewpoint would leave you liable to losing your head or being toasted at the stake. This is still the case today in some places. Why can't followers of religion leave such matters to their god to sort out?

Because some followers of religion aren't satisfied with keeping their beliefs to themselves and want to exhort power and control over other people, and religion seems like just as good an excuse as any IMO. Well, that's the way it appears to me at least. I really couldn't give you a comprehensive answer on that one. I'm sure most people mean well, but just the same as in any community really - there will always be that minority who give a bad impression of the majority within that community.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Atheism is not an ideology
Atheism is not a religion
Atheism is not a movement
Atheism is not a belief

While I agree with you that atheism is neither a belief nor a religion, I don't think I'm being disrespectful when i refer to Atheism as an ideology or as a movement (some people can't even agree as to whether it should be 'atheism' or 'Atheism', 'atheist' or 'Atheist', i usually go with the 'A' when referring to Atheism as an ideology, and 'a' when referring to an atheist).

Why is religion in crisis in all enlightened societies then? Everywhere in the world where ignorance and poverty are in decline, so is religion.

And therein lies the problem - how many enlightened societies are you aware of? I'm not aware of too many apart from a few first world European countries. There's a reason i said globally, because religion isn't in crisis globally. If anything, it's expanding, because 84% of the world still lives in ignorance and poverty, and I don't see enlightened intellectuals too willing to address that glaring disparity any time soon. Sure they'll point it out and say "What kind of a God would allow for this to happen?", but that's about the extent of their altruism, and then they'll complain about the religious organisations exploiting the ignorant and impoverished while there was nothing preventing them from organising themselves to do something about it.

I truly despair sometimes for all that intellect and enlightenment going to waste.

pH · 29-01-2016 12:28am

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I saw PZ Myers rush to misrepresent this one yesterday too. I have to admit I am baffled. Someone, not Richard Dawkins, made a video generalizing Muslims and Feminists.

I'm sorry but how does it generalize Muslims and Feminists? - for a starter the video doesn't mention muslims - the word in the title is "Islamist"

Islamism, also known as Political Islam (Arabic: إسلام سياسي‎ islām siyāsī), is an Islamic revival movement often characterized by moral conservatism, literalism, and the attempt "to implement Islamic values in all spheres of life."

Secondly the 2 people being caricatured are:

The lady is Chanty Brinks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH_ZryBfCtU

And the gentleman is "Dawah man", who has been "no platformed" himself by University of East London for saying homosexuality was “filthy disease”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11419088/Radical-preacher-at-Islamic-charity-event-promotes-extremism.html

yellowlabrador · 29-01-2016 12:30am

How can atheism be an ideology?There's no 'right' way or 'wrong' way of being an atheist.

Absolam · 29-01-2016 2:26am

Shrap wrote: »

Hmm. Am I the only one who found it funny (in a blackly humorous and sick kind of way)?

I thought it was a bit funny, and I think lampooning is a great way to get people to think about things from another point of view. But not funny enough to be worth retweeting, or offensive enough to be worth banning people from speaking or threatening them with violence.

Though I admit I can think of very little indeed that's worth banning people from speaking or threatening them with violence for, so maybe I'm an outlier in that regard.

colossus-x · 29-01-2016 3:20am

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Atheism is not an ideology
Atheism is not a religion
Atheism is not a movement
Atheism is not a belief

magicbastarder wrote: »

that's the worst poem i've read today. it doesn't even rhyme.

What he should have said was:

Atheism is not an ideology
- I think your into codology

Atheism is not a religion
- I regard that idea with derision

Atheism is not a movement
- I read that with some amusement

Atheism is not a belief
- and we've no commander and chief

colossus-x · 29-01-2016 3:57am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I just think that Atheism, as a movement, is in crisis, because the more public it becomes, the more under attack it is, and I think some of the more prominent figures do themselves no favours on social media. For example I looked at a few of that Sargon guys YouTube videos, or TheAmazingAtheist, or thunderf00t, and tbh they come off like woeful knobs!

I know you're saying that the idea that someone can give atheism a bad name is ridiculous, but I do wonder - have Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers become like the Germaine Greer of Atheism?

Gone are the days of intellectual rigour and intelligent discourse, replaced by bitter bastards with a victim complex on social media. I really do wonder are they doing their own cause any favours.

