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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


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 25th October 2019, 10:34 PM   #121
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 9,017
First you claim that it is:

Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Little wake up call, ISF is already 4chan, or near enough as makes no odds. Has been for years. The conservatrolls, TERFs, reactionaries, racists, pro-corporate libertarians, pseudo-centrists, and the various useful idiots who support them are over 50% of the regular posters here, and have been for some time. They manage to disrupt pretty much any thread that's even remotely related to some sort of political or social issue, to the point where certain topics have become effectively impossible to have a rational discussion about.

And then you explain why you think it isn't:

Quote:
The only reason it's not worse here is, unlike 4chan, Reddit, Faceboo, or other major social media platforms, there simply isn't the population here to make it worse. The only reason that this place hasn't become yet another MRA/Incel/alt.right hotbed like all those others is because it's a little ass-end-of-nowhere board with no influence, and still maintains some semblance of rules preventing the sheer volume of personal attacks and obscenity that floods nearly every other forum these days.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann 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 26th October 2019, 04:51 AM   #122
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,500
Originally Posted by Max_mang View Post
Personally, I wouldn't say deplorable. But there is a huge difference in the amount of critical thinking skills being used in the science and general skepticism sections than in the social/political sections.

We can have multiple posters describing the intricacies of rocket science; destroying ufo theories and religious zealotry with sound scientific data and logic. Then those same people watch the same video with black guy and a white guy in it and they all somehow see completely different things and start calling each other racist or reverse-racist or whatever immediately.
While I would need to flesh out more detail before I could reach agreement with you, these comments seem somewhat reasonable. Whereas the post you agreed with is irrational to the point of being surreal. It's the sort of irrational, fact-challenged post that a person who wished for more skepticism in the socio-political domain would object to, not agree with.

You agreed with that fact-challenged blather, but you're not owning the position you staked out via that agreement.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   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 26th October 2019, 05:00 AM   #123
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,500
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
People who have differing politics, but are coherent about it, are actually interesting to discuss.

People whose guiding principle is "these people do not deserve rights because they have a different skin color/gender/sexual orientation/whatever" are not. You can't be a patriotic American and love the Confederate battle flag. You can't favor "small government" *and* insist that trans people shouldn't be allowed in public bathrooms legally, or that police should be allowed to "stop and frisk" people based on skin color. But quite a few of our so-called "conservatives" have effectively advocated exactly this.

ETA: I wouldn't be shocked if my ignore list and luchog's contain quite a few of the same names, and for the same reason: neither of us are interested in talking to people who deny with our status as human beings.
I take no issue with you or anyone else choosing not to engage with the uber deplorables. There are a tiny number of posters who I also choose not to engage with. I too belong to a demographic on certain **** lists, if that matters to anyone.

But this is a far cry from the OP, and a far cry from luchog's fact-challenged screed.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 26th October 2019 at 05:02 AM.
varwoche is online now   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 26th October 2019, 05:17 AM   #124
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,926
What's the point in even having a goddamn language if every discussion is just going to forever stall at an impossible to escape impasse of arguing about categorization?
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   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 26th October 2019, 06:32 AM   #125
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 363
If the point is to nitpick luchog's and uke2ske's posts, then have at. Having seen luchog be attacked over and over in other threads I can see why he would post what he did.

As for me, I don't feel this forum is so much overwhelmed by conservative right wing trolling (though there's lots of that), there's plenty from the left as well. People constantly get called racist, homophobic, islamophobic, etc when they apply critical thinking to news stories that happen to involve minorities. Then there's the insisted-on false binaries (one side must be 100% right/pure and one side must be 100% wrong/evil) that grind most threads down to people just sniping.
Max_mang is online now   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 26th October 2019, 06:58 AM   #126
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,926
Okay here's the issue.

Whenever we talk "extreme/reactionary/similar concept" we don't use the correct scale.

Let's try a parable.

In front of class a teacher is teaching a series of math problems. He says 2+2=4, then he says 2 X 2 = 4, then he says 2^2 is 4, then he flubs it and says 2+3=4.

And let's say this teacher is a bit of a douche and instead of admitting his mistake he blusters and digs his heels in, just continuing to demand that 2+3=4.

