Comments on: Self-censorship, and the fear of offending http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/ Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:37:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: TXStorm http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6751 TXStorm Sun, 14 Jan 2007 06:40:09 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6751 Daniel, I cannot help but wonder if you would offer similar advice to a religious writer. I wonder since what you suggest about offering substantive points and evidence applies in spades to religious writers (and all defenders of religion) since as of yet neither can be found in any such writing in defense of religon (whetheer xnty or another). With that in mind, how do we account for the double standard? Also I wonder whom you have been reading with regard to refuting the claims of the defenders of illusions. Certainly you can find a great deal of well written sound arguments offered on this site, from not only Pedro, but from others commenting as well. Pedro, While in direct personal discussion and interaction there is a degree of courtesy extended as a general rule, there is no cause to allow that to silence you in your own space, such as this blog. There is nothing discourteous about speaking your mind on your own property where no one is forced to listen. As another noted, the religious have managed to get the PC codes of conduct to dictate that it is "rude" to refute their preaching, or even to suggest that you might not want to be subjected to their tirades and preaching. That you might object to being insulted and assaulted is not considered objectionable and aggressive. Fortunately there are still some of us who can differentiate between illusion and reality and can recognize that responding to such tirades and assaults is not itself aggressive or rude, rather it is the tirade or assault which is the act of aggression, and which necessarily disrespects all others. Speak your mind, continue to do so intelligently and in the manner you find most effective. In the US there is an illusion of free speech, but it is coming to mean that only popular speech is protected. Since the religous rule this nation, unpopular speech such as reasoned positions, honest discussion, and respect for knowledge and wisdome, is being attacked on all fronts. This is not uncommon worldwide, so we need all honest, reasonable intelligent individuals to speak up so as to perhaps remind a few who can hear us over the drowning droning of the religous. Daniel,

I cannot help but wonder if you would offer similar advice to a religious writer. I wonder since what you suggest about offering substantive points and evidence applies in spades to religious writers (and all defenders of religion) since as of yet neither can be found in any such writing in defense of religon (whetheer xnty or another). With that in mind, how do we account for the double standard?

Also I wonder whom you have been reading with regard to refuting the claims of the defenders of illusions. Certainly you can find a great deal of well written sound arguments offered on this site, from not only Pedro, but from others commenting as well.

Pedro,

While in direct personal discussion and interaction there is a degree of courtesy extended as a general rule, there is no cause to allow that to silence you in your own space, such as this blog. There is nothing discourteous about speaking your mind on your own property where no one is forced to listen. As another noted, the religious have managed to get the PC codes of conduct to dictate that it is “rude” to refute their preaching, or even to suggest that you might not want to be subjected to their tirades and preaching. That you might object to being insulted and assaulted is not considered objectionable and aggressive. Fortunately there are still some of us who can differentiate between illusion and reality and can recognize that responding to such tirades and assaults is not itself aggressive or rude, rather it is the tirade or assault which is the act of aggression, and which necessarily disrespects all others.

Speak your mind, continue to do so intelligently and in the manner you find most effective.

In the US there is an illusion of free speech, but it is coming to mean that only popular speech is protected. Since the religous rule this nation, unpopular speech such as reasoned positions, honest discussion, and respect for knowledge and wisdome, is being attacked on all fronts. This is not uncommon worldwide, so we need all honest, reasonable intelligent individuals to speak up so as to perhaps remind a few who can hear us over the drowning droning of the religous.

