Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Atheists control science
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


(4)
Message 62 of 124 (671543)
08-27-2012 6:38 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by marc9000
08-26-2012 6:45 PM


Re: Scientists control science
Interesting that marc900 should quote this;
quote:
Militant atheist is defined as one who is militantly opposed to theism, theists, and religion. Militant atheists have an extreme hostility towards religious theism that entails a desire to see religion suppressed by force. The label militant atheist tends to be used interchangeably with fundamentalist atheist, new atheist, and anti-theist.
Even more interesting that he should stop at that point... just before the article says this;
quote:
This definition of militant atheist is usually meant pejoratively because the label is typically applied to atheists who do not seek the forced suppression of religion or theism. Instead, religious apologists apply the label "militant" to atheists generally or at least any atheist that isn't quiet, meek, and obsequious.
I genuinely have no idea why marc9000 would think that this supports his case, nor can I comprehend why he would actually provide a link through to the web-page that proves that he is talking nonsense. Does he imagine that we are too lazy to check? Did he perhaps simply stop reading after he found the bit that he wanted? I cannot say.
What I can say is that just because "The label militant atheist tends to be used interchangeably with fundamentalist atheist, new atheist, and anti-theist." by theists who hate us and wish to misrepresent us, does not mean that all atheists, new atheists, atheists+, etc. are in fact militant atheists. In actual fact, I have never met a genuine militant atheist.
Anyway, we've already seen marc9000's definition of "atheist"; it is basically someone who fails to agree with marc9000 about religion and politics. That pretty much makes this entire thread a waste of time. Perhaps marc9000 should try again, only in English, as opposed to playing Humpty-Dumpty and changing words to mean whatever he wants them to mean.
Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by marc9000, posted 08-26-2012 6:45 PM marc9000 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by NoNukes, posted 08-27-2012 10:32 AM Granny Magda has replied
 Message 74 by Blue Jay, posted 08-27-2012 10:09 PM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied
 Message 75 by hooah212002, posted 08-28-2012 12:48 AM Granny Magda has seen this message but not replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 3.8


(3)
Message 70 of 124 (671555)
08-27-2012 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by NoNukes
08-27-2012 10:32 AM


Re: Scientists control science
Hi NoNukes,
I disagree that the thread is a waste of time. We are learning quite a bit about how marc9000 views things and I find his view point quite interesting.
In a clinical sense perhaps.
I think that marc9000 has already made his opinions clear; anyone who disagrees with him about science, politics or religion is an atheist and therefore wicked. This makes me an atheist, but it also makes Percy an atheist, it makes the Pope an atheist... Basically, it's just a palce-holder insult for anyone marc9000 disapproves of. He uses the term "liberal" in much the same way.
In the long run perhaps threads like this save time.
I doubt it. Tangle was the first to point it out; marc9000's title contains three words and he has chosen idiosyncratic definitions for all of them. That is not an approach that's likely to help clarify anything. It may appeal to marc9000 as a way to rationalise the cognitive dissonance arising from his rich fantasy life, but as actual communication, it's valueless.
I don't think creationists are actually lying when they quote mine. Marc9000 believes he has caught the author in an admissions of his true feelings.
Like I say, perhaps he's not deliberately lying, but certainly he is guilty of intellectual dishonesty. I mean, look at this, from the very page that marc9000 linked to;
quote:
My dictionary defines [militant] as "aggressive or vigorous, especially in support of a cause." But the word is used all too freely in the feebler sense of "holding or expressing views which are unpopular or which I don't like." Fore example, when Richard Dawkins is asked about this religious beliefs and replies "I'm an atheist, and i have no time for religion," he is at once accused by tabloid newspapers and other commentators of being a "militant atheist." So, if you find yourself writing this word, stop and think whether it has any clear meaning, or whether you are just using it as a swearword."
- R.L. Trask, Mind the gaffe: the Penguin guide to common errors in English
That was right there on the page he quoted from and yet he is doing precisely what this quote warns against. Whether he is lying or merely deluding himself, something is going wrong here.
And as for his absurd claim that by "atheist" he means "wicked person", I'm flat out calling that a lie. I think that marc9000 knows full well that he's equivocating there and he's doing it deliberately.
Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by NoNukes, posted 08-27-2012 10:32 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by NoNukes, posted 08-27-2012 2:55 PM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024