Periodic Table of Swearing

[Skep tickle]

Just got the book "Assholes: A Theory" by Aaron James (avaiable from Amazon, see Lsuoma's link at the bottom of the page). It looked interesting and perhaps relevant to the "skeptic schism", & besides who can resist a title like that. On initial skim of a couple of sections I'm seeing some things I don't agree with (coincidentally, one is his claims about free will, however he may be using "free will" simply to mean control over some aspect of one's behavior).

This caught my eye, in Chapter 1:

Our theory thus has 3 main parts. In interpersonal or cooperative relations, the asshole:

• allow himself to enjoy special advantages and does so systematically;
• does this out of an entrenched sense of entitlement; and
• is immunized by his sense of entitlement against the complaints of other people.

He claims most assholes are men (with women more often playing "bitch", see below) and he discusses this further in Chapter 4, "Gender, Nature, and Blame". I didn't expect to see in this book the term "intersectionality" and the claim that "deep" cultural gender roles >> biological factors, but there they are. But for our purposes, here's a couple lines from that chapter that caught my eye, on the difference between "bitch" and "asshole" as he's using the terms (neither is specific to one gender):

The bitch betrays you behind your back. The asshole fails to recognize you to your face.

One advantage to the asshole is that his ugly conduct takes place out in the open. This makes him easier to avoid. The bitch presents uncertainty, because hidden motives are harder to discern.

[SPACKlick]

Sorry – I should have been clearer; I wasn’t arguing that we all accept without proof, for example, the free-will hypothesis, only that we all accept different things without proof, more or less by necessity. However, somewhat in the nature of the beast, it seems that even the contrary hypothesis – that there is no free-will – is still something that many other people accept as an article of faith which still has no conclusive proof.

Apologies, I'd read you as talking about "on faith" not "without proof". Ofcourse we accept things without proof, outside of logic and mathematics there is no proof. Only evidence and argument, and the difference between accepting on that basis and faith, is that you accept tentatively only to the degree that the arguments and evidence support the position.

[SPACKlick]

Seems that one has to start from some assumptions, even in science, and assumptions are, by definition (4), those claims that one accepts without proof, i.e., on faith.

No, Assumptions are claims which are taken to be true for the sake of argument and later tested. The assumptions I make as a basis are:
1) There is a reality outside of my experience
2) That reality in some form causes my experience
Once you have those two, the rest of my beliefs are based on evidence and argument from there and my experience. As it turns out, those assumptions seem to be holding good, they have yet to cause a contradiction, but it also turns out that holding the contrary to either of those assumptions is undetectably different in terms of experience, but practically useless. They are functional assumptions.

And if in fact that argument is true then it makes any philosophies or systems of belief or action based on science equally suspect.

It is impossible to hold tentative beliefs or acquire knowledge without some base assumption, it's not suspect to assume something exists nor to assume it causes your experience.

Conventional wisdom is the body of ideas or explanations generally accepted as true by the public or by experts in a field. Such ideas or explanations, though widely held, are unexamined. Unqualified societal discourse preserves the status quo.

Except that people challenge the conventional wisdom all the time, it's encouraged.

You're digging a hole here steers.

[Skep tickle]

So far, in "Assholes", the author has given Ann Coulter and Richard Dawkins as examples of assholes, also basically the entire Bush administration and much of France. :lol: (okay, really just a couple of French politicians.)

The index is full of names, many of whom seem to be included as examples of assholery. (Jesus and God have multiple pages listed in the index but on checking the first couple, it doesn't look like he's even thinking about calling them assholes. Missed opportunity, I'd say.)

Odd thing, I don't see any of the FtB/Skepchick/A+ crowd listed. Presumably simply an oversight that James can correct in his 2nd edition.

Nor, in his chapter on "Newer Asshole Styles", does he mention "New Media Douchebags". Seems like that would be a useful addition.

[rayshul]

Today I had the realisation that men talk to me all the time in the street and lifts.

I talk back to them.

Weird.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

and much of France. :lol: (okay, really just a couple of French politicians.)

How surprising...

[SPACKlick]

Have to say, I'm getting a lot less strangers starting hostile conversations now that I've switched from a book to a kindle. It feels sort of like my new technology terrifies their tiny little minds. MUAHAHAHAHAHA!

Also, most of them, if you go "sorry buddy, I'm kinda busy right now" or "I don't mean to be rude but I need some space right now ok?" will just shut the fuck up and leave you alone. Those fainting couch resident professional victims try and make all of them out to be the ranting raving dicks that just plough on despite being told to stop. Which exist, but not the majority.

I'd love to live in their heads for a day or two, to see what the crazy feels like.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Have to say, I'm getting a lot less strangers starting hostile conversations now that I've switched from a book to a kindle. It feels sort of like my new technology terrifies their tiny little minds. MUAHAHAHAHAHA!