Is it "restoring the balance" if you then demand to go "Okay since you've used two as an answer to many times, that is you are 'biased' against two, I'm going to start demanding that equations that equation that don't add up to two then add up to two. That way the balance is maintained."

Wrong on one side and wrong on the other just add up to more wrong, they don't cancel out.

And that's the problem with all discussions of "balance." Unless the scale we're measuring it on is and only is "Between factually incorrect and factually correct" then the discussion is pointless and dangerous.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   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 26th October 2019, 07:46 AM   #127
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 7,020
Quote:
Is it "restoring the balance" if you then demand to go "Okay since you've used two as an answer to many times, that is you are 'biased' against two, I'm going to start demanding that equations that equation that don't add up to two then add up to two. That way the balance is maintained."
The problem with this is that the teacher in your scenario hasn't used "two" as an answer even once!

I'm sure there's a lesson in this somewhere but I'm buggered if I can figure out what it is.
Matthew Best 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 26th October 2019, 09:29 AM   #128
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,153
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
ETA: I wouldn't be shocked if my ignore list and luchog's contain quite a few of the same names, and for the same reason: neither of us are interested in talking to people who deny with our status as human beings.

I'd be willing to put money on that.

And the ongoing responses in this thread just further reinforce the accuracy of my point. It's impossible to have any sort of rational discussion with someone who doesn't believe you should even exist, who believes it's perfectly acceptable to marginalize and discriminate against people who are too different from them. And it's disturbing how many people who pretend to act like skeptics in some arenas turn into outright science-denying woos, using typical woo tactics, when confronted with science that challenges their prejudices and worldview -- most blatantly with regard to climate change and transgender issues. No matter how many facts they're confronted with, their responses never vary, and are never anything but woo.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.
luchog 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 26th October 2019, 02:27 PM   #129
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,539
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
I'd be willing to put money on that.

And the ongoing responses in this thread just further reinforce the accuracy of my point. It's impossible to have any sort of rational discussion with someone who doesn't believe you should even exist, who believes it's perfectly acceptable to marginalize and discriminate against people who are too different from them. And it's disturbing how many people who pretend to act like skeptics in some arenas turn into outright science-denying woos, using typical woo tactics, when confronted with science that challenges their prejudices and worldview -- most blatantly with regard to climate change and transgender issues. No matter how many facts they're confronted with, their responses never vary, and are never anything but woo.
There have been a number of posters who advocate shunning some (most?) of the posters on this forum. Can you name anyone posting here who thinks you don’t have a right to exist?
Giz 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 26th October 2019, 07:52 PM   #130
ServiceSoon
Graduate Poster
 
ServiceSoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,498
The predominate mainstream position is that if somebody makes an appalling statement, it is necessary for politicians to denounce them. Any politician who does not do that is assumed to agree/validate that appalling statement. While denouncing isn't directly engaging the individual who said something terrible, it is a type of quasi-discussion in the public space.

The OP's position is that engaging somebody in a conversation is validating them.

Aren't these positions contradictory?

Originally Posted by Dictionary
Reactionary: of, pertaining to, marked by, or favoring reaction, especially extreme conservatism or rightism in politics; opposing political or social change.
Isn't reactionary applicable to speech made by conservatives anybody who questions liberal orthodoxy?
Would the contrary term be progressionary?

Last edited by ServiceSoon; 26th October 2019 at 07:53 PM.
ServiceSoon 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 27th October 2019, 05:17 AM   #131
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,500
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
... And the ongoing responses in this thread just further reinforce the accuracy of my point. It's impossible to have any sort of rational discussion with someone who doesn't believe you should even exist, who believes it's perfectly acceptable to marginalize and discriminate against people who are too different from them...
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
There have been a number of posters who advocate shunning some (most?) of the posters on this forum. Can you name anyone posting here who thinks you don’t have a right to exist?
I re-read the thread. There's nothing that's been posted here that remotely justifies the comment that I highlighted. Using minority status as a paranoid rhetorical weapon is something I take an incredibly dim view of. It dilutes actual situations when deplorable characters express deplorable concepts, and when vulnerable minorities have actually been the recipient.

