More Hypocrisy From Jerry Coyne

I am a hard-liner when it comes to free speech: I think that no speech should be banned or criminalized save speech meant to incite imminent violence. – Jerry Coyne

But just three months earlier, he wasn’t quite the hard-liner:

Next, there’s Jerry Coyne, who as I previously mentioned was very upset about my Guardian article. Three people have since told me that Coyne immediately banned them from his site for questioning or criticizing his post about me (1, 2, 3). – Adam Lee

It looks like Jerry is a hard-liner about free speech as long as the free speech doesn’t criticize him or his allies or his agenda. After all, anyone think it is a coincidence that his comments section is an echo-chamber?

I think that no speech should be banned…..Coyne immediately banned them from his site for questioning or criticizing his post

Professor Ceiling Cat is a HypoCat.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Hypocrisy, Jerry Coyne and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to More Hypocrisy From Jerry Coyne

  1. Billy Squibs says:

    And in other (unrelated) news, I see that the Godfather of Gnu has been busy courting controversy by demonstrating his islamophobic tendencies – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11381529/Richard-Dawkins-wants-to-fight-Islamism-with-erotica.-Celebrity-atheism-has-lost-it.html

    I would suggest that it’s by no means a great article and this is evidenced by the manner in which Fry’s ‘problem of evil’ objection is dismissed. It’s a genuine objection for many people.

    Still, that Richard, eh?

  2. Is it just me, or does the problem of evil seem to disproportionately be a problem for the comparatively well-off? You don’t find many records of mediaeval people claiming that the amount of suffering in the world disproves the existence of God, even though death and disease and injury were far more prevalent in their world than in the sort of upper-middle-class milieu in which Mr. Fry moves. Maybe the problem of evil isn’t actually the reason most people have for being atheists, it’s just something they trot out when they need to find an intellectual justification for disbelieving, or else people raised in a relatively cosseted environment tend to over-estimate the terribleness of other people’s lives.

  3. Isaac says:

    I’ve never seen an exact correlation between suffering and skepticism/negativity, period. In fact it’s not uncommon for well-off people to look back most fondly on the periods of their lives that were the most difficult.

    This would never fly in public discourse (people don’t generally think past platitudes), but to even claim that there is a “problem of suffering” you have to establish that comfort and prosperity are just “better”…and I don’t think anyone has really done that. Thousands of people choose to live among the poor as missionaries, etc…at great personal risk, and wouldn’t be caught dead in some McMansion with all needs met.

  4. Dhay says:

    > It looks like Jerry is a hard-liner about free speech as long as the free speech doesn’t criticize him or his allies or his agenda. After all, anyone think it is a coincidence that his comments section is an echo-chamber?

    Jerry Coyne will suffer for that. The observant will note that the times (such as right now) when Coyne has posed a question to his readers, and asked for reader feedback, have coincided with the return of his book for proof reading and correction — and by the look of it, editorial doubts as to whether he has covered topics in sufficient depth.

    Editorial doubts are of course to be expected, and are a normal part of refining a book, and Coyne’s requests for reader input are actually a good idea; or rather, could have been a good idea — but only if his comments section hadn’t become an echo-chamber, only if all dissenting voices, only if all of the people who could and would have provided the alternative views he now needs in order to provide a thoughtfully written book, only if genuinely critical thinkers had not long ago been banned from his blog, hence silenced.

    Coyne refuses to listen to those who would argue with him, those who would engage with and refine his views. Coyne’s book will be the worse for his wilful deafness.

  5. Dhay says:

    Jerry Coyne > like people calling in and asking if God would still hear their prayers if they called him “Yeshua” (the host said “yes,” that God knows all languages—though I’m not sure what would happen if you called him “Allah” but he was really Yahweh).
    https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2015/01/31/is-it-okay-to-lie-about-jesus/

    This, I think, highlight’s Coyne’s utter cluelessness, in that “Allah” is normal amongst Arab Christians, and has been normal since before Islam appeared.

    Coyne doesn’t know, Coyne cannot even be bothered to spend the few seconds it takes to use Google to get an answer, Coyne doesn’t want to know. Coyne’s question functions as an ignorant and silly jibe, a mere sneer; which is silly, because anyone with a modicum of knowledge will sneer straight back at him.

    This also highlights the faults of the echo-chamber: in the 159 comments so far, not one of his commenters has had the knowledge (or basic ability to use Google) to correct Coyne; or if any has had it, has had the courage to risk banning by showing Coyne up Coyne’s ignorance as, well, ignorant.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s