Also, most of them, if you go "sorry buddy, I'm kinda busy right now" or "I don't mean to be rude but I need some space right now ok?" will just shut the fuck up and leave you alone. Those fainting couch resident professional victims try and make all of them out to be the ranting raving dicks that just plough on despite being told to stop. Which exist, but not the majority.

I'd love to live in their heads for a day or two, to see what the crazy feels like.

[youtube]BwkdGr9JYmE[/youtube]

[rayshul]

[youtube]yh1RkRxnAOs[/youtube]

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

[youtube]yh1RkRxnAOs[/youtube]

10:15 AM GMT+1

No end of the world.

Needs a new screen, though. Coffee stains look nasty.

[TedDahlberg]

In the spirit of the day…

[youtube]FIY41LrvMFQ[/youtube]

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

In the spirit of the day…

FIY41LrvMFQ

Bullshit, they always forget Ronnie Soak.

[Steersman]

But while that certainly seems like it generally holds quite a bit of water, it also seems that one can quite reasonably argue that we all accept many things without proof that no level of proof is apparently sufficient to dismiss – free will and that “mind” is something more than just “brain”, for examples.

Free will is an illusion caused by consciousness emerging from concious processing.
Mind is just a name for the process the brain does, like bending is a name for the process that knees do. No duality just names of different aspects.

Please do try again.

Ok, how about the following: :-)

I’m more or less stumbling about in the dark on the question, but it seems to me that the whole argument about emergence is that, in simplest terms, the whole – “mind” – can be quite a bit more than the sum of the parts – “brain”. It would appear certain that the mind is a process in the brain, but the argument seems to be that the mind is something over and above the process itself.

Supposedly a very good example of that is the phonon; you might be interested in this article (the following link seems a little erratic, doesn't always work) on the topic which argues:

For example, when a large number of atoms condense into a crystal, the phonon, the elementary quantum of sound, becomes a perfectly legitimate particle at low energy scales. It propagates freely, does not decay, interacts by simple rules that can be verified experimentally, carries momentum and energy relative to wavelength and frequency, and mediates the attractive interaction responsible for conventional superconductivity.

That article is referenced and discussed in some detail in a discussion that the biologist/philosopher Massimo Pigliucci was part of recently.

[welch]

I see Greta has turned up on Svans thread to add a contribution to the pyre.

Was there an earlier version of Welsh's blog post because I can't find the second, and most damaging quote that she seems to have found.

http://i.imgur.com/qzOMo.jpg

It can't be that she simply made it up herself and is lying through her teeth about Welsh saying that Watson is a "slut" who deserves "to be raped to death"?
Can it? :think:

BAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh Greta, bless your heart. There is no faster way to make an NMD cry than point out how they lov to create nontroversies to get hit counts.

She's so precious. I wonder of she ever pulls a muscle patting herself on the back.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

kumbaya my Steers, kumbaya...

I also have nice crystals to sell.

[welch]

Guess who still insists the Slymepit "doxxed" him?

Our good old pal, Brownian (or Anthony K as he's called now)

I’m so glad to read that Jay, because I feel the same way. Slymepit fuckers have lied about and doxxed me.

As far as I’m concerned, you ass-sucking fuckers get everything coming your way.

That kid doesn't have the sense evolution gave a sack of hammers.

How to make NMDs flip the fuck out:

1) point out how they manufacture bullshit to get attention.
2) see 1)

And as my AMB cohort and I have discussed, damn but atheists/skeptics are some thin-skinned motherfuckers.

[Steersman]

kumbaya my Steers, kumbaya...

I also have nice crystals to sell.

Those crystals actually have some real physics and philosophy behind them – you might want to consider following a link or two before making up your mind – unless it’s totally closed off ….

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

kumbaya my Steers, kumbaya...

I also have nice crystals to sell.

Those crystals actually have some real physics and philosophy behind them – you might want to consider following a link or two before making up your mind – unless it’s totally closed off ….

GO HOME STEERS! YOU'RE DRUNK!

[Steersman]

kumbaya my Steers, kumbaya...

I also have nice crystals to sell.

Those crystals actually have some real physics and philosophy behind them – you might want to consider following a link or two before making up your mind – unless it’s totally closed off ….

GO HOME STEERS! YOU'RE DRUNK!

Certainly not on alcohol ....

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Certainly not on alcohol ....

Probably on crystals, then.

[SPACKlick]

Those crystals actually have some real physics and philosophy behind them – you might want to consider following a link or two before making up your mind – unless it’s totally closed off ….

GO HOME STEERS! YOU'RE DRUNK!

