ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 17th July 2019, 02:08 PM   #321
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 5,180
Originally Posted by Baylor View Post
In a short span of time I've seen four ISf member use the phrase, "you should be ashamed of yourself." This is a forum full grown (old) men talking to each other like insufferable women. Skeptics don't even try to have arguments, they go straight for the shaming tactics. And they are getting more and more pathetic.

There is so much wrong with this post it's hard to know where to begin.* How Baylor identifies a skeptic should first be established. Is it just because someone posts on ISF? Does this qualify the person for the title? I have seen many posts by many exhibiting something well short of skepticism.

So, having defined all posters here as skeptic, Baylor goes on to make the blanket claim - "Skeptics don't even try to have arguments, they go straight for the shaming tactics."

I suppose we should be kind. Advanced age can cloud judgment in some.


* That the writer should be ashamed of his/her self is a given.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:46 PM   #322
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,773
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Shaming is one of the methods that our species uses to enforce moral norms. This has been the case for at least hundreds of thousands of years and certainly isn't restricted to women.

While purely rational discussion limited to the implications of a particular argument, it's factual basis, etc. shouldn't include such as part of examining the truth or lack thereof of any particular position, this forum isn't limited only to such a limited form of examination.

While I tend to think that too much shaming goes on here for my own taste, the idea that the fact that it exists at all is evidence that there's a problem with the forum isn't valid.
But shaming is the first and often only line of attack for skeptics. Like the religious cult they are, they use to it form in-group/out-group demarcations. They use it to ostracize others not willing to conform to their group-think. Like any religion, they have cardinal virtues ("tolerance," "oikaphobia"); they have deadly sins ("racism," "homophobia"). This forum is filled old men using contemporary politics to show how "not racist" they are. This forum has become competition to see who's the most "not racist." The more outraged one is, the more "not racist" he is. These boomers don't seem to understand these social norms will be gone not long after they're dead. The zietgeist is moving and not in the direction they think it is.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:18 PM   #323
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 62,538
Originally Posted by Baylor View Post
But shaming is the first and often only line of attack for skeptics.
No it isn't. Take a look at the Rockets cannot propel in the vacuum of space thread as an example. Lots of good science was presented, by some very patient actual rocket scientists.

Because you made a blanket statement, one counterexample is enough to disprove your point.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
Morticia Addams was elegaunt.
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:45 PM   #324
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,773
Hate this petty **** but often ≠ every.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:13 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.