The Refuge of the Toads

#12781

I need to correct two of my previous posts.

Post 12746 should have been:

Aneris!

...

I love your analysis in Post 12732.

Post 12751 should have been:

H. Korban, I enjoyed your Post 12736. I see a lot to agree with, and it gave me some good laughs.

Now I have some errands to do, and I don't know when I'll be back.

#12782

welch wrote:
comhcinc wrote:
welch wrote:[.quote="Steersman"]
:lol: Face it Welch, you just don't like me - to quote your earlier comment to me. ;-)[/.quote]

You just now figured that out?
No, not until you responded to it. :o
Steerzo doesn't do well with ambiguity.

I'm a helper!

One good turn deserves another.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... ersity.jpg

#12783

jimhabegger wrote:Now I have some errands to do, and I don't know when I'll be back.

https://cdn.makeagif.com/media/8-25-2014/fWx327.gif

#12784

Ape+lust wrote:
http://imgur.com/Tu1eMGW.jpg

Good fucking god.

It seems redundant to congratulate you, Ape, on all of your shoops because each one is a masterpiece. But this is up there with the best*. Shit, this is amazing.

*The best being that one of Meyers inches from the pavement, saying "All's going well so far", or similar.

#12785

Ape+lust wrote:
comhcinc wrote:
Ape+lust wrote:
http://imgur.com/Tu1eMGW.jpg

That is near perfect work.

You should be proud of that.
Awesome. Thank you, comhcinc! :dance: :D

I'd actually thought that the tentacles would be going in tip-first...

#12786

MarcusAu wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote:...the town smells like a fart...
Have you been to Rotorua?

In the old pre-multiple-children days we used to take the bus from Wellington to Auckland to catch planes because we were cheap fucking losers. If you took the night bus you'd always wake up in the middle of the night because the stink of Rotorua would come in through the airconditioners.

#12787

Apparently you're supposed to fuck them in the ear.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/file ... ctosex.png

#12788

fuzzy wrote:Apparently you're supposed to fuck them in the ear.

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/file ... ctosex.png

That graphic is transphobic. So an octopus is female because it has ovaries? Shame on PZ.

#12789

Sunder wrote:
d4m10n wrote:Don't call the cops you guys.
Here's some better fucking advice: Don't take mental health tips from the mentally ill.

I am not envious of this lady's life. What mental illness does she have anyway?

This came up recentlike in the news here: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/parenting/new ... d=11606436

Worth some fucking consideration IMHO.

#12790

Taking a look at the orbitwats, it looks like they are always heading down the path of failure. I checked earlier today, and between the 21 bloggers currently on the orbit, they managed to produce only two posts for the entire day. One post was from the dim Nicki M., and it was supposed to be an attack on Milo. The only problem is, she seems to have forgotten to include any criticsm, insults or rants about Milo... She doesn't really say anything at all. It looks like an Ophelia Benson post if Ophie didn't bother to include the copy paste. The other orbit post from Sunday was from Brianna Bilyeu, where she posted a picture of her dodging inn a garden.

Saturday was hardly better for the orbitwats, with an entire 4 posts for the day. Two of them were of a blogger introducing himself by posting 100 facts about himself- yet he couldn't even be bothered to finish. One post was Evan's Saturday post of someone else's writing. The final post was from Genoa where she posted cat pictures.

The most prolific poster appears to be Niki M, who only posts One a day. Many of the other orbitwats, including, founder Alex McGabriel, have only posted an introduction type post where they say they are now blogging at the orbit. Aside from her intro posts and her posts promoting her stuff, Regreta has only managed to write a dreadfully unfunny song parody about cats. Tjibeault has only managed to post about technical glitches studying from his incompetence.

When FTB was actually popular and earning money (for PZ and Ed), they actually produced quite a bit of content. Brayton used to do like 20+ posts a day. Ophie used to post a lot too. PZ did like 5 or more posts a day himself.

These idiots at the orbit can't even do one post a day. To make things worse, many of the orbitwats like Nicki M., Tony the Queer Shop, Alex McGabriel, Dana Hunter, Moro, Ashley, Zvan.... Are unemployed. These idiots can't regularly produce blog content even though it is literally all they do.

Those idiots managed to set up a blog network and claimed it would change atheism, yet they weren't smart enough to bring on at least one blogger that can reliably produced content. The Orbit is dying already and it has only been one week.

#12791

Maybe they should get actual jobs.

I don't know. Just a thought.

How are they being supported?

#12792

Actually... I've been watching Daredevil season 2 and it's terrifying how fiscally irresponsible they are.

They say they're broke all the time... and then buy coffees. Or go out for a dinner. It's fucking insane. I find it really hard not to freak out about it. My husband says it's normal for Americans to live on their credit cards but honestly... what is the shit is the shit.

#12793

MarcusAu wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote:...the town smells like a fart...
Have you been to Rotorua?

Yes! Yes! So true.

#12794

rayshul wrote:Actually... I've been watching Daredevil season 2 and it's terrifying how fiscally irresponsible they are.

They say they're broke all the time... and then buy coffees. Or go out for a dinner. It's fucking insane. I find it really hard not to freak out about it. My husband says it's normal for Americans to live on their credit cards but honestly... what is the shit is the shit.