All those points are completely irrelevant to atheists. Atheist don't 'follow' anyone aside from subscribing to their youtube channel. That's the mindset of a religious person who has great difficulty in understanding the complete opposite of their own way of thinking.

It could be true what you say about those guys being knob-heads but it's doesn't matter a jot. No one becomes an atheist because of what any of them say. All that is required is non-belief in God. All that chatter is just mild amusement and if they say something stupid no atheist is gonna flip and become a theist because of it.

Absolam · 29-01-2016 4:47am

colossus-x wrote: »

What he should have said was:

Atheism is not an ideology
- I think your into codology

Atheism is not a religion
- I regard that idea with derision

Atheism is not a movement
- I read that with some amusement

Atheism is not a belief
- and we've no commander and chief

Oddly reminiscent of Fezzik....

One eyed Jack · 29-01-2016 5:12am

colossus-x wrote: »

All those points are completely irrelevant to atheists.

You've spoken to them all then and they've given you permission to speak on behalf of atheists then? Or is it simply more likely that you can realistically only speak about what is or isn't relevant to you as an atheist?

Atheist don't 'follow' anyone aside from subscribing to their youtube channel.

I never said anything about atheists following anyone. I spoke of those high profile personalities as examples of atheists, not people anyone would necessarily base their opinion of atheists upon, if they have any common sense at least.

That's the mindset of a religious person who has great difficulty in understanding the complete opposite of their own way of thinking.

The above is the mindset of someone who hasn't read a post properly and had definitely misunderstood what was being said.

It could be true what you say about those guys being knob-heads but it's doesn't matter a jot. No one becomes an atheist because of what any of them say. All that is required is non-belief in God. All that chatter is just mild amusement and if they say something stupid no atheist is gonna flip and become a theist because of it.

Clearly it does matter, or Dicky wouldn't have been uninvited for his latest twitter titsup. I never said any atheist was likely to become a theist because of it, but there are many theists who will never hear the benefits of atheism if these representatives of atheism keep getting themselves "no-platformed" and unable to speak, silenced and banned from public spaces and social media.

nozzferrahhtoo · 29-01-2016 7:59am

orubiru wrote: »

As an identity, "Atheist" is not really a great one.

Preaching to the converted here. I am one of those that do not actually use or identify myself with the term "atheist" at all except on very rare occasion where I require a term of convenience to keep a block of prose short.

I prefer to identify myself with terms that describe what I am, not what I am not. I have no issue with people who DO use the term, so it is no slight or judgement on them. I just do not do so myself.

orubiru wrote: »

The very idea that someone can "give Atheism a bad name" is ridiculous.

Agreed, but in the post you were replying to from me I was less talking about atheism as a term, rather than as a movement. That is to say the multiple associations and organisations that have arisen in the name of atheism.... AI, AAI, and so on and so forth..... and how any such movement will have bad and pernicious minority elements.

We appear for the most part to acknowledge the existence of the ones in ours. I certainly do at least. But we can see from the reaction to Dawkins pointing out minority pernicious elements in Feminism as a movement how some people react to it being pointed out in THEIRS.

It is all too easy and common, I guess, for humans to misrepresent and generalise people behind a label. It can be done with any label. Many atheists generalise Christians for example.

But the less a label actually says about who you are, the easier it is to pack the straw men tight. Atheism is often about what a person is not, and very little about what a person IS, so misrepresentation of atheism and atheists abound. From the "Atheists have no hope in life" type comment all the way up to "Look what atheism did in China and Russia" type comments.

Feminism likely suffers from the same thing. Not because it says as little about what you are as atheism does, but because many people..... myself included..... are not even clear what "feminism" even is any more. For me it means little more than being blind.... in all but a few cases.... to sex at all. Not seeing, or thinking in any way relevant, what sex a person is when deciding how to treat them, interact them, or parse anything they do or say.

I would be a "feminist" in that regard, but like "Atheist" I do not find I require "feminist" as a label or descriptive term for myself and more than I feel I need "colorist" or "aracist" or something to describe my lack of any form of discrimination against people of other races or colors.