Mind you, I don't deny that there are a few posters on this forum who might hold the views that luchog imagines have been expressed here. (I speak in the third person because I think I'm on ignore.)
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 27th October 2019 at 05:20 AM.
varwoche is online now   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 27th October 2019, 06:05 AM   #132
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,920
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I re-read the thread. There's nothing that's been posted here that remotely justifies the comment that I highlighted. Using minority status as a paranoid rhetorical weapon is something I take an incredibly dim view of. It dilutes actual situations when deplorable characters express deplorable concepts, and when vulnerable minorities have actually been the recipient.

Mind you, I don't deny that there are a few posters on this forum who might hold the views that luchog imagines have been expressed here. (I speak in the third person because I think I'm on ignore.)
It's the drink-all-of-the Kool-Aid or it's "proof" that you hate Kool-Aid approach. It doesn't really work and only makes people look for alternatives, like Tang.
Stout 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 27th October 2019, 08:45 AM   #133
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,500
Originally Posted by Max_mang View Post
If the point is to nitpick luchog's and uke2ske's posts, then have at. Having seen luchog be attacked over and over in other threads I can see why he would post what he did.

As for me, I don't feel this forum is so much overwhelmed by conservative right wing trolling (though there's lots of that), there's plenty from the left as well. People constantly get called racist, homophobic, islamophobic, etc when they apply critical thinking to news stories that happen to involve minorities. Then there's the insisted-on false binaries (one side must be 100% right/pure and one side must be 100% wrong/evil) that grind most threads down to people just sniping.
"Nitpick"? That's an awfully flimsy excuse for you having signed your name to blatant delusion, while in the same breath wishing for better skepticism in the socio-political domain. Highly unimpressive.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   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 27th October 2019, 05:21 PM   #134
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
"Nitpick"? That's an awfully flimsy excuse for you having signed your name to blatant delusion, while in the same breath wishing for better skepticism in the socio-political domain. Highly unimpressive.
Your agenda was pretty clear from your first post, so this is unsurprising. I've outlined my feelings and they're not black and white enough for you, big deal.
Max_mang is online now   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 28th October 2019, 03:34 AM   #135
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Given the nature of this forum, I would think this would be considered a pretty basic first step. Before we decide to take action based on some set of facts, we first determine if those facts are actually accurate or not.

It's possible that my request received no reply because I'm on the list of reactionaries with whom we shouldn't be talking, I guess, but if so I find that pretty strange given my political views.
No, your request received no reply because I missed it in the avalanche of posts attacking me for stuff I've said in other threads.

Answer to your question:

This isn't a scientific report. It's an editorial. The method I used was my eyes and ears and years of experience.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 28th October 2019, 03:39 AM   #136
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Varwoche, what was "irrational" and "fact-challenged" in my OP?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 28th October 2019, 03:46 AM   #137
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,584
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Varwoche, what was "irrational" and "fact-challenged" in my OP?
Varwoche was saying Luchog's claim that this place is already just like 4chan, and 50% of the people here are right wing reactionaries, and they want Luchog to not exist, was a fact-challenged screed.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is online now   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 28th October 2019, 03:48 AM   #138
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Varwoche was saying Luchog's claim that this place is already just like 4chan, and 50% of the people here are right wing reactionaries, and they want Luchog to not exist, was a fact-challenged screed.
Ok, then I withdraw my question.

That said, Luchdog didn't say that.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 28th October 2019, 03:59 AM   #139
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,584
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Ok, then I withdraw my question.

That said, Luchdog didn't say that.
Luchog said..
Quote:
Little wake up call, ISF is already 4chan, or near enough as makes no odds...The conservatrolls, TERFs, reactionaries, racists, pro-corporate libertarians, pseudo-centrists, and the various useful idiots who support them are over 50% of the regular posters here, and have been for some time.
And..
Quote:
And the ongoing responses in this thread just further reinforce the accuracy of my point. It's impossible to have any sort of rational discussion with someone who doesn't believe you should even exist,


"this place is already just like 4chan, and 50% of the people here are right wing reactionaries, and they want Luchog to not exist" seems like a pretty good synopsis.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is online now   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 28th October 2019, 06:16 AM   #140
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,500
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Varwoche, what was "irrational" and "fact-challenged" in my OP?
I wasn't referring to you / your post in any way, shape or form.

Thank you kellyb (again! )
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 28th October 2019 at 06:17 AM.
varwoche is online now   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 28th October 2019, 06:28 AM   #141
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Luchog said..

And..