No it isn't and yeah it kinda stuck out with me too. Foggy comes from money so the idea that he would be okay personally (but not being able to cover the company bills) makes sense. Karen we are being kept in the dark about. Matt, he is the one that seems like he should be the most broke because we know his background so we know there shouldn't be any hidden money there.

#12795

The Yeti wrote:Taking a look at the orbitwats, it looks like they are always heading down the path of failure. I checked earlier today, and between the 21 bloggers currently on the orbit, they managed to produce only two posts for the entire day. One post was from the dim Nicki M., and it was supposed to be an attack on Milo. The only problem is, she seems to have forgotten to include any criticsm, insults or rants about Milo... She doesn't really say anything at all. It looks like an Ophelia Benson post if Ophie didn't bother to include the copy paste. The other orbit post from Sunday was from Brianna Bilyeu, where she posted a picture of her dodging inn a garden.

Saturday was hardly better for the orbitwats, with an entire 4 posts for the day. Two of them were of a blogger introducing himself by posting 100 facts about himself- yet he couldn't even be bothered to finish. One post was Evan's Saturday post of someone else's writing. The final post was from Genoa where she posted cat pictures.

The most prolific poster appears to be Niki M, who only posts One a day. Many of the other orbitwats, including, founder Alex McGabriel, have only posted an introduction type post where they say they are now blogging at the orbit. Aside from her intro posts and her posts promoting her stuff, Regreta has only managed to write a dreadfully unfunny song parody about cats. Tjibeault has only managed to post about technical glitches studying from his incompetence.

When FTB was actually popular and earning money (for PZ and Ed), they actually produced quite a bit of content. Brayton used to do like 20+ posts a day. Ophie used to post a lot too. PZ did like 5 or more posts a day himself.

These idiots at the orbit can't even do one post a day. To make things worse, many of the orbitwats like Nicki M., Tony the Queer Shop, Alex McGabriel, Dana Hunter, Moro, Ashley, Zvan.... Are unemployed. These idiots can't regularly produce blog content even though it is literally all they do.

Those idiots managed to set up a blog network and claimed it would change atheism, yet they weren't smart enough to bring on at least one blogger that can reliably produced content. The Orbit is dying already and it has only been one week.

The number of non-slymepit and non-orbit blogger commenters also appears to be in the range of 0 to 10.

At least they will get to split their $0 monthly revenue more equitably than at FTB

#12796

s and her posts promoting her stuff, Regreta has only managed to write a dreadfully unfunny song parody about cats. Tjibeault has only managed to post about technical glitches studying from his incompetence.

When FTB was actually popular and earning money (for PZ and Ed), they actually produced quite a bit of content. Brayton used to do like 20+ posts a day. Ophie used to post a lot too. PZ did like 5 or more posts a day himself.

snip. [/quote]

You have them all wrong. They are activists busy organising RL interventions.

But really, they forgot PZs golden rule. Post every day, more than once. Post topically. Don't post so much that a convo can't develop. 4-5 sounds about right. Then people start to check in. They start to comment. Discussions begin (and then get crushed - another story).

But for that they would have to organise feeds and they would have to apply themselves and have some discipline.

And a purpose.

And if any did this they would start to wonder why they weren't getting a bigger share of the pie than the once every six monthers. And then they would leave.

#12797

That was an abortion of a snip. Apologies.

#12798

Bottom line is they don't really have anything of interest to add to most subjects. In fact they probably don't even have an opinion on most topics, let alone an area of specialty.

And they are lazy. From my perspective, a perfect storm of boredom.

#12799

comhcinc wrote:
rayshul wrote:Actually... I've been watching Daredevil season 2 and it's terrifying how fiscally irresponsible they are.

They say they're broke all the time... and then buy coffees. Or go out for a dinner. It's fucking insane. I find it really hard not to freak out about it. My husband says it's normal for Americans to live on their credit cards but honestly... what is the shit is the shit.
No it isn't and yeah it kinda stuck out with me too. Foggy comes from money so the idea that he would be okay personally (but not being able to cover the company bills) makes sense. Karen we are being kept in the dark about. Matt, he is the one that seems like he should be the most broke because we know his background so we know there shouldn't be any hidden money there.

Our business is broke and we can't pay our bills. We have one piece of food left. Literally what's happening and what they're saying. Overdue bills. It's their fucking company!!! It's fucking nuts.

#12800

H. Korban wrote: <chop>
I have always enjoyed religious devotional music, even if I actually no longer believe. For example, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan's music devoted to the successor of the prophet, Ali, is particulary good. Incidentally, even though distinctly Islamic, such music is enjoyed by both Muslims and Hindus on the Indian subcontinent. More recently, I have started listening to Persian music, in particular, from the Nimatullahi Sufi order (and other orders). For me, such music goes beyond simply "enjoyment". It tends to push me into particular "ecstatic" states.

So, you appear to be a fellow traveler. I have posted this one before but to as I recall no response. My number one favorite in the genre is follows. To me this version was better than any other I have heard including the original by A.R.Rahman himself.

[youtube]Pam8tXa6pkM[/youtube]

I thought that the movie was pretty good too, despite omitting some significant historical facts. But eh, was supposed to be a love story.