Certainly not on alcohol ....

No, homeopathic alcahol, you see the water in your body once had some booze in it and got shaken up and now it's so dilute you're practically killing your liver with the water you drink...

Crystals? Really? Fuck off Steers.

[Steersman]

Steersman said: Those crystals actually have some real physics and philosophy behind them – you might want to consider following a link or two before making up your mind – unless it’s totally closed off ….
GO HOME STEERS! YOU'RE DRUNK!

Certainly not on alcohol ....

No, homeopathic alcahol, you see the water in your body once had some booze in it and got shaken up and now it's so dilute you're practically killing your liver with the water you drink...

Crystals? Really?

Entirely different type of crystals. But I suppose you never even bothered to click the link to the Wikipedia article to confirm that – “don’t confuse me with facts; my mind is made up”?

Fuck off Steers

After you, Alphonse ….

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Fuck off Steers

After you, Alphonse ….

Eh, doxxing, now?

[Steersman]

Fuck off Steers

After you, Alphonse ….

Eh, doxxing, now?

Nope – at least I assume not. Just an old cartoon reference, and probably not a well known one ….

[Reap]

Guess who still insists the Slymepit "doxxed" him?

Our good old pal, Brownian (or Anthony K as he's called now)

I’m so glad to read that Jay, because I feel the same way. Slymepit fuckers have lied about and doxxed me.

As far as I’m concerned, you ass-sucking fuckers get everything coming your way.

In response to this from Jay,

You may dislike what welch does, but his attack is logical: it’s called, disagreeing with your assumptions and refusing to play your game.

Whether it’s dems/repubs, evolution/creationist, atheist/religious, or now Atheism+/Atheists, it’s been shown over and over the two sides cannot have fair intellectual arguments on the net.

The instant one of you disemvowel, moderate, delete, alter, ban what others have to say, well, you deserve all the heap of shit people can heap on you.

And you make it worse, with the encouragement of your commenters to pile on.

And that’s long after you folks couldn’t even argue with intellectual honesty or acknowledge truthfully what others have to say or what their positions are.

So, your cries of victimhood are like what? What’s the metaphor Stephanie? Oh something like tears I drink from.

Brownian, Anthony, whatever, let me make this absolutely clear: NOBODY "DOXXED" YOU. Nobody! If someone should have that "honour" (and we know someone needs to be responsible), it would be yourself, you fucking dumb shit, for broadcasting your real name on EVERY SINGLE SOCIAL NETWORK YOU SUBSCRIBED TO!

You used the name "Brownian" on multiple occasions, so anyone would able to find it in seconds! Seconds! You literally would just have to make a Google search for "Brownian" and "Pharyngula". We have PROOF, you fucking idiot! Facebook, Twitter, ATHEIST FUCKING NEXUS! Linking back to Pharyngula, mentioning Pharyngula by name several times. You would have to be retarded to NOT make the connection.

Wait, I'm sorry. "Retarded" is one of the bad words you don't like. Let me rephrase: you would have to be RETARDED to not make the connection.

Same thing when Surly broadcasted her FULL ADRESS applied to her BUSINESS. Who does that? To prevent stalkers and unsavory types from finding me, I'll just paint a nice shining sponsored by Surlyramics TARGET on my back. That'll keep them at bay! Pardon if I won't hide the atomic facepalm I'm now exhibiting. Not such a good idea to channel the queen of hurt fee fees, now is it, Brownian, old buddy, old pal?

Pitchguest..sometimes I think I may love you

[Dick Strawkins]

Taking due cognizance of sacha’s recent reposting of an amusing video on the question, one can’t help but think that the phenomenon of emergence tends to support the argument for dualism. Although, as with other related discussions, the waters tend to get muddied by questions as to what is meant by various terms.

The idea that the mind is more than its constituent parts is not the same as dualism.
Dualism says that mind is seperate from the brain.

[SPACKlick]

"Phil_Giordana_FCD" said "
Steersman said: Those crystals actually have some real physics and philosophy behind them – you might want to consider following a link or two before making up your mind – unless it’s totally closed off ….
GO HOME STEERS! YOU'RE DRUNK!
Certainly not on alcohol ....

No, homeopathic alcahol, you see the water in your body once had some booze in it and got shaken up and now it's so dilute you're practically killing your liver with the water you drink...

Crystals? Really?

Entirely different type of crystals. But I suppose you never even bothered to click the link to the Wikipedia article to confirm that – “don’t confuse me with facts; my mind is made up”?

What Fucking Link?

[Steersman]

Taking due cognizance of sacha’s recent reposting of an amusing video on the question, one can’t help but think that the phenomenon of emergence tends to support the argument for dualism. Although, as with other related discussions, the waters tend to get muddied by questions as to what is meant by various terms.

