Angry Dawk

I’m not surprised at all by this story:

At this time (September of 2011), Dave Silverman was heading up the Reason Rally Committee. There was still quite a bit of planning and promotion that needed to be done, so Dave asked Richard, Elizabeth, and Sean to make videos to promote the Reason Rally. (The video Richard ended up making is still viewable.) Richard was standing behind the podium, and he asked Dave something along the lines of, “What exactly is the Reason Rally?” Dave started explaining it, and as he did, someone who was waiting in the line outside opened the door to peek inside and we could all hear a lot of noise. I rushed up the aisle and made frantic “shut the door” gestures at the people peeking inside, and they did. As I walked the ten feet back, I couldn’t hear everything Dave was saying, but I heard the name “Rebecca Watson.” Richard suddenly had a very angry look on his face and I heard him almost shout, “No, absolutely not! If she’s going to be there, I won’t be there. I don’t want her speaking.” and then Dave immediately replied, “You’re absolutely right, we’ll take her off the roster. It’s done.” Richard huffed for a moment, Dave continued to placate him, and then he made the video.

This entry was posted in New Atheism, Richard Dawkins and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Angry Dawk

  1. A great sitcom or soap opera would be something like “Gnus and Thumpers”, about the new atheists and their mirror-image dilettantes who talk in circles and posture as Christian apologists. Switching out key terms reveals that both sides are using the same statement-rotation algorithm. “Clowns to the left of me . . .”

  2. Bilbo says:

    Hi Machine,

    You’ve got me curious. Who do you have in mind as Christian apologist posers?

  3. In my experience, it’s most people who are into Christian apologetics, including many authors of books on the subject. Craig, Geisler, and a few others are exceptions. But the common syndromes are: the split personality about reason, which reasons against reason in atheists, but uses reason to do so, while using reason as THE badge of their own intellectual legitimacy (although they use it sloppily like a drunk clinging to a lamppost), the circular reasoning, the faith-beyond-reason rhetoric which is also reasoned about endlessly, answering questions about logical justification with formulaic ontological claims, which is just intellectual dishonesty with a halo, and on and on and on. It’s embarrassing, but it’s the typical cognitive foot-shooting on he part of Christians, for most of whom apologetics is sort of like the new more-hip worship band gimmick but with the pretension to deep dispassionate intellectual deliberation.

    It’s like closet queen Paul Crouch having apologist John Warwick Montgomery do brief programs on his channel, while all other TBN programming does 100 times the damage done by the false views Mongomery argues against.

    So I consider the new atheists and most of their Christian detractors as two sides of the same coin, oscillating insanities who just mirror each other in trading insults, mischaracterizations, faulty arguments and a refusal to admit—or usually just flat-out dismiss—lingering questions and legit objections they don’t have responses for. A little intellectual honesty on both sides would go a long way toward garnering more patient consideration of the issues and arguments by their opponents than the unwarranted grinning confident front that both exhibit toward each other.

    On the Christian side of things, Christian parents and ministers are—almost to a person—locked into their convoluted algorithms, and they’ll NEVER get it. EVER. It’s the Christianese Statement Rotation System: If statement 1 is challenged, respond with statement 2, if statement 2 is challenged, respond with statement 3 . . . if statement N is challenged, return to statement 1. They will NEVER get out of that circle of statements, even if it means driving every one of their own youth away from Christianity—which they are doing btw. The REAL Jesus here is not having to ever think with any precision about the justification of belief. Most Christianity is just the perpetual sublimation of doubt, while considering anyone outside the Christian Orgz as spiritual second-class citizens. But their own youth are obviously not buying it.

    I’m not a Catholic, and this basically comes from my experience in going to Mass in military school (only because the priest let us smoke cigarettes in the fellowship hall lol), but I still attend a Catholic church because I like the absolute solemnity of the Mass and it doesn’t seem like I’m in a place where all the thinking people have been run off by an unfriendly robotic regime with a sales script and a list of rebuttals for questions and objectionsthat are not the ones being raised.


  4. Bilbo says:

    So other than Craig, Geisler, and a “few others,” you see all Christian apologists as posers?

  5. “a few others’ was in regard to apologist authors in the previous sentence. But just skip any charitable reading of my comments. I neither expect it nor believe anyone is obligated to it.

    You know, Hume is just so evil and his writings have been so devastating. But I’m actually glad in almost 300 years no apologist has written a single exhaustive refutation of his views, because where would apologetics fundraising be without those Humean evils? Think about it.

    But yeah, with very few exceptions, the precision reasoning just ain’t there, the paraded confidence is underdetermined, there’s an absence of depth and detail, and when you try to engage them, they are either unavailable or else evasive, condescending, vague, dismissive, glib, and of course judgmental.

    Hey! I know! I’ll use the apologetics formula for MY views! And then I too can be a robo-apologist and just backatcha to all those apologists using their own algorithms, just like the atheists have done with TAG! This is almost as good as the 5-minute-old universe with a built-in appearance of age,

    Maybe Ron Popeil will want to sell my Christian Apologetics Cognitive Rotisserie! Set it—and just repeat it endlessly! Presets will have already been programmed to answer all logically possible questions, objections, and alternative views in advance! Any deviations are just intellectual dishonesty! Auto-scorn feature assigns both bad faith and sinfulness to anyone who isn’t persuaded! The world’s going to hell. More funding, please! And think about those few converts of ours. Yeah God’s using us in a great way. More funding, please!

    I’ll never have to fool with that messy reasoning again, yet look intellectual all the while—-and no one will know! Guaranteed! (Cultural Hate Generator, Fallacybot, and Auto-Equivocate attachments sold separately)

    Auto-Apologetics for the Interwebs! Thank you, FaithCo!

    (A Joint Venture of ApeCo and JudgeCo. Your results may vary. Actual costs: $50 down, $50 per month, for 50 years at 50% A.P.R., or until the rapture, whichever comes last. JudgeCo is an obligation collection agency and multi-level guilt distributor network)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.