"this place is already just like 4chan, and 50% of the people here are right wing reactionaries, and they want Luchog to not exist" seems like a pretty good synopsis.
If you strech out the yellow highlight a bit more you'll note that Luchdog didn't say 50% were right wing reactionaries.

I tend to think Luchdog was exaggerating a bit for effect, but I agree with him that we have our fair share of reactionaries, racists, pro-corporate libertarians, pseudo-centrists, and the various useful idiots who support them. I would hate to put a number on it, but I'd say it's a significant amount.

I also know that the people we are talking about in this thread ultimately believe that nobody but white cis heterosexual people ought to exist in the US, so I don't particularly have a problem with that characterization either. I think it's ******** to expect anyone who isn't white, cis and heterosexual to have to constantly defend their right to exist simply in the name of "having to allow all viewpoints".

All that said, this thread isn't about that. It's specifically about a tactic to use against people who aren't here discussing in good faith, and who's own tactics are designed to amplify recruitment into unsavory organizations.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 28th October 2019, 06:36 AM   #142
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,500
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
If you strech out the yellow highlight a bit more you'll note that Luchdog didn't say 50% were right wing reactionaries.

I tend to think Luchdog was exaggerating a bit for effect, but I agree with him that we have our fair share of reactionaries, racists, pro-corporate libertarians, pseudo-centrists, and the various useful idiots who support them. I would hate to put a number on it, but I'd say it's a significant amount.

I also know that the people we are talking about in this thread ultimately believe that nobody but white cis heterosexual people ought to exist in the US, so I don't particularly have a problem with that characterization either. I think it's ******** to expect anyone who isn't white, cis and heterosexual to have to constantly defend their right to exist simply in the name of "having to allow all viewpoints".

All that said, this thread isn't about that. It's specifically about a tactic to use against people who aren't here discussing in good faith, and who's own tactics are designed to amplify recruitment into unsavory organizations.
Not so fast. Read it again. If we're to believe luchog, there are posts in this thread that represent this attitude. It's an injustice to vulnerable minorities who were actually victimized. An injustice to luchog's own cause.

Mind you, observing the existence / non-existence of people advocating death to vulnerable minorities is just a little "nitpick", at least according to Max.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 28th October 2019 at 06:44 AM.
varwoche is online now   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 28th October 2019, 06:45 AM   #143
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Not so fast. Read it again. If we're to believe luchog, there are posts in this thread that represent this attitude.

Mind you, observing the existence / non-existence of people advocating death to vulnerable minorities is just a little "nitpick", at least according to Max.
I couldn't tell you if there are posts in this thread that represent that attitude as I can't see many of the posts. Luchdog's word is pretty good imo.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 28th October 2019, 07:03 AM   #144
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,584
There aren't any posts in this thread which represent that attitude.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is online now   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 28th October 2019, 07:13 AM   #145
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,500
Being right is a risky state of mind, in terms of maintaining rationality.

There's nothing wrong with being outraged by deplorable characters who express deplorable concepts. Quite the opposite, so far as I'm concerned. I feel a strong sense of righteous outrage when I think about people like that.

Getting so swept up by that outrage that facts stop mattering is another matter. That's what leads to paranoid zealots who see boogiemen around every corner, and play the victim card accordingly.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   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 28th October 2019, 07:21 AM   #146
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Mind you, observing the existence / non-existence of people advocating death to vulnerable minorities is just a little "nitpick", at least according to Max.
Nice try. Keep re-framing what people say to support your narrative.
Max_mang is online now   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 28th October 2019, 07:23 AM   #147
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Getting so swept up by that outrage that facts stop mattering is another matter. That's what leads to paranoid zealots who see boogiemen around every corner, and play the victim card accordingly.
It only takes a tiny bit of empathy to try and see why someone would feel victimized, but it's not as easy as attacking them for it.
Max_mang is online now   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 28th October 2019, 07:25 AM   #148
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 52,156
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Getting so swept up by that outrage that facts stop mattering is another matter. That's what leads to paranoid zealots who see boogiemen around every corner, and play the victim card accordingly.
As a Boogieman-American I find your attempts at erasure to be outrageous. You, sir, are worse than genocide! I'm launching a nationwide protest immediately. Out from under the bed and onto the streets!
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 28th October 2019, 07:36 AM   #149
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,920
Originally Posted by Max_mang View Post
It only takes a tiny bit of empathy to try and see why someone would feel victimized, but it's not as easy as attacking them for it.
Feelz before Reelz ?
Stout 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 28th October 2019, 08:03 AM   #150
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,414
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Being right is a risky state of mind, in terms of maintaining rationality.