]]> By: Daniel http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6672 Daniel Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:11:00 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6672 Pedro, you have the motivation to do good work, but I'd encourage you to avoid reducing the quality of your writing by succumbing to the temptation to write like some of your blogger heroes. Perhaps more time can be devoted instead to showing just <i>how</i> theism is supposedly "stupid". What is appalling is not so much the hubris with which some atheologian writers make their claims (as unnecessary such remarks are). But for all such confidence, it is surprising just how empty much of it is of any substantive support -- things are simply stated, relying on assumption and subcultural prejudice to carry their conclusions for them. For such atheistic writers, argument is apparently not necessary. Take your first excerpt as an example. There is absolutely nothing contained therein which compels the reader to adopt the same assumptions the writer employs to make his point. Theists of other traditions than Islam as well as atheists must do more to show just <i>how</i> such beliefs are formally irrational, whether they be internally inconsistent, or perhaps based on factual error... Otherwise, it seems there is no real substantive objection to engage. The piece amounts to an opinion article, which hardly compels anyone not already convinced of what is said to change their minds. Or take the second excerpt. George W. Bush is said to be unintelligent -- less intelligent, in fact, than the average Christian. Now I'm eager to read just how the writer came to determine that. Unfortunately, he doesn't take the time to indulge our curiosity. Even if he had, it's not clear what implications might such an autobiographical detail have for Theism. How does one man's intellectual capacities prove or disprove the belief system in question? In fact, nothing else in that excerpt serves to support any of his points. Much of what is said seems unrelated or just thrown in there with some exaggerated editorializing ("..villagers who still believe Santa Claus is going to save them"?). This is grandstanding, and the only people I know could possibly appreciate that kind of writing are the atheists. Other selected excerpts fall prey to similar critique. It's not just that arguments in favor of some intended conclusion fail to succeed... it's that there hardly seems to be anything approximating any real argument at all. Now you could respond by trying to shore up support for any one of their disjointed claims yourself, but then this would be exceeding the topic of your post and missing my point: The quality of one's writing in favor of some view is going to depend on the substance of its support -- not on how flamboyantly one can paint their opponents as intellectually inferior. My own suspicions are that the more one relies on that kind of critique, the less likely it is that they really have a case to stand on anyway. Pedro, you have the motivation to do good work, but I’d encourage you to avoid reducing the quality of your writing by succumbing to the temptation to write like some of your blogger heroes. Perhaps more time can be devoted instead to showing just how theism is supposedly “stupid”. What is appalling is not so much the hubris with which some atheologian writers make their claims (as unnecessary such remarks are). But for all such confidence, it is surprising just how empty much of it is of any substantive support — things are simply stated, relying on assumption and subcultural prejudice to carry their conclusions for them. For such atheistic writers, argument is apparently not necessary.

Take your first excerpt as an example. There is absolutely nothing contained therein which compels the reader to adopt the same assumptions the writer employs to make his point. Theists of other traditions than Islam as well as atheists must do more to show just how such beliefs are formally irrational, whether they be internally inconsistent, or perhaps based on factual error… Otherwise, it seems there is no real substantive objection to engage. The piece amounts to an opinion article, which hardly compels anyone not already convinced of what is said to change their minds.

Or take the second excerpt. George W. Bush is said to be unintelligent — less intelligent, in fact, than the average Christian. Now I’m eager to read just how the writer came to determine that. Unfortunately, he doesn’t take the time to indulge our curiosity. Even if he had, it’s not clear what implications might such an autobiographical detail have for Theism. How does one man’s intellectual capacities prove or disprove the belief system in question? In fact, nothing else in that excerpt serves to support any of his points. Much of what is said seems unrelated or just thrown in there with some exaggerated editorializing (”..villagers who still believe Santa Claus is going to save them”?). This is grandstanding, and the only people I know could possibly appreciate that kind of writing are the atheists.

Other selected excerpts fall prey to similar critique. It’s not just that arguments in favor of some intended conclusion fail to succeed… it’s that there hardly seems to be anything approximating any real argument at all. Now you could respond by trying to shore up support for any one of their disjointed claims yourself, but then this would be exceeding the topic of your post and missing my point: The quality of one’s writing in favor of some view is going to depend on the substance of its support — not on how flamboyantly one can paint their opponents as intellectually inferior. My own suspicions are that the more one relies on that kind of critique, the less likely it is that they really have a case to stand on anyway.