The idea that the mind is more than its constituent parts is not the same as dualism.
Dualism says that mind is seperate from the brain.

You might be right – I don’t know enough about emergence to say for sure, but my impression is that what emerges can be autonomous entities that are entirely different from what it emerges out of.

[Steersman]

...
No, homeopathic alcahol, you see the water in your body once had some booze in it and got shaken up and now it's so dilute you're practically killing your liver with the water you drink...

Crystals? Really?

Entirely different type of crystals. But I suppose you never even bothered to click the link to the Wikipedia article to confirm that – “don’t confuse me with facts; my mind is made up”?

What Fucking Link?

Obviously then you never followed the link from which I quoted the phrase that referred to crystals. But here they are again, the first one to Wikipedia should work, the second seems iffy depending, maybe, on your browser:

Supposedly a very good example of that is the phonon; you might be interested in this article on the topic which argues:

For example, when a large number of atoms condense into a crystal, the phonon, the elementary quantum of sound, becomes a perfectly legitimate particle at low energy scales. It propagates freely, does not decay, interacts by simple rules that can be verified experimentally, carries momentum and energy relative to wavelength and frequency, and mediates the attractive interaction responsible for conventional superconductivity.

[time call it a day; or a kalpa as the case may be]
 

[SPACKlick]

Ah right, I read the link on Phonons, I skimmed the article on reduction and emeregence and it became clear from your posts, you're talking out the wrong end.

[welch]

Guess who still insists the Slymepit "doxxed" him?

Our good old pal, Brownian (or Anthony K as he's called now)

I’m so glad to read that Jay, because I feel the same way. Slymepit fuckers have lied about and doxxed me.

As far as I’m concerned, you ass-sucking fuckers get everything coming your way.

In response to this from Jay,

You may dislike what welch does, but his attack is logical: it’s called, disagreeing with your assumptions and refusing to play your game.

Whether it’s dems/repubs, evolution/creationist, atheist/religious, or now Atheism+/Atheists, it’s been shown over and over the two sides cannot have fair intellectual arguments on the net.

The instant one of you disemvowel, moderate, delete, alter, ban what others have to say, well, you deserve all the heap of shit people can heap on you.

And you make it worse, with the encouragement of your commenters to pile on.

And that’s long after you folks couldn’t even argue with intellectual honesty or acknowledge truthfully what others have to say or what their positions are.

So, your cries of victimhood are like what? What’s the metaphor Stephanie? Oh something like tears I drink from.

Brownian, Anthony, whatever, let me make this absolutely clear: NOBODY "DOXXED" YOU. Nobody! If someone should have that "honour" (and we know someone needs to be responsible), it would be yourself, you fucking dumb shit, for broadcasting your real name on EVERY SINGLE SOCIAL NETWORK YOU SUBSCRIBED TO!

You used the name "Brownian" on multiple occasions, so anyone would able to find it in seconds! Seconds! You literally would just have to make a Google search for "Brownian" and "Pharyngula". We have PROOF, you fucking idiot! Facebook, Twitter, ATHEIST FUCKING NEXUS! Linking back to Pharyngula, mentioning Pharyngula by name several times. You would have to be retarded to NOT make the connection.

Wait, I'm sorry. "Retarded" is one of the bad words you don't like. Let me rephrase: you would have to be RETARDED to not make the connection.

Same thing when Surly broadcasted her FULL ADRESS applied to her BUSINESS. Who does that? To prevent stalkers and unsavory types from finding me, I'll just paint a nice shining sponsored by Surlyramics TARGET on my back. That'll keep them at bay! Pardon if I won't hide the atomic facepalm I'm now exhibiting. Not such a good idea to channel the queen of hurt fee fees, now is it, Brownian, old buddy, old pal?

Pitchguest..sometimes I think I may love you

LOL

But, again, we see the trick. Take a word with a fairly well-understood meaning, like, oh, misogyny, and redefine it until it now means pretty much whatever the fuck you want it to, and then use it to club people with.

Left your name tied to your 'nym all over the internet and someone noticed?

OMG DOXXING.

[cunt]

Yeah, but it's not even like somebody just noticed. First he had to prance around in front of his mates acting as if people were just too stupid to find out that easily accessible information.

[BarnOwl]

While you were sleeping, Ophelia:

http://i1158.photobucket.com/albums/p60 ... b40938.png

In other news, I'm sorely disappointed that the world does not appear to be ending.

No, wait, I'm just sore.

[SPACKlick]

it's now the day after the end of the world in kiribati and Norfolk island, no reports of disaster.

[Keating]

it's now the day after the end of the world in kiribati and Norfolk island, no reports of disaster.