H. Korban wrote: I must admit, that its very difficult for most Westerners to understand the cultural milieu of say Iran or India/Pakistan. It almost as if a particular organ of cognition is missing, and often the effort to explain what one finds extraordinary in these cultures is like trying to describe subtle colors of a sunset to a blind man. Some success towards this has been, for example, in translation of the poetry of Rumi or Fariduddin Attar. However, these poems are almost invariable misunderstood and the subtle meaning of highly specialized Sufi vocabulary used by these Sufi poets gets lost. Their depth is probably lost to most people not raised in those cultures.

Despite being raised in the West, I have always felt a "disconnect" from the culture, mind this is true of all the cultures I have been exposed to. The bottom line is that In many ways I do not even consider myself a Westerner.

H. Korban wrote: Incidentally, I should say that the curse of mankind, the Evil Triumvirate of Salafi/Wahabbi/Takfiri forms of Islam are distinctly opposite and not mystical and very much about the here-and-now, despite all the apparent indications to the contrary. In fact, I should say they are fully material, in many ways paralleling Western materialism, even though of course couched in religious language. One can see this in the extreme emphasis on meting out horrific punishment in the most public and brutal manner possible. Another indication of this is the absurd emphasis on external show of religious piety, including wearing hijaab, for example, or behaving in a very particular way based on some narrow understanding the prophetic biography. This is not unlike the Western colonial projects of decimating and strong-arming everyone into subjugation for material profit, and the emphasis on material possessions as the most important marker of success.

I for one appreciate your occasional comments here.

One last one - by Šejla Kadić (sound quality could be a lot better)

[youtube]5LW8LQp97qw[/youtube]

#12801

Brive1987 wrote:Bottom line is they don't really have anything of interest to add to most subjects. In fact they probably don't even have an opinion on most topics, let alone an area of specialty.

And they are lazy. From my perspective, a perfect storm of boredom.

Ashley could probably write a lot about Honey Boo Boo. I bet a lot of people would be interested in that. What a clever idea to get a doctorate in that. Fucking amazing foresight there, this is definitely a skill set that will enrich the future of our civilisation.

#12802

rayshul wrote:
Sunder wrote:
d4m10n wrote:Don't call the cops you guys.
Here's some better fucking advice: Don't take mental health tips from the mentally ill.
I am not envious of this lady's life. What mental illness does she have anyway?

This came up recentlike in the news here: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/parenting/new ... d=11606436

Worth some fucking consideration IMHO.

Yep. Seen that weeks earlier. I doubt it will get too much traction now but in another 20 years? Anyway, just one reason some Feminists hate MRAs because they promote stuff like the above, and I suppose they are worried it might become mainstream.

#12803

rayshul wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:Bottom line is they don't really have anything of interest to add to most subjects. In fact they probably don't even have an opinion on most topics, let alone an area of specialty.

And they are lazy. From my perspective, a perfect storm of boredom.
Ashley could probably write a lot about Honey Boo Boo. I bet a lot of people would be interested in that. What a clever idea to get a doctorate in that. Fucking amazing foresight there, this is definitely a skill set that will enrich the future of our civilisation.

:lol: Meow? ;-) While I expect that the likes of Melissa Click, or Sarkeesian (sp?), could probably ace that topic, I kind of thought that Miller had better chops than that.

#12804

Steersman wrote:
rayshul wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:Bottom line is they don't really have anything of interest to add to most subjects. In fact they probably don't even have an opinion on most topics, let alone an area of specialty.

And they are lazy. From my perspective, a perfect storm of boredom.
Ashley could probably write a lot about Honey Boo Boo. I bet a lot of people would be interested in that. What a clever idea to get a doctorate in that. Fucking amazing foresight there, this is definitely a skill set that will enrich the future of our civilisation.
:lol: Meow? ;-) While I expect that the likes of Melissa Click, or Sarkeesian (sp?), could probably ace that topic, I kind of thought that Miller had better chops than that.

I hadn't been following her doctoral career, but a quick search shows she did post on FTB in 2014 that she was writing her dissertation on Honey Boo Boo.

Dissertation was completed 12/2015: "Redneckaissance: Honey Boo Boo, Tumblr, and the Stereotype of Poor White Trash" http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/3217/

#12805

d4m10n wrote:
Steersman wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:I hope for no evil to befall danielle. And when I consider his gender confusion and attempted transition, I am filled with equal measure sadness and mirth.

So shoot me.
Only if I catch you breaking into my home. In Florida. ;-)
You're in Florida? ;)

Having thrown the fox in amongst the chickens .... ;-)

d4m10n wrote:Good news!

Interesting but, dang, just not going to be able to make it .... :-)

However, I'd kind of be interested to know what Carrier's views are on free-will as I see he has a course scheduled on the topic. While I think he's a bit of a dick for any number of reasons, he might provide a reasonable rejoinder to the rather dogmatic positions of people like Coyne & Harris. From an Amazon review of Harris' book Carrier is going to be using:

Herbert Gintis wrote: This review is from: Free Will (Paperback)
I am curious about free will arguments because of what they inevitably suggest concerning our scientific preconceptions. Sam Harris is a determinist, pure and simple. The problem is that we have no proof that human behavior is fully determined by the causal laws modeled in modern physical science. I cannot imagine why Harris assumes a determinist model of human behavior. He simply assumes it. ....