]]> By: Micah http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6563 Micah Thu, 11 Jan 2007 18:11:00 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6563 I looked at the link provided. Most of the points don't apply to me (after all, although many people who are American may be war-mongerers, and being American may correlate to violence, that doesn't mean that I am violent or believe in war). But this point particularly is the opposite of my religious views: [quote post="194"]many Christians tend to believe that this world is Satan’s, that there’s no point to this life except as a “test” to see whether you go to heaven or hell, that there’s no reason to try, in any way, to make either the world, or your life, any better, since it’s not “the real thing” anyway. It’s certainly not all of them, but there are far too many Christians of the “take me, lord Jesus!” variety for it to be a coincidence.[/quote] Satan simply means "enemy", and the Satan the bible talks about is long gone. The bible says so, too. "Hell" is an English word, not a Jewish or Greek one. Jesus is not coming back to take us away. God is already here, and the whole point of Jesus' life was to teach people how to live and make the world a better place. Jesus stood up against religion, the concept of a priesthood or clergy, the use of religious buildings, the payment of religious taxes (tithes), listening to religious leaders for your beliefs, the concept that worshipping or obeying God had anything to do with religious ceremonies, etc. Jesus was trying to tear down any religious trappings, and leave only the individual's status as a being in the image of God. -micah http://emergentchristian.blogspot.com/ I looked at the link provided. Most of the points don’t apply to me (after all, although many people who are American may be war-mongerers, and being American may correlate to violence, that doesn’t mean that I am violent or believe in war). But this point particularly is the opposite of my religious views:

[quote post="194"]many Christians tend to believe that this world is Satan’s, that there’s no point to this life except as a “test” to see whether you go to heaven or hell, that there’s no reason to try, in any way, to make either the world, or your life, any better, since it’s not “the real thing” anyway. It’s certainly not all of them, but there are far too many Christians of the “take me, lord Jesus!” variety for it to be a coincidence.[/quote]

Satan simply means “enemy”, and the Satan the bible talks about is long gone. The bible says so, too.
“Hell” is an English word, not a Jewish or Greek one.
Jesus is not coming back to take us away. God is already here, and the whole point of Jesus’ life was to teach people how to live and make the world a better place.

Jesus stood up against religion, the concept of a priesthood or clergy, the use of religious buildings, the payment of religious taxes (tithes), listening to religious leaders for your beliefs, the concept that worshipping or obeying God had anything to do with religious ceremonies, etc.

Jesus was trying to tear down any religious trappings, and leave only the individual’s status as a being in the image of God.

-micah
http://emergentchristian.blogspot.com/

]]> By: Micah Redding http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6434 Micah Redding Wed, 10 Jan 2007 03:51:36 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6434 [quote comment="6351"]If I may, Micah, the dangers of religious belief IMHO include: - not thinking critically for yourself, thereby being easily manipulated - a tendency to highlight what divides us (religious beliefs) instead of what unites us (too many to list...). This leads to antagonizing the others (see how Islam mentions the house of Islam and the house of the infidels, or something like that, or the Christian crusades, ...) - wasted effort. People spend significant resources (time, money) in pursuits that are ultimately meaningless - why donate to the Church (any Church) instead of a charity that does meaningful work without imposing its morals?[/quote] Thanks for the comment, Fernando. If I may, 1) I set out to decide what was true, and did not stop at analyzing Buddhism, atheism of different strains, and Christianity of all types. I found the best and most logical from each of these, and held to that. I honestly can't claim to follow any religious leader or religious group or religious upbringing. I may be wrong on various points, but I certainly think critically and for myself. 2) I don't highlight the division between different strains of religious or non-religious belief; I hold that the most important thing is love, or altruistic enlightened self-interest, if you prefer. 3) I quite deliberately donate to no churches. -micah http://emergentchristian.blogspot.com/ [quote comment="6351"]If I may, Micah, the dangers of religious belief IMHO include:
- not thinking critically for yourself, thereby being easily manipulated
- a tendency to highlight what divides us (religious beliefs) instead of what unites us (too many to list…). This leads to antagonizing the others (see how Islam mentions the house of Islam and the house of the infidels, or something like that, or the Christian crusades, …)
- wasted effort. People spend significant resources (time, money) in pursuits that are ultimately meaningless - why donate to the Church (any Church) instead of a charity that does meaningful work without imposing its morals?[/quote]

Thanks for the comment, Fernando. If I may,

1) I set out to decide what was true, and did not stop at analyzing Buddhism, atheism of different strains, and Christianity of all types. I found the best and most logical from each of these, and held to that. I honestly can’t claim to follow any religious leader or religious group or religious upbringing. I may be wrong on various points, but I certainly think critically and for myself.