That's because we're all dead, duh.

[TedDahlberg]

Certainly not on alcohol ....

Probably on crystals, then.

[youtube]_k1nvmVzayc[/youtube]

[TedDahlberg]

it's now the day after the end of the world in kiribati and Norfolk island, no reports of disaster.

Ah, but when the world does end, it will have ended on 21 December 2012, retroactively. Because the Mayans are magic.

This is also why Elevatorgate seems to linger on. While it happened last year, it will actually have happened last year at some point still in our future. The current bullshit is the ripples of the event travelling backwards though time to the point where it will have happened.

[Dilurk]

I just googled brownian and pharyngula. His full name does come up as the first result but he seems to have deleted it... if he's reading the 'pit and wants to avoid it coming up, you could try to ask google to reindex that page? Hope that helps...

Brownian and Surly have been demonstrating text book cases of the "Streisand effect".
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

I had absolutely 0 interest in Surly for example until I saw her bleating over and over again about how she was doxed and absolutely terrified. So she got me interested. Was she living in a private home with no burglar alarm? Was she living in a bad part of town? Why would anyone keep on whining about being in danger? So I looked. It was so laughable I could not resist showing how easy it was and how utterly laughable her complaints were. To the point where Lsuoma had to remove a "lmgtfy" string (With my blessing).

I still have 0 interest in Brownian. I have no interest in whoever this guy is, but if he keeps it up maybe I should go look eh?

That's the point of the Streisand effect isn't it? The more you bleat and try to suppress the more interesting this forbidden knowledge becomes. The moment a book is banned is when sales take off of the book. (Catcher in the Rye, Lady Chatterly's lover, The Santanic verses) It's far better to simply ignore and it simply fades away.

[BarnOwl]

Certainly not on alcohol ....

Probably on crystals, then.

<youtube>

No way ... can't be meth-heads, they still have teeth.

[BarnOwl]

So she got me interested. Was she living in a private home with no burglar alarm? Was she living in a bad part of town? Why would anyone keep on whining about being in danger?

It's a variety of adult Attention Deficit Disorder characterized by the inability to garner sufficient attention for oneself.

Maybe we should start a walk-a-thon.

[mordacious1]

The world may not end until I eat my birthday cake, those bastard Mayans trying to ruin my birthday. It's bad enough having a birthday so close to christmas (my mom would say, "Just open one of your xmas presents early". I had to explain to the spousal unit why I didn't want my B-day presents wrapped in christmas wrap. Grrr.

But enough about me, I hope no one's world ends today.

[Dilurk]

So she got me interested. Was she living in a private home with no burglar alarm? Was she living in a bad part of town? Why would anyone keep on whining about being in danger?

It's a variety of adult Attention Deficit Disorder characterized by the inability to garner sufficient attention for oneself.

True that. Just think of all the free advertising she got for her business. "Help! I'm being doxed!" Resulting in pity buying "I'm going to help that poor oppressed girl!". It could have even been planned. I bet she is laughing all the way to the bank. Maybe that was where she used to live shortly before she moved and she has since re-registered at a PO box eh?

Maybe we should start a walk-a-thon.

That would be giving these people too much attention.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

The world may not end until I eat my birthday cake, those bastard Mayans trying to ruin my birthday. It's bad enough having a birthday so close to christmas (my mom would say, "Just open one of your xmas presents early". I had to explain to the spousal unit why I didn't want my B-day presents wrapped in christmas wrap. Grrr.

But enough about me, I hope no one's world ends today.

Happy fucking birthday! You just destroyed the world. Well done, you prick!

[Angry_Drunk]

How to make NMDs flip the fuck out:

1) point out how they manufacture bullshit to get attention.
2) see 1)

And as my AMB cohort and I have discussed, damn but atheists/skeptics are some thin-skinned motherfuckers.

Scoble could take these derps in a slap-fight.

[franc]

http://socialnumber.com/atheismplus?etid=1320

[ReneeHendricks]

Renee, have just caught up over the last 6 pages, sorry to hear about this lymphoma scare, hopefully it's just a false alarm, indeed a needle biopsy typically does not provide enough info for diagnosis (the pathologists like to see the "architecture" of the lymph node, though these days flow cytometry can also provide useful info). There's a very wide range of behavior of lymphomas. The aggressive ones (high-grade) are scary & dangerous but can respond very well to treatment. The slow-growing ones (low-grade) can mosey along for years or even decades but (typically) can't be cured. I hope you can get more information soon, though the holiday may put a bit of a wrench into that.

We were hoping to get more information sooner rather than later as well. But it seems we'll be waiting until possibly just after the holidays for that detailed info. It's funny. His throat wasn't bothering him at all until they started poking around. Now he says it feels like he has a cold/flu and it's gathered in his throat. Thanks for the info!