For some others it is a tribal "us against them" movement where women somehow have to "win" against men, or women are somehow "oppressed" and have to fight some revolution, and that man hating women need to be educated or defeated in some way, or some war is at play that needs to be "won" somehow.

orubiru wrote: »

Hey look over here, the Atheists can't even make up their minds about their own belief system.

Hahah true, but it would be a comical move from them given Christianity has well over 33,000 sects, off shots, cults, branches and forms. Many of them with not just differing, but entirely irreconcilable, truth claims. So they would be the _last_ people I could think of who have any form of pedestal from which to admonish others on clarifying their belief systems.

nozzferrahhtoo · 29-01-2016 8:10am

pH wrote: »

I'm sorry but how does it generalize Muslims and Feminists? - for a starter the video doesn't mention muslims - the word in the title is "Islamist"

Yes someone else already corrected my use of the term Muslim. It was unimportant to me really as the point I made remains the same.

If a video generalises (or even people THINK it does whether it does or not)..... a group X..... and someone shares the video and says it is NOT representative of group X....... then attacking that someone for offending group X is a bit ridiculous.

And that core point is not affected by whether I say Muslim or Islamist.... or whether the video actually does generalize the group or not.

Boskowski · 29-01-2016 8:11am

Not terribly original or funny, in fact you'd wonder why anyone would put so much effort into something that dimwitted and childish. And while I'd be the last person to defend either group here at boards I think we'd call that trolling.

nozzferrahhtoo · 29-01-2016 9:07am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I make an effort to engage in the discussion.

Now that _is_ funny.

Amusement aside however I do not see atheism as "in crisis" at all. Not when more than one Pew type office of statistics has acknowledged it to be the fastest rising minority in places like the US. And articles were only in multiple news sources this week about Atheism as the UKs hidden silent majority.

And meanwhile the business of selling lies to children, lies such as virgin births and magic crackers.... lies which you too have apparently been sold and subscribe to as true for no reason you care to explain in your alleged campaign of wanting to engage in discussion..... is far from as lucrative for the CEOs and front line plebs as it used to be. With Mass attendance on the down in countries like our own, parishes being amalgamated due to lack of funds and vocations, and existing priests taking pay cuts and even complaining in some cases of having to take second jobs. And in many places vocations and funds are in fact so low that they not only have to merge parishes, but they have to import priests from places like Africa (The parish I live in here in Bavaria in Kreis Aschaffenburg is one of multiple examples).

You refer to the "out" campaign in a previous post and that is a good example. The purpose of that campaign is to acknowledge that there is some statistical "tipping point" that a minority can reach where suddenly a cascade of change results. There are parallels to draw there to the movements around homosexuality.

But I think it is also not in crisis given that the perpetuation of atheism is not actually the goal or ideal of the majority of atheists or atheist organisations like Atheist Ireland. Rather the perpetuation of things like Humanism and Secularism is.

So what is the nature of the "crisis" you imagine exactly? The only thing you have offered / suggested is that as it becomes more public, the more it, or it's proponents, get "attacked". I do not see that as a crisis, or even a bad thing. I see it as a measure of it's success, it's position trending in the minds of the public, and I see it as entirely the norm for ANY movement that starts taking on any kind of momentum.

And in fact many of those attacks are a good thing. Some of them are so ridiculous, such nonsense, and so unsubstantiated that they validate a mantra I have all too often repeated on this very forum. Which is that sometimes the best way to damage the cause and agenda of religion is to _keep the religious talking_.

They do more to damage the credibility and agenda of their own cause than anything I or the likes of Atheist Ireland can do or say. Take the posts of the likes of J C on this forum, or the insane ramblings of people like Bill O'Reilly or ISIS. They have their followers sure, some quite vehement, but over all their affect is a detriment to religion.

So let the "attacks" come! In a war of ideas, on the stage of open and honest discourse, we have the higher ground. They are on our turf now. Bring it! And we will see just who is in "crisis" here.

orubiru · 29-01-2016 11:47am

Boskowski wrote: »

Not terribly original or funny, in fact you'd wonder why anyone would put so much effort into something that dimwitted and childish. And while I'd be the last person to defend either group here at boards I think we'd call that trolling.

Yes, it is blatant trolling.

I'm not really sure I understand why someone like Dawkins would be sharing it in the first place.

Unless he thinks the video makes some good points? I'm not really seeing it.