Indeed. As Mark Twain put it, "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

#12806

Skep tickle wrote:
Steersman wrote:
rayshul wrote:Ashley could probably write a lot about Honey Boo Boo. I bet a lot of people would be interested in that. What a clever idea to get a doctorate in that. Fucking amazing foresight there, this is definitely a skill set that will enrich the future of our civilisation.
:lol: Meow? ;-) While I expect that the likes of Melissa Click, or Sarkeesian (sp?), could probably ace that topic, I kind of thought that Miller had better chops than that.
I hadn't been following her doctoral career, but a quick search shows she did post on FTB in 2014 that she was writing her dissertation on Honey Boo Boo.

Dissertation was completed 12/2015: "Redneckaissance: Honey Boo Boo, Tumblr, and the Stereotype of Poor White Trash" http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/3217/

Where's that smugly whistling smiley when I need it?

#12807

Skep tickle wrote:
Steersman wrote:
rayshul wrote:[.quote="Brive1987"]....And they are lazy. From my perspective, a perfect storm of boredom.[/.quote]

Ashley could probably write a lot about Honey Boo Boo. I bet a lot of people would be interested in that. What a clever idea to get a doctorate in that. Fucking amazing foresight there, this is definitely a skill set that will enrich the future of our civilisation.
:lol: Meow? ;-) While I expect that the likes of Melissa Click, or Sarkeesian (sp?), could probably ace that topic, I kind of thought that Miller had better chops than that.
I hadn't been following her doctoral career, but a quick search shows she did post on FTB in 2014 that she was writing her dissertation on Honey Boo Boo.

Dissertation was completed 12/2015: "Redneckaissance: Honey Boo Boo, Tumblr, and the Stereotype of Poor White Trash" http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/3217/

Ok, I stand corrected; mea culpa - shoot me a dawn. ;-)

Though I remember taking a look at her resume some time back - here it is again for posterity - and it certainly seemed then, and seems now, that she wasn't any type of fainting violet, a Melody Hensley prone to weeping and wailing and gnashing her teeth over trivialities, that she did have a few tangible accomplishments under her belt. But maybe I'm not looking deep enough.

#12808

rayshul wrote:
Skep tickle wrote: <snip>

Dissertation was completed 12/2015: "Redneckaissance: Honey Boo Boo, Tumblr, and the Stereotype of Poor White Trash" http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/3217/
Where's that smugly whistling smiley when I need it?

:lol: This one? :whistle: On the first page. ;-)

Though, as mentioned, while I'll concede she did write such a paper - mea culpa, shoot me at dawn, and all that - you might take a look at that resume of hers, and decide whether she's got more credibility than Click and Sarkeesian or not. And one might suggest that the stereotype of "poor white trash" - along with many such stereotypes - is a reasonable topic of discussion.

#12809

Steersman wrote:
rayshul wrote:
Skep tickle wrote: <snip>

Dissertation was completed 12/2015: "Redneckaissance: Honey Boo Boo, Tumblr, and the Stereotype of Poor White Trash" http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/3217/
Where's that smugly whistling smiley when I need it?
:lol: This one? :whistle: On the first page. ;-)

Though, as mentioned, while I'll concede she did write such a paper - mea culpa, shoot me at dawn, and all that - you might take a look at that resume of hers, and decide whether she's got more credibility than Click and Sarkeesian or not. And one might suggest that the stereotype of "poor white trash" - along with many such stereotypes - is a reasonable topic of discussion.

Why should I look at her resume if no one else will?

#12810

As a completely unrelated note... here's a thread on Kotaku of people who deconverted from the SJW cult.

#12811

Billie from Ockham wrote:I'm not great at dividing 100 by 2 repeatedly, but I've still never landed on 1.5. Is that because I'm not native American?

That's what happens if you start from a binary sex standpoint, rather than a gliding scale. You could have shut up and listened to Hornbeck, but no, you went your own way and now you're stuck.

#12812

rayshul wrote: Why should I look at her resume if no one else will?

I did.

My thoughts were "Decline and Fall of Western Civilization" symptoms of.

*shrug*

Are we doomed? Only time will tell, but right now I am not optimistic.

#12813

rayshul wrote:
Steersman wrote: <snip>
Though, as mentioned, while I'll concede she did write such a paper - mea culpa, shoot me at dawn, and all that - you might take a look at that resume of hers, and decide whether she's got more credibility than Click and Sarkeesian or not. And one might suggest that the stereotype of "poor white trash" - along with many such stereotypes - is a reasonable topic of discussion.
Why should I look at her resume if no one else will?

Maybe because, being a skeptic-in-good-standing, and, having leveled an accusation of sorts, you'd want to review all of the evidence before passing sentence? Just a thought. Maybe I'm missing something - haven't read her dissertation for example - but, like I said, her resume certainly looked a helluva lot more credible that what Watson, for instance, has apparently done.

But, to kill two birds with one stone, that KIA thread certainly looks interesting, even if it too has a brief hint of a 12-steps/Maoist confessional.

#12814

http://i.imgur.com/V42JTwS.png

:clap: :clap:

#12815

AndrewV69 wrote:
rayshul wrote: Why should I look at her resume if no one else will?
I did.

My thoughts were "Decline and Fall of Western Civilization" symptoms of.

*shrug*

Are we doomed? Only time will tell, but right now I am not optimistic.

I'm a little inspired, actually. I have largely deconverted some friends in the science fiction community who I've kind of just weathered their SJWness until they had their little road to Damascus moment. Yes I have an advantage when it comes to doing this because of being brown and female which makes SJWs or their non-quite-convinced-converts take a moment.

