RE: Who are your favorite current Atheists?
March 20, 2015 at 1:06 pm
(This post was last modified: March 20, 2015 at 1:20 pm by Thumpalumpacus.)
(March 18, 2015 at 10:19 pm)Dystopia Wrote: I don't disapprove what the user you are replying to said - If I created a group just for an ideologically homogeneous demographic I would expect all members to be either a part of the same ideology or to abide by certain boundaries. Yes, ideas should be questioned, but if you go to a Christian forum to say that god doesn't exist they will rightfully ban you; if you go to a communist forum to say that capitalism is perfect, they will rightfully ban you; if you go to a music forum to say music sucks, they will rightfully ban you.
That's fine and well; they're happy with their cloisters and do not wish questioning. The issue arises when folks who behave in that manner present themselves as freethinkers. If youo're going to follow where rationality leads, you must have a vibrant discussion in order to determine which course is the most rational.
Stifling debate in the name of ideology is rarely a useful heuristic for arriving at a reasonable conclusion.
(March 18, 2015 at 10:19 pm)Dystopia Wrote: Yes, ideally everything should be up to question, but in human societies (and internet groups are somewhat similar to the former in structure) imperfection reigns. I noticed some people on A+ seem to be former victims of some kind of abuse and really want to make justice for the cause, so basically everyone is ideologically motivated.
I find the ingroup/outgroup dynamics of their behavior discomfiting.
(March 18, 2015 at 10:29 pm)abentwookie Wrote: Yeah, that was the point I was trying to make earlier. I joined a Feminist group for the purpose of supporting women's issues. I joined a liberal group because I supported their political views. I joined an Atheism group similar to Atheism Plus because I shared their values. I don't join a group unless I agree with their views. If you don't agree with the majority of members on certain issues, then it probably isn't the right group for you. It seems counterproductive to join one just to debate issues with them. That isn't why they exist, unless it happens to be a debate group of course.
What if you agree with the majority of their views, but think they are making a mistake on Issue X? What if they actually are making a mistake on that issue, but because of the requirement to not go against the grain, you cannot present a view or proposal which is possibly more useful?
This idea that you will always be able to find consensus in a group is chimerical, because people have different opinions on different issues, and the more issues your group intends to address, the more likely you are to have heterogeneous opinions inside your own group. Restricting the conversation to only those views approved by the leadership is certainly their right, at A+ -- but how much are they losing by requiring the membership to toe the ideological line?
Debate happens within every group of thinkers. Stifling it in the name of ideology is the act of valuing preachments above insights.
(March 19, 2015 at 4:59 pm)Delicate Wrote: It's too late. This is what atheism is, whether you like it or not.
Perhaps that's what your atheism means to you. As an American, I've had my fill of you're-with-me-or-against-me rhetoric for a while, thanks.
Also, the "disaster of religion" has been "impending" for quite a few millennia now. Why do you think it's taking so long getting here?
Flat claims bereft of support aren't very convincing.