There's nothing wrong with being outraged by deplorable characters who express deplorable concepts. Quite the opposite, so far as I'm concerned. I feel a strong sense of righteous outrage when I think about people like that.

Getting so swept up by that outrage that facts stop mattering is another matter. That's what leads to paranoid zealots who see boogiemen around every corner, and play the victim card accordingly.
Is this how you see people being targeted by extreme rightwingers? That maybe they shouldn't be so outraged about having to always assert their right to exist, because they may at any point step over the point to where you no longer feel they are rational?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 28th October 2019, 08:33 AM   #151
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,920
Speaking of stepping over the point to where you no longer feel they are rational...

What do you firgue these "extreme right wingers" are going to do ? Come over to your house ?
Stout 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 28th October 2019, 08:37 AM   #152
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 9,017
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Is this how you see people being targeted by extreme rightwingers? That maybe they shouldn't be so outraged about having to always assert their right to exist, because they may at any point step over the point to where you no longer feel they are rational?

This reminds me of the ignore attitude: White House urges all federal agencies to cancel Washington Post and New York Times subscriptions (CNN, Oct. 25, 2019)

But Trump prefers to be in denial about any critical voice, so it's not a big surprise that he behaves in this way. He is a mental midget, which I don't think that you are.

There are many ways of tackling annoying right-wing extremists. Let me recommend one that I also sometimes use when I'm dealing with incorrigible woos: Instead of writing to them, answering to their posts, write about them, thus making it obvious that you aren't having any kind of conversation with them. You are having one with other people about them.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 28th October 2019 at 08:39 AM.
dann 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 28th October 2019, 08:51 AM   #153
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,498
Why we shouldn't be talking to reactionaries

Originally Posted by dann View Post
This reminds me of the ignore attitude: White House urges all federal agencies to cancel Washington Post and New York Times subscriptions (CNN, Oct. 25, 2019)

But Trump prefers to be in denial about any critical voice, so it's not a big surprise that he behaves in this way. He is a mental midget, which I don't think that you are.

There are many ways of tackling annoying right-wing extremists. Let me recommend one that I also sometimes use when I'm dealing with incorrigible woos: Instead of writing to them, answering to their posts, write about them, thus making it obvious that you aren't having any kind of conversation with them. You are having one with other people about them.


So you advocate that people argue about the arguer instead of their arguments? Interesting.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   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 28th October 2019, 09:41 AM   #154
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,304
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
Speaking of stepping over the point to where you no longer feel they are rational...

What do you firgue these "extreme right wingers" are going to do ? Come over to your house ?
Kill unarmed teenagers because they're a "wrong" skin color?

Pay for the legal defense of said murderer?

openly support the election of a white supremacist criminals to various levels of government?

Downplay a major white nationalist rally in a college town, in which one such person drives his car into a crowd killing one and injuring many more?

In any event, this place is far more sympathetic to the "let's discuss whether or not you should be tortured and/or killed for not being straight, white, and cisgendered" view, than the "people who repeatedly advocate attacking people for not being cishet white men are obviously bigots" view. I'd name the...what, 8 or 10? - people on this thread who have done so previously, except that, as I just implied in that last sentence, this is considered a TOU violation.
Mumbles 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 28th October 2019, 12:02 PM   #155
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,153
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Mind you, observing the existence / non-existence of people advocating death to vulnerable minorities is just a little "nitpick", at least according to Max.

You're overreaching here. I never claimed that anyone was advocating murdering vulnerable minorities on this board. You really need to work on your reading comprehension.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.
luchog 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 28th October 2019, 12:10 PM   #156
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,539
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
You're overreaching here. I never claimed that anyone was advocating murdering vulnerable minorities on this board. You really need to work on your reading comprehension.
Perhaps you should try writing more carefully.