I wonder if it's possible to have a site or somewhere for people who aren't convinced of SJWs to escape to and talk to someone. We've had a large number of deconverts from FtB's blogroll come here after deconverting, never mind those who are simply ex readers of the blogs. Maybe there's room for some sort of address for us to use to help people who want someone to talk to but can't do it publicly.

#12816

For those acronym challenged - the Orbit is on Amazon web services

#12817

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:
Ape+lust wrote:
http://imgur.com/Tu1eMGW.jpg
Good fucking god.

It seems redundant to congratulate you, Ape, on all of your shoops because each one is a masterpiece. But this is up there with the best*. Shit, this is amazing.

You mean there might be more than one up there? :character-kyle:

*The best being that one of Meyers inches from the pavement, saying "All's going well so far", or similar.

Wasn't that a Wile E. Coyote persiflage, where he launched himself from a cannon?

#12818

Steersman wrote:
rayshul wrote:
Steersman wrote: <snip>
Though, as mentioned, while I'll concede she did write such a paper - mea culpa, shoot me at dawn, and all that - you might take a look at that resume of hers, and decide whether she's got more credibility than Click and Sarkeesian or not. And one might suggest that the stereotype of "poor white trash" - along with many such stereotypes - is a reasonable topic of discussion.
Why should I look at her resume if no one else will?
Maybe because, being a skeptic-in-good-standing, and, having leveled an accusation of sorts, you'd want to review all of the evidence before passing sentence? Just a thought. Maybe I'm missing something -

It's a joke.

#12819

The Yeti wrote:Taking a look at the orbitwats, it looks like they are always heading down the path of failure.

http://cdn.epicski.com/d/d1/438x400px-d ... eally.jpeg

(Sorry Yeti, couldn't resist. That was one open door waiting to be kicked down :-))

#12820

AndrewV69 wrote:
rayshul wrote: Why should I look at her resume if no one else will?
I did.

My thoughts were "Decline and Fall of Western Civilization" symptoms of.

*shrug*

Are we doomed? Only time will tell, but right now I am not optimistic.

About what she was describing? Or about the (po-mo?) framework she was using to analyze the situation?

Though, in any case, I can still sympathize with the view of "End of an Age". Reminds me of something from the closing passages in Bronowski's The Ascent of Man (though I might emphasize "Man" in the sense of humanity):

And I am infinitely saddened to find myself suddenly surrounded in the west by a sense of terrible loss of nerve, a retreat from knowledge into - into what? Into Zen Buddhism; into falsely profound questions about, Are we not really just animals at bottom; into extra-sensory perception and mystery. They do not lie along the line of what we are now able to know if we devote ourselves to it: an understanding of man himself. We are nature's unique experiment to make the rational intelligence prove itself sounder than the reflex. Knowledge is our destiny. Self-knowledge, at last bringing together the experience of the arts and the explanations of science, waits ahead of us.

It sounds very pessimistic to talk about western civilization with a sense of retreat. I have been so optimistic about the ascent of man; am I going to give up at this moment? Of course not. The ascent of man will go on. But do not assume that it will go on carried by western civilization as we know it. We are being weighed in the balance at this moment. If we give up, the next step will be taken but not by us. We have not been given any guarantee that Assyria and Egypt and Rome were not given. We are waiting to be somebody's past too, and not necessarily of our future. ....[pg 268]

Indeed.

#12821

Well having had all those virtuous thoughts...

I've created an email account sjwfreedom@mail.com

If you're reading here and you're worried about, you know, being a SJW... feel free to drop a line.

#12822

rayshul wrote:
Steersman wrote:
rayshul wrote: <snip>
Why should I look at her resume if no one else will?
Maybe because, being a skeptic-in-good-standing, and, having leveled an accusation of sorts, you'd want to review all of the evidence before passing sentence? Just a thought. Maybe I'm missing something -
It's a joke.

Ah so. Though you might consider using a smiley to telegraph ahead your intent. Otherwise it kind of looks like a post hoc rationalization.

#12823

Brive1987 wrote:That was an abortion of a snip. Apologies.

Snips need abortion rights too!

#12824

H. Korban wrote:I feel somewhat sympathetic to the position of jimhabegger. He is correct that most of us need myth and metaphors to live a full life. Of course, I exclude racist, robotic cunts like Steersman (Piss Be Upon Him and His Rusted Diodes).

I'm not saying that metaphors are useless, I'm saying that they have their limits. For example, speaking of physics, the metaphor of Rutherford's model for the atom suggests certain ideas about the atom which don't match the available evidence and can lead to cognitive mistakes. The same is true for the orbital model, or for any other theoretical model, really.

There's nothing wrong with using metaphors, just like there's nothing wrong with using maps. However one must always remember the limits of the metaphor, just like one must remember that the map isn't the territory.

I must admit, that its very difficult for most Westerners to understand the cultural milieu of say Iran or India/Pakistan. It almost as if a particular organ of cognition is missing, and often the effort to explain what one finds extraordinary in these cultures is like trying to describe subtle colors of a sunset to a blind man. Some success towards this has been, for example, in translation of the poetry of Rumi or Fariduddin Attar. However, these poems are almost invariable misunderstood and the subtle meaning of highly specialized Sufi vocabulary used by these Sufi poets gets lost. Their depth is probably lost to most people not raised in those cultures.

