ProfessionalTeabagger Posted October 20, 2014 Posted October 20, 2014 I'm a fan of Matt Dillahunty and this group of atheists in general. Here they try to take on anarchist arguments and seem to accept fallacies which they would never accept coming from a theist. http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/54225364 This is from the 20 oct 2014 show and the conversation about government starts around 38:30 mins.
Wuzzums Posted October 20, 2014 Posted October 20, 2014 As an atheist I can safely say that atheist does not mean smart. The fact that people get one thing right it does not mean that they get everything right. Smart people are usually atheists. I'll call myself an atheist, this way people will assume I'm also smart. Nerds are seen as cool in popular TV shows. I'll call myself a nerd, this way people will see how cool I am. X celebrity does X thing. I'll do X thing also, this way people will assume I'm just like X celebrity. Intellectuals use special jargon. I'll use my own special jargon too, this way others will see me as an intellectual. Popular tv hosts are liberals. I'll call myself a liberal too so people will laugh at my jokes. Fit people go to the gym. I'll go to the gym too, this way people will know how fit I am. You can go on and on. Just look whether people use a method and/or principle to arrive at conclusions. If not then you might as well debate a parrot. 3
J-William Posted October 20, 2014 Posted October 20, 2014 I'm a fan of Matt Dillahunty and this group of atheists in general. Here they try to take on anarchist arguments and seem to accept fallacies which they would never accept coming from a This is from the 20 oct 2014 show and the conversation about government starts around 38:30 mins.I used to listen back before 2006 or so (gee that was long ago...) and I'd always cringe when the topic of economics or government came up. As an objectivist/libertarian and atheist there wasn't much available in podcasts before FDR. So I took what I could get. It got real boring the hundredth time I heard a caller telling them they can't prove a negative. I'm really surprised Dillahunty is still going, before him the host apparently changed every few years. As for philosophical rigor, they don't have it and never have. You should hear them talk about Ayn Rand, it's just sneering and insinuation that Rand is popular with teenagers as far as the eye can see.
Pepin Posted October 20, 2014 Posted October 20, 2014 Like with religion, politics had more to do with relationships than it had to do with its contents. Taking stances outside of the liberal norm will result in a lot of personal trouble, especially for intellectual figures. Thinking critically about government in non-liberal contexts likely to invite mass criticism and ostracism. Unconsciously, the person is aware that every smear tactic will be applied to them if they for say question public education, or welfare. Memes such as "if you are against welfare you hate the poor" do not replicate so well due to being true, but rather because the statement creates causes a greater in group resilience. To make the case, the statement does not spread to those who are not of liberal persuasion or to those who are not within the liberal community, but rather it spreads among already entrenched liberal social groups. I don't doubt that part of its intention is a pseudo argument against those with different beliefs, but the primary intention is to inform those within the liberal group that deviating from such a belief will be interpreted as hating poor people and will of course result in ostracism from that group. Though the above may sound strange due to my poor wording, this is a feature of most religions. The memes which cause religious groups to maintain followers are often the ones that demonize the outgroup. The ingroup is seen as moral, while the outgroup is seen as sinners. For someone to contemplate leaving such a religion involves the acknowledgement that it will be seen by the ingroup as falling into sin, as opposed to any rational conclusion. 1
dsayers Posted October 20, 2014 Posted October 20, 2014 Just look whether people use a method and/or principle to arrive at conclusions. Exactly. If they didn't arrive at atheism by way of a principled adherence to reality, it's no surprise that they could also come to a conclusion in opposition of it.
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted October 20, 2014 Author Posted October 20, 2014 Check out this playlist from Shane Killian: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSPi1JFx4_-H7dEU9enhqWPWoFX9rM7AW I think it may be a good idea if we more actively engage the atheist movement. Much of that movement involves advocating increases in state power. Thousands of new atheists are created every day and most of them are going straight to the left. I was one of them and I'm glad I stumbled upon Stef otherwise I may still be one.
Wuzzums Posted October 21, 2014 Posted October 21, 2014 Check out this playlist from Shane Killian: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSPi1JFx4_-H7dEU9enhqWPWoFX9rM7AW I think it may be a good idea if we more actively engage the atheist movement. Much of that movement involves advocating increases in state power. Thousands of new atheists are created every day and most of them are going straight to the left. I was one of them and I'm glad I stumbled upon Stef otherwise I may still be one. Destroying religion, specifically christianity, is one step in communist indoctrination. The atheist community does not offer a solution to religion, it offers an alternative. 1
Recommended Posts