[welch]

How to make NMDs flip the fuck out:

1) point out how they manufacture bullshit to get attention.
2) see 1)

And as my AMB cohort and I have discussed, damn but atheists/skeptics are some thin-skinned motherfuckers.

Scoble could take these derps in a slap-fight.

Oh dear lord, I think he'd be howling at what they call "abuse". He's caught more shit over a single post than FTB catches in a year en masse. Fuck, I've gotten more actual threats than those tools have.

I seriously, seriously wonder how they survive their morning piss.

[ReneeHendricks]

The world may not end until I eat my birthday cake, those bastard Mayans trying to ruin my birthday. It's bad enough having a birthday so close to christmas (my mom would say, "Just open one of your xmas presents early". I had to explain to the spousal unit why I didn't want my B-day presents wrapped in christmas wrap. Grrr.

But enough about me, I hope no one's world ends today.

[youtube]yIfzIOPpKsI[/youtube]

[acathode]

Brownian and Surly have been demonstrating text book cases of the "Streisand effect".
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

I had absolutely 0 interest in Surly for example until I saw her bleating over and over again about how she was doxed and absolutely terrified. So she got me interested. Was she living in a private home with no burglar alarm? Was she living in a bad part of town? Why would anyone keep on whining about being in danger? So I looked. It was so laughable I could not resist showing how easy it was and how utterly laughable her complaints were. To the point where Lsuoma had to remove a "lmgtfy" string (With my blessing).

I still have 0 interest in Brownian. I have no interest in whoever this guy is, but if he keeps it up maybe I should go look eh?

That's the point of the Streisand effect isn't it? The more you bleat and try to suppress the more interesting this forbidden knowledge becomes. The moment a book is banned is when sales take off of the book. (Catcher in the Rye, Lady Chatterly's lover, The Santanic verses) It's far better to simply ignore and it simply fades away.

isn't the Streisand effect exactly what they want? They crave the attention they get whenever they play the victim card, and so what if someone bothers checking up their name or address? They know perfectly fine that they are in no real danger from anyone, so playing the victim card to get "community cred" and to sell their "art" is completely risk free. Hell, if they become really good at it, they might even be able to become a "personality" and get flown around to speaking gigs where they can talk about themselves, just as a certain blue-haired blob managed to do.

[Cunning Punt]

I see Greta has turned up on Svans thread to add a contribution to the pyre.

Was there an earlier version of Welsh's blog post because I can't find the second, and most damaging quote that she seems to have found.

http://i.imgur.com/qzOMo.jpg

It can't be that she simply made it up herself and is lying through her teeth about Welsh saying that Watson is a "slut" who deserves "to be raped to death"?
Can it? :think:

Plus the Facebook saga where she and Benson manipulated (I think his name was) Ryan Grant Long into saying just want they wanted, something about kicking one of them in the cunt. He was an idiot for letting them get to him, and taking the bait the way he did, but make no mistake, they poked at him until they got their quote.

[Ericb]

Bucketloads of cunt:

http://deadspin.com/5886424/and-now-for ... ag=cursing

[Dilurk]

Brownian and Surly have been demonstrating text book cases of the "Streisand effect".
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

I had absolutely 0 interest in Surly for example until I saw her bleating over and over again about how she was doxed and absolutely terrified. So she got me interested. Was she living in a private home with no burglar alarm? Was she living in a bad part of town? Why would anyone keep on whining about being in danger? So I looked. It was so laughable I could not resist showing how easy it was and how utterly laughable her complaints were. To the point where Lsuoma had to remove a "lmgtfy" string (With my blessing).

I still have 0 interest in Brownian. I have no interest in whoever this guy is, but if he keeps it up maybe I should go look eh?

That's the point of the Streisand effect isn't it? The more you bleat and try to suppress the more interesting this forbidden knowledge becomes. The moment a book is banned is when sales take off of the book. (Catcher in the Rye, Lady Chatterly's lover, The Santanic verses) It's far better to simply ignore and it simply fades away.

isn't the Streisand effect exactly what they want? They crave the attention they get whenever they play the victim card, and so what if someone bothers checking up their name or address? They know perfectly fine that they are in no real danger from anyone, so playing the victim card to get "community cred" and to sell their "art" is completely risk free. Hell, if they become really good at it, they might even be able to become a "personality" and get flown around to speaking gigs where they can talk about themselves, just as a certain blue-haired blob managed to do.

Logically the conclusion is 1) They are really that stupid that they don't know of the Streisand effect 2) They are manipulating us for sales.