This is, quite frankly, a baseless assumption. It'd even go as far as to call it an anti-reductionist myth. What you're saying is that there is some cognitive special property given to people simply by belonging to a culture. Cultural contexts can affect tastes and the understanding of references, but I don't think that there is room to support the idea of "extra organs of cognition" or "other ways of knowing".

Do you also believe that there is an organ of cognition that you need in order to understand or appreciate Shakespeare's poetry as non-English or Dante's Divine Comedy as a non-Italian? Or are the cultures of Iran and India/Pakistan somewhat "special" and superior, beyond the grasp of mere Westerners? If so, why?

Incidentally, I should say that the curse of mankind, the Evil Triumvirate of Salafi/Wahabbi/Takfiri forms of Islam are distinctly opposite and not mystical and very much about the here-and-now, despite all the apparent indications to the contrary. In fact, I should say they are fully material, in many ways paralleling Western materialism, even though of course couched in religious language. One can see this in the extreme emphasis on meting out horrific punishment in the most public and brutal manner possible. Another indication of this is the absurd emphasis on external show of religious piety, including wearing hijaab, for example, or behaving in a very particular way based on some narrow understanding the prophetic biography. This is not unlike the Western colonial projects of decimating and strong-arming everyone into subjugation for material profit, and the emphasis on material possessions as the most important marker of success.

I get that the schools you're talking about have a political bent, and that they're concerned with power over people and society more than with philosophical/mystical endeavors, but colonial projects and an emphasis on material possessions aren't an attribute only of "Western" culture. All cultures have a drive for material possessions or for political power, or for colonial projects as the basis of the vast majority of political and religious projects.

I'd say that it's the mystical/philosophical schools who are the minority, both in the "West" (where Christian mystical traditions existed and flourished for centuries, from Origen to Ignatius of Loyola, and beyond) and elsewhere. Abstract philosophical/mystical speculations and experiences have always been a field that fascinates some people (especially intellectuals) but that is limited to some specific movements. Mystics are rarely in charge of a church; they're more likely to start a religion, or a cult, or to be burned/beheaded/stoned as "heretics", or all of those things together.

I'm not really concerned about mystical experiences, I'm concerned about the practical effects of religions and ideologies on the life of people. I also think that the ideas that mystical experiences are "only understandable through experience" and "require special organs of cognition" are myths based on philosophical assumptions

PS: This anal obsession by some, in particular Kibmark and Aneris, to "understand" everything is very, very funny. To me, at least. Look, I am a physicist, and I understand the need to explain and understand. However, I do physics. Not talk about the habits of physicists and the details of their social interactions. In the same way, certain things need to be experienced and not simply dissected into lists and banal "explanations". As I said, some simply miss the cognitive organs, and when I read their long, and frankly, boring "analysis", I often can't help but laugh. Of course, one should feel free to indulge in what one likes, but often its best to experience than dissect.

I get it, you're anti-reductionist. It's a legitimate philosophical position, albeit not one I feel inclined to. However it is nothing special. You simply deny the possibility the explain and explore certain kinds of "experiences" with the means of reductionism, which have been successful in explaining many other processes which were thought to be impossible to explain (like the mechanism of evolution).

Your position has a huge limit: it doesn't really help us to understand anything. At best, you're simply pointing out that something hasn't been understood (so far), and question whether it could be understood, which is a legitimate position. At worst your assumption is just a "sophisticated" intellectual way to feel superior and smug about your own "experiences".

We learn by dissecting. Science has been carried forth by analysis, which, as the etymology suggests (ἀνά- "up, throughout" and -λυσις, from λυω, "dissolve") is the process of breaking a complex topic apart in order to better understanding. "Pure experience" tells us nothing by itself. Indeed "pure experience" can be based on delusions, or on the process of interfering with your mental processes by assuming psychotropic drugs.

I'm not saying that my or Aneris' attempts at analyzing things are necessarily right. We might as well be completely wrong. If I am factually wrong (as it often happens) I'm glad to be corrected. But if you're simply saying "you need to experience it, you funny knave" you're not different from the Scientologists or the other woo-peddlers who tell us that their pet theories are "beyond scientific understanding".

By the way as a physicist you don't need to understand why you do what you do. That's what philosophy of science, and sociology, and anthropology, and psychology are for.

#12825

Steersman wrote:
rayshul wrote:
Steersman wrote:Maybe because, being a skeptic-in-good-standing, and, having leveled an accusation of sorts, you'd want to review all of the evidence before passing sentence? Just a thought. Maybe I'm missing something -
It's a joke.
Ah so. Though you might consider using a smiley to telegraph ahead your intent. Otherwise it kind of looks like a post hoc rationalization.

oh sweet god

#12826

Brive1987 wrote:For those acronym challenged - the Orbit is on Amazon web services

But... but... Amazon is the Evil incarnate!

#12827

Also of interest.

#12828

What I find interesting here is that the perspective of most people is that SJWs lost in atheism.

In my view they won.

They destroyed most major communities and a lot of the major websites (rational wiki, FtB, etc) and these places haven't come back to life.