2) I don’t highlight the division between different strains of religious or non-religious belief; I hold that the most important thing is love, or altruistic enlightened self-interest, if you prefer.

3) I quite deliberately donate to no churches.

-micah
http://emergentchristian.blogspot.com/

]]> By: Zipi http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6433 Zipi Wed, 10 Jan 2007 03:28:09 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6433 Pedro, what you hear now is the sound of a new reader adding a bookmark to WotM. Pedro, what you hear now is the sound of a new reader adding a bookmark to WotM.

]]> By: Pedro Timóteo http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6419 Pedro Timóteo Tue, 09 Jan 2007 22:23:16 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6419 Thanks for the words of support, guys. :) And, Einsteinmonkey, thanks for posting the link I was going to post in reply to Micah. :) Thanks for the words of support, guys. :)

And, Einsteinmonkey, thanks for posting the link I was going to post in reply to Micah. :)

]]> By: The Old Git http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6415 The Old Git Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:02:22 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6415 Good post, Pedro, and I agree with your sentiments. Playing the 'You're being intolerant to my faith position' card is just another ploy used by religionists to attempt to silence voices of reason, and to stop anyone questioning their irrational faith and psychopathic delusions. And as for religionists demands that we respect their particular faith, or even more risible, all faiths, I am still awaiting anyone to give me a valid reason why I should. Delusional beliefs are not worthy of respect, and that's an end to it. And their so-called 'beliefs' are delusional, since no-one has ever been able to provide any credible empiric evidence that (a)their particular god(s) exist, or (b) that their god(s) are deserving of higher regard than anyone else's anthropomorphic monsters. Good post, Pedro, and I agree with your sentiments.

Playing the ‘You’re being intolerant to my faith position’ card is just another ploy used by religionists to attempt to silence voices of reason, and to stop anyone questioning their irrational faith and psychopathic delusions.

And as for religionists demands that we respect their particular faith, or even more risible, all faiths, I am still awaiting anyone to give me a valid reason why I should. Delusional beliefs are not worthy of respect, and that’s an end to it. And their so-called ‘beliefs’ are delusional, since no-one has ever been able to provide any credible empiric evidence that (a)their particular god(s) exist, or (b) that their god(s) are deserving of higher regard than anyone else’s anthropomorphic monsters.

]]> By: Kren http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6411 Kren Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:13:46 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6411 I say do it. There's nothing wrong with telling a murderer he's a murderer. I say do it.
There’s nothing wrong with telling a murderer he’s a murderer.

]]> By: mediumgeek http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6409 mediumgeek Tue, 09 Jan 2007 19:33:41 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6409 I have recently been through the same dilemna as you, realizing that I am sensoring myself to make sure I don't offend anyone. One of my "heart" issues is religion and all the evil it causes in the world. I don't believe in any higher Gods and I think it is extremely wrong that people get away with discriminating and doing evil deeds in the name of religion without us being allowed to critisize it. My New Year's resolution was to stop self-censoring myself. I have only recently found your blog and find it very interesting! I haven't been able to read that many of your entries but I am planning on it. A quick search in your archive showed me that you have already read End of Faith by Sam Harris. I recommend that you read the Pacifist chapter again. I read it right after I decided that I would stop censoring myself and it was an eye opener. After reading it I finally truly realized how important it is to not be silent. If you don't make it clear that you are against something you are really just agreeing with it. That being said, everything we said should be well thought out and we should be critical towards our own views. Every belief can quickly turn into a religion:). <a href="http://www.mediumgeek.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.mediumgeek.com</a> I have recently been through the same dilemna as you, realizing that I am sensoring myself to make sure I don’t offend anyone. One of my “heart” issues is religion and all the evil it causes in the world. I don’t believe in any higher Gods and I think it is extremely wrong that people get away with discriminating and doing evil deeds in the name of religion without us being allowed to critisize it. My New Year’s resolution was to stop self-censoring myself.