I refuse to believe that these people aren't aware of the Steisand effect due to its effects upon attempted suppression of atheists on youtube (just look at the mirroring that happens when a DMCA is filed), the effects after sceptics go against chiropractors and just look at the false flagging on twitter. No, these people are deliberately gaming everyone involved. Unlike Sara Mayhew who has been suggesting that trolls be ignored, I think the idea of exposing this deliberate gaming should be the goal.

If these people were rational I'd be all for an open dialogue. I'm willing to bet we could agree on some things, continue to disagree on others yet still remain united in our common enemy. For an example of this, look what happened when Sam Harris and Bruce Schneier debated. http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/to-p ... to-profile I have no personal stake in this debate nor a firm conviction on the answer. I just found it interesting the two could disagree in a saner way than what we have been seeing from the FFtB and a+.

This brings up an even more interesting question. Is the gaming of other atheists at all justified in the grander scheme of things? Does all this controversy bring in enough compensating $$ and attention for a continued war against the insanity of religion?

Personally I think not. Justin Vacula is a case in point. Still these people might think it is. Comments?

[ReneeHendricks]

Ok, so I stupidly read a blog post by Szvan today regarding mental illness which then prompted me to look at other posts on FfTB regarding the Newtown masscre and mental illness.

I can't be the only one thinking "a completely sane person with no mental issues whatsoever would not do this", right? I don't feel I'm stigmatizing those with mental issues because there are varying degrees as well as so many types and *many* afflicted would not be driven to this level of horror.

The posts are just pissing me off because they're pretty much stating that if you even thought Lanza was not in complete control of his mental faculties, you're in the wrong.

[Lsuoma]

Don't want to be near this guy when he starts playing the trouser trumpet!

[John Brown]

Ok, so I stupidly read a blog post by Szvan today regarding mental illness which then prompted me to look at other posts on FfTB regarding the Newtown masscre and mental illness.

I can't be the only one thinking "a completely sane person with no mental issues whatsoever would not do this", right? I don't feel I'm stigmatizing those with mental issues because there are varying degrees as well as so many types and *many* afflicted would not be driven to this level of horror.

The posts are just pissing me off because they're pretty much stating that if you even thought Lanza was not in complete control of his mental faculties, you're in the wrong.

It's because it takes away from their narrative of "masculinity" and "whiteness" being the core problem.

Never mind that the vast majority of people who are involved in these kinds of shootings either have been or were on psychotropic drugs of one sort or the other; meaning they A) had access to mental health care and B) were mentally damaged to a degree where said medication was prescribed. We take this to mean that they were mentally ill in some way.

The cognitive dissonance on this point is astounding. If you go the FTB or the A+ forums, they gladly announce what mental illness they have, how they are dealing with it, how the believe everyone else should deal with it, why it's a big deal to them, why the whole world should conform to their particular illness, ad infinitum...

Hell, the usual chorus after these events is "we need better mental health care in this country," or "we need better access to mental health care in this country," which implies that those involved were mentally ill in some way.

Of course these shooters are mentally ill. To deny it is to deny reality. And that's all mental illness really is at its core. It's either willfully or unknowingly denying reality in one form or the other.

Why are they taking this line? Because they've spent so much time and energy celebrating their mental illnesses and telling the rest of the world that they can deal with it or GTFO.

The world at large cannot deal with and will not abide mental illness which results in mass shootings.

It takes away their victim-hood, you see?

Better to blame the Patriarchy than look in a mirror.

[soldierwhy]

Ok, so I stupidly read a blog post by Szvan today regarding mental illness which then prompted me to look at other posts on FfTB regarding the Newtown masscre and mental illness.

I can't be the only one thinking "a completely sane person with no mental issues whatsoever would not do this", right? I don't feel I'm stigmatizing those with mental issues because there are varying degrees as well as so many types and *many* afflicted would not be driven to this level of horror.

The posts are just pissing me off because they're pretty much stating that if you even thought Lanza was not in complete control of his mental faculties, you're in the wrong.

'A completely sane person'. There's the rub Renee, how do you describe sane? Our culture is adept at identifying those it deems 'insane' but what exactly is sane? Lanza clearly had some serious psychological issues, to suggest otherwise is to ignore reality. The question that you, and I'm sure many others are asking, is what drives an individual to such extreme measures?

I've not read the post by Szvan, but to simply dismiss Lanza's actions as an act of insanity or to blame 'just' a mental illness is far too simplistic and I'm afraid the question won't be answered on a series of blog posts. Sometimes extreme actions are as a result of mental illness which could have been identified beforehand, sometimes people just break. I can't say what motivated Lanza, mental illness or a series of thought processes which led to him believing that carrying out such an atrocity was a logical step BUT neither can Szvan or her minions and opining dogmatically one way or another is just fucking stupid.