Only the big name atheists - the Dawkinses, Harrisses and Alis of the world - are really able to throw shit back at these people. The local communities in my area and probably lots of others are overtaken with SJWs. If we'd won in this community, we wouldn't all be in this forum talking shit but be back in the community.

The push back came too fucking late.

Atheism and skepticism is rotten and it won't make a come back in any valuable shape.

#12829

There was a local atheist group in Canberra. Canberra's small enough, that it wasn't really organised, and fell apart when the guy who was leading it left because he got a job offer in China. There were a few SJWs in that group. The worst was so stereotypical it wasn't funny. Poorly kept manlet without a job, who'd defend the islamists and feminists. It was the only time in real life I've heard someone advocate Pharyngula.

#12830

Kirbmarc wrote:
H. Korban wrote:I feel somewhat sympathetic to the position of jimhabegger. He is correct that most of us need myth and metaphors to live a full life. Of course, I exclude racist, robotic cunts like Steersman (Piss Be Upon Him and His Rusted Diodes). ....
I'm not saying that metaphors are useless, I'm saying that they have their limits. For example, speaking of physics, the metaphor of Rutherford's model for the atom suggests certain ideas about the atom which don't match the available evidence and can lead to cognitive mistakes. The same is true for the orbital model, or for any other theoretical model, really.

There's nothing wrong with using metaphors, just like there's nothing wrong with using maps. However one must always remember the limits of the metaphor, just like one must remember that the map isn't the territory. ....

<snip>

H. Korban wrote:PS: This anal obsession by some, in particular Kibmark and Aneris, to "understand" everything is very, very funny. To me, at least. Look, I am a physicist, and I understand the need to explain and understand. However, I do physics. Not talk about the habits of physicists and the details of their social interactions. In the same way, certain things need to be experienced and not simply dissected into lists and banal "explanations". As I said, some simply miss the cognitive organs, and when I read their long, and frankly, boring "analysis", I often can't help but laugh. Of course, one should feel free to indulge in what one likes, but often its best to experience than dissect.
I get it, you're anti-reductionist. It's a legitimate philosophical position, albeit not one I feel inclined to. ....

Your position has a huge limit: it doesn't really help us to understand anything. ....

We learn by dissecting. Science has been carried forth by analysis, which, as the etymology suggests (ἀνά- "up, throughout" and -λυσις, from λυω, "dissolve") is the process of breaking a complex topic apart in order to better understanding. "Pure experience" tells us nothing by itself. Indeed "pure experience" can be based on delusions, or on the process of interfering with your mental processes by assuming psychotropic drugs.

I'm not saying that my or Aneris' attempts at analyzing things are necessarily right. We might as well be completely wrong. If I am factually wrong (as it often happens) I'm glad to be corrected. But if you're simply saying "you need to experience it, you funny knave" you're not different from the Scientologists or the other woo-peddlers who tell us that their pet theories are "beyond scientific understanding". ....

Good points; nice analysis. I quite agree with you - and Aneris - about the value of metaphors and analogies, and their limitations. But it really seems that those tools, along with the feedback of testing assumptions against "reality" are, largely at least, the only real game in town. However, I kind of think that gestalt and intuition and inductive logic, arguably "another way of knowing", encompass some uncharted but quite real territory that could bear some serious thought.

#12831

rayshul wrote:
Steersman wrote:
rayshul wrote:
It's a joke.
Ah so. Though you might consider using a smiley to telegraph ahead your intent. Otherwise it kind of looks like a post hoc rationalization.
oh sweet god

Is this some sort of Anti-Turing Test?

#12832

Steersman wrote:
AndrewV69 wrote:
rayshul wrote: Why should I look at her resume if no one else will?
I did.

My thoughts were "Decline and Fall of Western Civilization" symptoms of.

*shrug*

Are we doomed? Only time will tell, but right now I am not optimistic.
About what she was describing? Or about the (po-mo?) framework she was using to analyze the situation? ....

My mistake (it's late) as I thought you were referring to her dissertation and not her resume. Though I find it hard to see how you could get "Decline and Fall" out of the latter.

#12833

Cnutella wrote:
rayshul wrote:
Steersman wrote:[.quote="rayshul"]

It's a joke.[/.quote]
Ah so. Though you might consider using a smiley to telegraph ahead your intent. Otherwise it kind of looks like a post hoc rationalization.
oh sweet god
Is this some sort of Anti-Turing Test?

Y'all might consider that we all start off, generally speaking, with different assumptions. Kind of presumptuous to think that everyone does or should share the same ones we or you do. If "we" aren't able to deal with that fact then it looks like "riding madly off in all directions" is going to be the only result.

#12834

rayshul wrote:Well having had all those virtuous thoughts...

I've created an email account sjwfreedom@mail.com

If you're reading here and you're worried about, you know, being a SJW... feel free to drop a line.

I'm wondering if something could be organised along the lines of a group promoting anti-censorship.

Recently there was 'The Triggering' event on twitter.

But, I'm thinking of something like the 'Banned Books' events that libraries sometimes promote.

People could be encouraged to read or watch media that was at sometime banned - it would start with the usual suspects (eg things banned by the catholic church etc, or the Nazis) but would also include more modern things.

And if the people involved found one sort of thing acceptable but not others - they would have to articulate their ides of censorship, forcing a conversation.

Of couse, I don't know how this would work out in practice - as my experience is of not being a part of any community.