Bristolscale7 · 29-01-2016 11:48am

What time did he post the original tweet? Maybe it was late and he had a few glasses of wine.

silverharp · 29-01-2016 12:03pm

It made me chuckle , two ideologies that have warped views of the world , I get it.

orubiru · 29-01-2016 12:57pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

When I say that Atheism is in crisis, I mean that as an ideology, it hasn't made much progress, it's still an ideology that is squarely in a minority, and it doesn't appear to be gaining any traction on a global scale to pose any serious threat to theism.

Atheism isn't an ideology though. It's a lack of belief in God(s). That's it.

How can something like that make progress?

A: Do you believe in God?
B: No.
...10 years later...
A: Do you believe in God?
B: No.

Boiled Water isn't a type of Tea.
Off is not a TV channel.

I don't really understand the insistence that "Atheism is a religion" or "Atheism is an Ideology". Can you explain it for me?

One eyed Jack · 29-01-2016 1:35pm

orubiru wrote: »

Atheism isn't an ideology though. It's a lack of belief in God(s). That's it.

How can something like that make progress?

A: Do you believe in God?
B: No.
...10 years later...
A: Do you believe in God?
B: No.

Boiled Water isn't a type of Tea.
Off is not a TV channel.

I don't really understand the insistence that "Atheism is a religion" or "Atheism is an Ideology". Can you explain it for me?

As simply as I can I suppose, I consider Atheism an ideology because it has one core idea - an absence, or a lack of belief in any deities. It's not meant in a derogatory way or any of the rest of it, it's simply meant as a descriptive term for an idea that all people who identify as atheist have in common. When I talk about the movement making progress, I mean the spread of atheism globally, making progress in increasing the numbers of people who identify as atheist.

Joe Exotic · 29-01-2016 1:55pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

As simply as I can I suppose, I consider Atheism an ideology because it has one core idea - an absence, or a lack of belief in any deities. It's not meant in a derogatory way or any of the rest of it, it's simply meant as a descriptive term for an idea that all people who identify as atheist have in common. When I talk about the movement making progress, I mean the spread of atheism globally, making progress in increasing the numbers of people who identify as atheist.

I see where your coming from but when you say that Atheism has one "core" idea the implication is that there are other non core ideas and thats the point there isn't there is only that one thing a lack of belief in god.

If you want an ideology, there are loads out there which would typically include mostly Atheists such as sceptisim and humanism but atheism is not the same thing.

One idea only!!!

thats what is so good about it you are either in or out no arguments needed.

magicbastarder · 29-01-2016 1:59pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

As simply as I can I suppose, I consider Atheism an ideology because it has one core idea - an absence, or a lack of belief in any deities.

i'm not sure we share the same definition of ideology. the ideology is the structure of ideas you build on top of the core idea of a lack of belief in a god, rather than the core idea itself.
so humanism is an ideology, but not atheism.

nozzferrahhtoo · 29-01-2016 1:59pm

murphk wrote: »

I see where your coming from but when you say that Atheism has one "core" idea the implication is that there are other non core ideas and thats the point there isn't there is only that one thing a lack of belief in god.

Indeed. And the majority of dictionary definitions I am finding for the word "idealogy" talk about things like a "system of ideas" or "body of doctrine" or "set of beliefs".

Taking one single claim or idea.... or worse in this case the ABSCENCE of one single claim or idea.... and acting like it is a "system" or "set" or "body" of ideas or beliefs is really quite the stretch, even for someone generally known to pretend English words and phrases mean other than they actually do.

orubiru · 29-01-2016 2:01pm

yellowlabrador wrote: »

How can atheism be an ideology?There's no 'right' way or 'wrong' way of being an atheist.

I think that treating atheism as an ideology is more of an American thing to be honest.

In the USA, if you want to be one of the "cool" kids then you absolutely do not support The Christian Right. In fact, you really want to be aggressively in opposition to the Christian Right and Trump etc. So, for many, being an Atheist is more than just "I don't believe in God". It an act of rebellion against the White Male Patriarchy or maybe rebellion against the antiquated beliefs of Mummy and Daddy. Something like that.