The only one who knows the real reason behind Lanza's actions are Lanza, and he's not talking.

[John Brown]

Ok, so I stupidly read a blog post by Szvan today regarding mental illness which then prompted me to look at other posts on FfTB regarding the Newtown masscre and mental illness.

I can't be the only one thinking "a completely sane person with no mental issues whatsoever would not do this", right? I don't feel I'm stigmatizing those with mental issues because there are varying degrees as well as so many types and *many* afflicted would not be driven to this level of horror.

The posts are just pissing me off because they're pretty much stating that if you even thought Lanza was not in complete control of his mental faculties, you're in the wrong.

'A completely sane person'. There's the rub Renee, how do you describe sane? Our culture is adept at identifying those it deems 'insane' but what exactly is sane? Lanza clearly had some serious psychological issues, to suggest otherwise is to ignore reality. The question that you, and I'm sure many others are asking, is what drives an individual to such extreme measures?

I've not read the post by Szvan, but to simply dismiss Lanza's actions as an act of insanity or to blame 'just' a mental illness is far too simplistic and I'm afraid the question won't be answered on a series of blog posts. Sometimes extreme actions are as a result of mental illness which could have been identified beforehand, sometimes people just break. I can't say what motivated Lanza, mental illness or a series of thought processes which led to him believing that carrying out such an atrocity was a logical step BUT neither can Szvan or her minions and opining dogmatically one way or another is just fucking stupid.

The only one who knows the real reason behind Lanza's actions are Lanza, and he's not talking.

I think it's rather safe to speculate that mentally "sane" people do not shoot 20 children at point blank range. I agree that the concept of sanity, insanity, mental illness, etc... is nebulous and health care professionals have not done a very good job of finding a "baseline," but we can certainly point out certain behaviors that deviate so far from the norm that they can be nothing less than insane.

We're unpacking all kinds of concepts here, and I understand the controversy the surrounds all of this. I tend think more in the Szazian way when it comes to mental illness, so your point is taken. But, if we are to integrate our thoughts into the social milieu, then there's no way we can come up with any other explanation other than mental illness.

[ReneeHendricks]

Ok, so I stupidly read a blog post by Szvan today regarding mental illness which then prompted me to look at other posts on FfTB regarding the Newtown masscre and mental illness.

I can't be the only one thinking "a completely sane person with no mental issues whatsoever would not do this", right? I don't feel I'm stigmatizing those with mental issues because there are varying degrees as well as so many types and *many* afflicted would not be driven to this level of horror.

The posts are just pissing me off because they're pretty much stating that if you even thought Lanza was not in complete control of his mental faculties, you're in the wrong.

'A completely sane person'. There's the rub Renee, how do you describe sane? Our culture is adept at identifying those it deems 'insane' but what exactly is sane? Lanza clearly had some serious psychological issues, to suggest otherwise is to ignore reality. The question that you, and I'm sure many others are asking, is what drives an individual to such extreme measures?

I've not read the post by Szvan, but to simply dismiss Lanza's actions as an act of insanity or to blame 'just' a mental illness is far too simplistic and I'm afraid the question won't be answered on a series of blog posts. Sometimes extreme actions are as a result of mental illness which could have been identified beforehand, sometimes people just break. I can't say what motivated Lanza, mental illness or a series of thought processes which led to him believing that carrying out such an atrocity was a logical step BUT neither can Szvan or her minions and opining dogmatically one way or another is just fucking stupid.

The only one who knows the real reason behind Lanza's actions are Lanza, and he's not talking.

I think it's rather safe to speculate that mentally "sane" people do not shoot 20 children at point blank range. I agree that the concept of sanity, insanity, mental illness, etc... is nebulous and health care professionals have not done a very good job of finding a "baseline," but we can certainly point out certain behaviors that deviate so far from the norm that they can be nothing less than insane.

We're unpacking all kinds of concepts here, and I understand the controversy the surrounds all of this. I tend think more in the Szazian way when it comes to mental illness, so your point is taken. But, if we are to integrate our thoughts into the social milieu, then there's no way we can come up with any other explanation other than mental illness.

I think we (either correctly or incorrectly) use ourselves as a baseline. We know what we would not do. Then, we apply our own personal baseline to the tragedy. I don't think this is necessarily an incorrect thing to do.

I guess I was just perturbed by the way these posts are intimating that we should *never* assume the person wasn't completely in control of their mental faculties. Sorry, but I think it's (for lack of a better phrase) human nature.

[Hoggbert]

http://socialnumber.com/atheismplus?etid=1320

What a fresh and exciting concept... the ability to anonymously discuss topics online. I'll have to buy some stock in this company.

[Scented Nectar]

Youtube says Myers is about to have a live stream (from google+?) at: