tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post1137971982689145644..comments2023-10-26T22:06:11.166+11:00Comments on Metamagician3000: More rubbish about "shrill" atheists - this time in The Daily MailRussell Blackfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-54625925318908228422012-02-08T14:41:16.378+11:002012-02-08T14:41:16.378+11:00I think most religious tend to look at criticism o...I think most religious tend to look at criticism of their beliefs literally and their strident arguements as allegorical and not literal. This is same with their concept of Blasphemy.Rajeshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11221568412758703179noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-19434534788465750362012-02-03T10:41:36.264+11:002012-02-03T10:41:36.264+11:00Thanks, Richard - I'll draw attention to the t...Thanks, Richard - I'll draw attention to the thread on your site and to your comment there.Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-53846865733370258392012-02-03T00:53:18.209+11:002012-02-03T00:53:18.209+11:00This is pretty much what I meant. Here are the tw...This is pretty much what I meant. Here are the two insurmountable problems with the "shrill" label:<br /><br />"Shrill," when it comes to how a person sounds, is a subjective description, and not any objective proof of anything. <br /><br />Labeling someone "shrill" puts that person on the offensive, while dodging whatever question or point that they previously made (in, by your standards, "shrill" mode). A proclamation of "shrilliness" does not refute what was said. If a doctor tells you that you have cancer, but is "shrill" in doing so, does not magically mean you are actually cancer free.<br /><br />Likewise, nobody likes a nag, but simply complaining that someone is "nagging" you does not mean that there is no truth in what is being nagged about (a sink full of dirty dishes, etc.).<br /><br />We also seem to have been visited by Dawkins himself. I suppose it is authentic; at least his link goes to his website.James A. Castelli, Jr.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04131011935225138358noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-23621823443977431742012-02-02T23:07:29.635+11:002012-02-02T23:07:29.635+11:00Why do theist articles always refer to Richard Daw...Why do theist articles always refer to Richard Dawkins (and atheists in general) as 'shrill'. Shrill? There is nothing 'shrill' about Richard's voice at all. If you want to hear 'shrill', check out the preachers on GOD.TVGregoryCoolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08862479689089538731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-83635132872041228412012-02-02T19:49:12.357+11:002012-02-02T19:49:12.357+11:00We have a link at RD.net to this excellent piece b...We have a link at RD.net to this excellent piece by Russell, where I have posted an exposé of the Reverend George Pitcher's astonishing mendacity, especially about Christopher Hitchens: an unforgivable exploitation of the dead, along the lines of the notorious 'Lady Hope' legend about Darwin having a deathbed conversion.<br /><br />Here is my post<br />http://richarddawkins.net/articles/644782-more-rubbish-about-shrill-atheists-this-time-in-the-daily-mail/comments?page=3#comment_913412<br /><br />Richard DawkinsRichard Dawkinshttp://richarddawkins.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-90618630353791902882012-02-02T16:40:35.500+11:002012-02-02T16:40:35.500+11:00Anon ... check out anything Lewis says about athei...Anon ... check out anything Lewis says about atheism, naturalism, or homosexuality (in Mere Christianity or elsewhere).Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-58352078165097807142012-02-01T22:42:34.856+11:002012-02-01T22:42:34.856+11:00Mindful of C S Lewis's delightful stories of m...Mindful of C S Lewis's delightful stories of mysticism and fantasy of the likes of the Narnia Chronicles, such as 1. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (1950) 2. Prince Caspian (1951) 3. The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (1952) etc etc, the writer could not have wished for a better preparation and the opportunity presented to broaden his experience and insights into mythicism and the occultic, than through his personal and abiding relationship with the christian mythos. <br />Mere Christianity seems a somewhat dull story in comparison to his other works of fantasy.Papalintonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03818630173726146048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-52715778770819630192012-02-01T20:01:40.948+11:002012-02-01T20:01:40.948+11:00You're reading C.S. Lewis for the second time?...You're reading C.S. Lewis for the second time? My condolences.Inajirahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09461659024281537126noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-67616773260815517792012-02-01T14:53:56.213+11:002012-02-01T14:53:56.213+11:00The response known as "Blake's Law" ...The response known as "Blake's Law" on Pharyngula, "In any discussion of atheism (skepticism, etc.), the probability that someone will compare a vocal atheist to religious fundamentalists increases to one.", applies to this sort of nonsense. "Shrill" translates to "oh help me jebus, he's winning".BarryTNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-6424006204697072512012-02-01T06:31:40.880+11:002012-02-01T06:31:40.880+11:00If I might offer a response to this trite ubiquity...If I might offer a response to this trite ubiquity:<br /><br />"By 'shrill' do you mean factually incorrect or bereft of supporting evidence? No, you don't? Then what, sir or madam, is your point? That you don't like the sound of my voice, or my conclusions and opinions make you feel uncomfortable, especially when you are required or expected to supply a spontaneous rebuttal?"James A. Castelli, Jr.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04131011935225138358noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-14220183730349102472012-02-01T05:35:44.687+11:002012-02-01T05:35:44.687+11:00Thanks Russell. I was wondering if you could give ...Thanks Russell. I was wondering if you could give an example from <i>Mere Chrisitianity</i> of C.S. Lewis being "blunt, emotive, self-righteous, and downright snide." I've never noticed it but that is most likely because I read <i>Mere Chrisitianity</i> when I was an evangelical Christian. And C.S. Lewis was a much more thoughtful apologist than the usual bunch (though still wrong, of course!)<br /><br />devdasAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-33618915447551279382012-02-01T00:09:05.732+11:002012-02-01T00:09:05.732+11:00I like Tony's idea of 'Shrills'. Nice ...I like Tony's idea of 'Shrills'. Nice and snappy. But it might be lost on the religious who have the habit of taking things literally and will probably assume it an affirmation of their contention.Ron Murphyhttp://ronmurp.net/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-44367492623766522442012-02-01T00:05:38.496+11:002012-02-01T00:05:38.496+11:00Many of Dawkins critics obviously haven't read...Many of Dawkins critics obviously haven't read The God Delusion, in which he explicitly does not rule out some intelligent cause of the universe (Chapter 4: Why There <b>Almost</b> Certainly Is No God). And the Bus campaign he was associated with made it equally clear in saying there 'probably' is no God. The difference between Dawkins and Attenborough seems to be one of degree rather than of kind.<br /><br />Religious arguments are as full of holes as their holy books (or is it holey books), and are just as selective at reading criticisms.Ron Murphyhttp://ronmurp.net/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-1238580606942582422012-01-31T22:16:41.414+11:002012-01-31T22:16:41.414+11:00I think Scote has it with "uppity".
May...I think Scote has it with "uppity".<br /><br />Maybe we should take a leaf out of the black/gay playbook and start deliberately "acting up". <br /><br />"Atheists With Attitude"?<br />"Nation of Atheism"?<br /><br />Drop the "brights" tag and call ourselves "shrills"?Tony Lloydhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03740295390214409286noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-26806305026166395012012-01-31T20:03:19.713+11:002012-01-31T20:03:19.713+11:00I second the good Prof Dawkins. :D
BTW, last week...I second the good Prof Dawkins. :D<br /><br />BTW, last week my brother got me a ticket to the Global Atheist Convention in April as a birthday gift. Very much looking forward to seeing my intellectual heroes like Prof Dawkins in the flesh. Excitement!Darrick Limhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13791236823584001938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-29227378492457475662012-01-31T19:40:41.234+11:002012-01-31T19:40:41.234+11:00Nice piece, Russell, thank you. By the way, it is ...Nice piece, Russell, thank you. By the way, it is very encouraging to see how commenters are responding to Pitcher on the Daily Mail site.Richard Dawkinshttp://richarddawkins.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-20565666185211240982012-01-31T13:20:54.333+11:002012-01-31T13:20:54.333+11:00I wonder if they will add "uppity" to th...I wonder if they will add "uppity" to the list of adjectives used to describe atheists? Because that is, IMO, what they mean.Scotenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-83450278702443213792012-01-31T12:23:55.794+11:002012-01-31T12:23:55.794+11:00Unlike some Christians, we are not calling for any...Unlike some Christians, we are not calling for anybody's murder, nor threatening them with an eternity of torture.Nick Andrewhttp://www.nick-andrew.net/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-47533609238438948292012-01-31T11:56:21.542+11:002012-01-31T11:56:21.542+11:00I made the mistake of reading Pitcher's piece,...I made the mistake of reading Pitcher's piece, and at the risk of seeming 'strident' found it to be a complete waste of ten minutes. I'm not especially familiar with Pitcher; but if this piece is at all representative of his 'thinking' I'm grateful to be ignorant of him and will work assiduously to remain so.<br /><br />Pete MoultonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-69504502625232928572012-01-31T09:59:17.980+11:002012-01-31T09:59:17.980+11:00I have always failed to understand why C. S. Lewis...I have always failed to understand why C. S. Lewis is regarded with such admiration. His arguments are shoddy and his fiction is abominable.Jeffrey Shallithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.com