I have only recently found your blog and find it very interesting! I haven’t been able to read that many of your entries but I am planning on it. A quick search in your archive showed me that you have already read End of Faith by Sam Harris. I recommend that you read the Pacifist chapter again. I read it right after I decided that I would stop censoring myself and it was an eye opener. After reading it I finally truly realized how important it is to not be silent. If you don’t make it clear that you are against something you are really just agreeing with it.

That being said, everything we said should be well thought out and we should be critical towards our own views. Every belief can quickly turn into a religion:).

http://www.mediumgeek.com

]]> By: Einsteinmonkey http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6382 Einsteinmonkey Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:39:18 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6382 micah: http://www.wayofthemind.org/2006/11/14/religion-not-really-harmful/ micah: http://www.wayofthemind.org/2006/11/14/religion-not-really-harmful/

]]> By: Fernando Montenegro http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6351 Fernando Montenegro Tue, 09 Jan 2007 16:50:17 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6351 Ao contrario, é o som de alguém digitando para te dar os parabéns! (Portuguese translation from above: On the contrary! It is the sound of someone using the keyboard to congratulate you!) Absolutely loved the post. I think you are correct in your analysis and your frustration with "political/religious correctness" is quite well placed. If I may, Micah, the dangers of religious belief IMHO include: - not thinking critically for yourself, thereby being easily manipulated - a tendency to highlight what divides us (religious beliefs) instead of what unites us (too many to list...). This leads to antagonizing the others (see how Islam mentions the house of Islam and the house of the infidels, or something like that, or the Christian crusades, ...) - wasted effort. People spend significant resources (time, money) in pursuits that are ultimately meaningless - why donate to the Church (any Church) instead of a charity that does meaningful work without imposing its morals? Hope this helps. I rarely comment on blog posts, but this one was CERTAINLY worth it. Keep going Pedro! Abracos, Fernando Ao contrario, é o som de alguém digitando para te dar os parabéns!

(Portuguese translation from above: On the contrary! It is the sound of someone using the keyboard to congratulate you!)

Absolutely loved the post. I think you are correct in your analysis and your frustration with “political/religious correctness” is quite well placed.

If I may, Micah, the dangers of religious belief IMHO include:
- not thinking critically for yourself, thereby being easily manipulated
- a tendency to highlight what divides us (religious beliefs) instead of what unites us (too many to list…). This leads to antagonizing the others (see how Islam mentions the house of Islam and the house of the infidels, or something like that, or the Christian crusades, …)
- wasted effort. People spend significant resources (time, money) in pursuits that are ultimately meaningless - why donate to the Church (any Church) instead of a charity that does meaningful work without imposing its morals?

Hope this helps. I rarely comment on blog posts, but this one was CERTAINLY worth it. Keep going Pedro!

Abracos,
Fernando

]]> By: Micah Redding http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/comment-page-1/#comment-6343 Micah Redding Tue, 09 Jan 2007 15:45:12 +0000 http://www.wayofthemind.org/2007/01/09/self-censorship-and-the-fear-of-offending/#comment-6343 Hey Pedro, Interesting post. You've mentioned that religion is dangerous. No one is disputing the atrocities committed in the name of God. But what specifically are the dangers of religious belief that you are thinking about? Don't think me arrogant, but I would like to see how many of them apply to me. I think there are a lot of misguided religious beliefs, but I would question whether religious belief itself is problematic. Looking forward to it, -micah http://emergentchristian.blogspot.com/ Hey Pedro,

Interesting post. You’ve mentioned that religion is dangerous. No one is disputing the atrocities committed in the name of God. But what specifically are the dangers of religious belief that you are thinking about?

Don’t think me arrogant, but I would like to see how many of them apply to me. I think there are a lot of misguided religious beliefs, but I would question whether religious belief itself is problematic. Looking forward to it,

-micah
http://emergentchristian.blogspot.com/

]]>