#12835

fuzzy wrote:Apparently you're supposed to fuck them in the ear.

So is that aural sex?

=

#12836

rayshul wrote:What I find interesting here is that the perspective of most people is that SJWs lost in atheism.

In my view they won.

They destroyed most major communities and a lot of the major websites (rational wiki, FtB, etc) and these places haven't come back to life.

Only the big name atheists - the Dawkinses, Harrisses and Alis of the world - are really able to throw shit back at these people. The local communities in my area and probably lots of others are overtaken with SJWs. If we'd won in this community, we wouldn't all be in this forum talking shit but be back in the community.

The push back came too fucking late.

Atheism and skepticism is rotten and it won't make a come back in any valuable shape.

I think you need to draw a distinction between SJWs in general and the atheist SJWs we know only too well (Myers, FTB/Orbiters/Skepchicks).
I think these two main groups had different objectives.
Group 1 - the general SJWs - (only some of whom are atheists) were opposed to new atheism due to its confrontational nature - in particular it's approach towards Islam. They wanted the whole movement silenced and had no interest in setting themselves as 'leaders' of atheism.

Group 2 - the FTB SJWs, on the other hand, simply wanted regime change. Their ideal scenario would have been a takeover of CF!, JREF, American Atheists and the RIchard Dawkins Foundation, with their own cronies installed as leaders.

I think you could make the argument that the aims of group 1 have been substantially achieved - although this is largely due to the malicious smearing actions of group 2.
The aims of group 2 on the other hand are nowhere near achieved,

They haven't achieved any substantial takeover of a major atheist or skeptical organization. Even their in-house conference, Skepticon, seems to be dwindling into nothingness.
Their online presence is fragmenting and PZ Myers, their one major voice, is not taken seriously by anyone outside his own horde (and half of those have abandoned him for fresh pastures.)

The real battle in atheism is only just beginning - and that is precipitated by the spread of atheism to the middle east.

#12837

rayshul wrote:What I find interesting here is that the perspective of most people is that SJWs lost in atheism.

In my view they won.

They destroyed most major communities and a lot of the major websites (rational wiki, FtB, etc) and these places haven't come back to life.

Only the big name atheists - the Dawkinses, Harrisses and Alis of the world - are really able to throw shit back at these people. The local communities in my area and probably lots of others are overtaken with SJWs. If we'd won in this community, we wouldn't all be in this forum talking shit but be back in the community.

The push back came too fucking late.

Atheism and skepticism is rotten and it won't make a come back in any valuable shape.

I think that the movement had almost run it's course anyway. The great books on atheism had been written and discussed to death. Religion is in retreat. Dissecting creationism with a creotard for the millionth time gets boring. If SJW's hadn't invaded - I think that most of us would have moved onto another ism anyway. I think that the SJW's have lost but there is nothing to go back to anyway

#12838

Melissa Click tells her side of the story to the WaPo (tl:dr "I had a lot on my plate, it was a matter for my conscience and, after all, doesn't everyone make mistakes? Oh and Missou didn't really have guidelines for this so it's actually kind of their fault, if you think about it.")

https://archive.is/dPnrN

My favorite part:

But I do not understand the widespread impulse to shame those whose best intentions unfortunately result in imperfect actions. What would our world be like if no one ever took a chance? What if everyone played it safe?...

...While I continue to fight the MU Board of Curators’ decision to terminate my employment without due process and in violation of university policy, I am also working to come to terms with how a few captured moments of imperfection could eclipse 12 years of excellence.

But beyond my specific circumstances, I believe this situation raises broader cultural, ethical, and legal questions about how surveillance and social media significantly impact the terrain of public engagement.
Whose interests are served when our drive to combat societal imperfections is defeated by fears of having our individual imperfections exposed?

And what value do our rights as citizens have in a culture increasingly ruled by snap judgments and by regulations that are easily rewritten to suit changing political interests?

Tell it to Tim Hunt and Matt Taylor.

We should all be concerned about the larger issues my situation raises.

I don’t want to live in a world where citizens are too afraid of public scorn to take a chance. Do you?

#12839

Steersman wrote:
Cnutella wrote:
rayshul wrote:
oh sweet god
Is this some sort of Anti-Turing Test?
Y'all might consider that we all start off, generally speaking, with different assumptions. Kind of presumptuous to think that everyone does or should share the same ones we or you do. If "we" aren't able to deal with that fact then it looks like "riding madly off in all directions" is going to be the only result.

Oh sorry, my bad. I forgot the :D

#12840

MarcusAu wrote:
rayshul wrote:Well having had all those virtuous thoughts...

I've created an email account sjwfreedom@mail.com

If you're reading here and you're worried about, you know, being a SJW... feel free to drop a line.
I'm wondering if something could be organised along the lines of a group promoting anti-censorship.

Recently there was 'The Triggering' event on twitter.

But, I'm thinking of something like the 'Banned Books' events that libraries sometimes promote.

People could be encouraged to read or watch media that was at sometime banned - it would start with the usual suspects (eg things banned by the catholic church etc, or the Nazis) but would also include more modern things.

And if the people involved found one sort of thing acceptable but not others - they would have to articulate their ides of censorship, forcing a conversation.

Of couse, I don't know how this would work out in practice - as my experience is of not being a part of any community.

What I'm trying to say is: "Beware the ides of censorship...in March...or something"