Over here you have guys like Richard Dawkins who, for me, are just skeptics and the existence of God is one of the many things they would be skeptical about. It shouldn't be too surprising to find them criticizing Islam or opposing the idea that "gender is a social construct" etc.

Skeptics will be skeptical and it's really up to you to provide the evidence and arguments that support your worldview. If you can't do that then you need to improve your data or your ability to make a reasonable argument. Banning someone because they criticize certain ideologies is pretty much the opposite of that.

For Americans like PZ Myers it's a little bit more difficult because they have "The Christian Right" to deal with. They have to consider crazies like the Westboro Baptist Church or "gun nuts" or White Supremacy groups etc. Sometimes being skeptical can lead you to a place where you basically agree with some horrible people on some specific points.

Can you imagine making a well reasoned, well presented, criticism of Islam and then these white christian fundamentalists, that you hate with a passion, are coming up to you and congratulating you on sticking it to "those damn Muslims"? That's not pleasant.

You have folks who are happy to support Bill Maher and Sam Harris as long as they are criticizing Christianity and making fun of Right-Wing Fundamentalist Christians but as soon as they have a pop at Muslims or Islam there are cries of "Islamophobia".

They are stuck in a trap. They don't believe in God and they hate the Christian Right. The Christian Right criticizes Islam. Atheists criticize Islam. Some people simply will not tolerate this overlap and so are only willing to be skeptical up to a point. If an aspect their skepticism leads them to a place where they might share a belief with some nut-job racists then they have to abandon that aspect.

That's what the Atheism+ movement really seemed to be when you look at it. They were basically saying that you can be a skeptic but not if your skepticism becomes problematic. You can say that the story of Noah's Ark is garbage and use a logical argument to make your point. However, you can't say that the Gender Pay Gap is garbage, even if you can use a logical argument to make your point.

When you get to that stage then I suppose Atheism really is an ideology for you.

"We are Atheists plus we care about social justice.
We are Atheists plus we support women's rights.
We are Atheists plus we protest racism.
We are Atheists plus we fight homophobia and transphobia.
We are Atheists plus we use critical thinking and skepticism"

That all sounds great but what happens when someone uses critical thinking and skepticism to question the finer points of these broad talking points?

When you'll invite Richard Dawkins to a conference on Science and Skepticism and will then dis-invite him because he openly criticizes Islam and is skeptical of some aspects of Feminism then you really are treating Atheism like an ideology at that stage.

One eyed Jack · 29-01-2016 2:04pm

murphk wrote: »

I see where your coming from but when you say that Atheism has one "core" idea the implication is that there are other non core ideas and thats the point there isn't there is only that one thing a lack of belief in god.

If you want an ideology, there are loads out there which would typically include mostly Atheists such as sceptisim and humanism but atheism is not the same thing.

One idea only!!!

thats what is so good about it you are either in or out no arguments needed.

Well the only reason I make an attempt to make the distinction if you will between atheism and non-religious is because atheists at least identify themselves as atheist, they're saying they have no belief in God, and that's grand, and then there are people who are offended if you refer to them as atheist.

My wife is one of them - has no interest in religion, has never been religious, takes no position on any lack of belief or absence of belief in deities. For her it's simply something that doesn't arise and there's no point entertaining something which as far as she's concerned doesn't exist and has no meaning in her life.

nozzferrahhtoo · 29-01-2016 2:14pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

For her it's simply something that doesn't arise and there's no point entertaining something which as far as she's concerned doesn't exist and has no meaning in her life.

Then she has my envy. I too would like never to deal with or concern myself with religion again. Never think about it. Just leave it "out there" as something "other people do" that does not affect me, in much the same way as I do Reality TV shows. No respect or time for it, but affects me not a jot, so I ignore it.

Alas I am just not let. The things I AM interested and invested in almost invariably have battle lines drawn in the field. And not by me, but by groups (often quite vocal and sometimes well bank rolled) of theists.

Sexuality, equal rights between sexes and sexuality divisions, bodily autonomy for people like women, education, politics, science, medicine, history, human rights, global peace, free speech, a free press, and much much more. Large areas where I am deeply invested and highly active. And every single one of them has the same problem.

I guess if someone is leading a life where they have no interest in those things, no investment in their success, then they will have no interest or need to defy religion or identify themselves in opposition to it. And as I said I envy them. I am not one of those people.