Your words:

“the ongoing responses in this thread just further reinforce the accuracy of my point. It's impossible to have any sort of rational discussion with someone who doesn't believe you should even exist”
Giz 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 28th October 2019, 01:38 PM   #157
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,500
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
You're overreaching here. I never claimed that anyone was advocating murdering vulnerable minorities on this board. You really need to work on your reading comprehension.
While I don't think my interpretation was an overreach, now that you've explained (in part), I acknowledge there's a difference between wishing a particular group of people didn't exist, versus advocating murder. Fair enough.

With that resolved, please point out the post(s) where your existence was challenged. Either that or else acknowledge that you went way overboard, to say the least.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   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 28th October 2019, 02:25 PM   #158
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,153
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
With that resolved, please point out the post(s) where your existence was challenged. Either that or else acknowledge that you went way overboard, to say the least.

You can go look at pretty much any transgender thread on this board for many glaring examples. The amount of transgender denialism in those threads is palpable, to the point of outright science denialism. According to the majority of posters in those threads, even those who claim that they are not anti-trans, transgenderism simply does not exist. It's generally dismissed/handwaved as mental illness or attention-whoring. Not all of it is explicit, some of it is couched in coded language, such as "gender critical", "transactivism", "lesbian erasure", and so on. Some is more crass and dismissive, "men in dresses", and the like. A few of them even go full-on screaming conspiracy-theory lunacy; preaching about how a shadowy conspiracy of "transactivists" (which includes pretty much every transperson who dares come out of the closet) who apparently control the medical industry and news media, and are trying to turn everyone trans (or if not everyone, certainly every lesbian), invade womens spaces (especially bathrooms) for the sole purpose of sexually harassing and assaulting women, or are otherwise engaged in repressing women.

I've long since given up attempting to debate such stupidity and hatred, so I've avoided some of the newer threads on the subject.

ETA: There was one particular incident that sticks in my mind, where I brought up the concept of internal body image, a well-established neurological phenomenon (V.S. Ramachandran, for example, has a number of great articles and papers on the subject, including some which study transsexualism directly), and was told by those who should bloody well know better that I was a woo claiming the existence of a "soul". That's the point I gave up completely on trying to educate the deliberately and aggressively ignorant; because it's obvious that they were unwilling to accept even the existence of transgendered people, and no amount of facts could sway them.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.

Last edited by luchog; 28th October 2019 at 02:36 PM.
luchog 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 28th October 2019, 06:16 PM   #159
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 24,377
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Originally Posted by dann View Post
This reminds me of the ignore attitude: White House urges all federal agencies to cancel Washington Post and New York Times subscriptions (CNN, Oct. 25, 2019)

But Trump prefers to be in denial about any critical voice, so it's not a big surprise that he behaves in this way. He is a mental midget, which I don't think that you are.

There are many ways of tackling annoying right-wing extremists. Let me recommend one that I also sometimes use when I'm dealing with incorrigible woos: Instead of writing to them, answering to their posts, write about them, thus making it obvious that you aren't having any kind of conversation with them. You are having one with other people about them.


So you advocate that people argue about the arguer instead of their arguments? Interesting.

Taking into account the normal vagaries of casual conversation, I am willing to extend the benefit of the doubt to xjx388 and assume that by "them" he was referring to their ideas and the statements they were making.

With that in mind I would have to say, yes, I prefer that people argue about the arguers' ideas and the statements they make rather than engage with them directly when those people are extremists who have no intention of defending their statements honestly (if at all).

I believe that was the point he was trying to make.

Often times such discussions about a statement result in far more cogent defenses than the extremists themselves would have ever put forward. The conversation becomes more beneficial for all.

We do this all the time when discussing statements made by people like Trump and his supporters, right here in these very fora.

No reason the same thing cannot be done with forum members of similar stripe. I see no forum rules which would be violated with such a strategy.
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."

"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation."
quadraginta 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 28th October 2019, 07:38 PM   #160
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 13,500
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I couldn't tell you if there are posts in this thread that represent that attitude as I can't see many of the posts. Luchdog's word is pretty good imo.
Are you kidding me? This is 200 proof blind loyalty, emphasis on blind. Perhaps there's a poster you trust who doesn't use the ignore feature who can confirm the facts for you. There's not even a borderline instance. Take note of kellyb's observations upthread.

What a sorry joke.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 28th October 2019 at 07:48 PM.
varwoche is online now   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 » Social Issues & Current Events

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 05:41 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.