tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post1344351471405579716..comments2023-10-26T22:06:11.166+11:00Comments on Metamagician3000: The Shook Distraction (3)Russell Blackfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-84607250456438628902010-09-29T01:32:42.461+10:002010-09-29T01:32:42.461+10:00What's so bizarre about such a partial defense...<i>What's so bizarre about such a partial defense?</i><br /><br />Nothing.<br /><br />Perhaps bizarre is too strong a word.<br /><br />De Dora's CFI position is prominently displayed at the top of his CFI blog along with CFI graphics and blurbs, presenting to the world a CFI imprimatur.<br /><br />Ron Lindsay expresses what he claims is his personal opinion on this blog article. I've only seen him comment on the articles by CFI staff when he is doing damage or spin control.<br /><br />Either these blogs are completely personal in which case why the need to weigh in claiming this or Lindsay knows full well that they represent the position of CFI in the minds of the audience no matter what obscure links to the CFI about pages say.<br /><br />To claim that when he comments on a CFI staff blogs it is strictly his personal opinion is simply not true, he is president and CEO of CFI and this can not be negated by the word "personal".<br /><br />This is the behaviour that I find, if not bizarre, at least contradictory. It makes me wonder what is going on internally at CFI and since I'm a member I have a vested interest in the money I freely give them being used in a manner that is consistent with their stated mission.steve oberskinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-14904658437064217002010-09-28T22:59:56.928+10:002010-09-28T22:59:56.928+10:00steve oberski: "No, this was when Lindsay com...steve oberski: "No, this was when Lindsay commented on De Dora's CFI blog article titled <a href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/the_problems_with_the_atheistic_approach_to_the_world" rel="nofollow">'The Problems With the Atheistic Approach to the World'</a>"<br /><br />You mean in comment #22, where Lindsay wrote, "My own (personal) view is that Michael makes a number of valid points. On the other hand, in places he tends to lump atheists together as though there were a monolithic bloc of atheists with specific, uniform positions on certain matters, including tactics to use when addressing religion"? What's so bizarre about such a partial defense?J. J. Ramseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00763792476799485687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-49917530739792437762010-09-28T14:22:23.430+10:002010-09-28T14:22:23.430+10:00"You mean where Lindsey dryly observed"
..."You mean where Lindsey dryly observed"<br /><br />No, this was when Lindsay commented on De Dora's CFI blog article titled 'The Problems With the Atheistic Approach to the World' (http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/the_problems_with_the_atheistic_approach_to_the_world/):<br /><br />"... the views expressed by the blogger are her or his own ..."<br /><br />My response was:<br /><br />"So is it just a coincidence that the president & CEO of CFI is making his (personal I assume) views known about an article expressing the personal views of another executive of CFI made on a blog that in no way represents the official position of CFI ?<br /><br />Is this a service you perform for all the personal CFI blogs ?"steve oberskinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-69680985464536858062010-09-28T11:36:37.304+10:002010-09-28T11:36:37.304+10:00"the bizarre defence of de Dora's ramblin..."the bizarre defence of de Dora's ramblings by Ron Lindsay"<br /><br />You mean where Lindsey <a href="http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/cfi_home_to_both_atheist_fundamentalists_and_religion-loving_wankers/" rel="nofollow">dryly observed</a>, "I find it remarkable that in the space of a few months, CFI is alleged to have been taken over by 'atheist fundamentalists' and then by those who are wishy-washy about religion. Was there a coup and then a counter-coup of which I was unaware? Both aspersions, of course, lack empirical support, and it is regrettable to see them being made by two learned individuals, Paul Kurtz and PZ Myers, who claim to base their beliefs on evidence"?J. J. Ramseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00763792476799485687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-82691878978482132432010-09-28T10:59:13.562+10:002010-09-28T10:59:13.562+10:00I think the comment about being outward-looking is...I think the comment about being outward-looking is correct and important.Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-68627073448665334212010-09-28T07:00:58.156+10:002010-09-28T07:00:58.156+10:00I like these three posts on "The Shook Distra...I like these three posts on "The Shook Distraction". They really say all that is to be said on the subject (until we hear more from Shook).<br /><br />I do think it's interesting that a lot of 'senior level' atheists seem more and more keen on distancing themselves from the public face of atheism that is DaDeHaHi. <br />All these new books and articles coming out will create a wide array of atheist opinions and lead to new discussions. It worries me though. Should we not be more outward-looking?setAD7https://www.blogger.com/profile/02501088408919498583noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-63320645104086716432010-09-28T04:12:36.163+10:002010-09-28T04:12:36.163+10:00"A poorly-thought-through, badly-worded artic...<i>"A poorly-thought-through, badly-worded article should not be enough to outweigh the enormously impressive programs that the CFI conducts, which depend on memberships and donations."</i><br /><br />This on its face sounds very reasonable.<br /><br />However, I suspect that those that will stop donating to CFI don't think it was <b>merely</b> a "poorly-thought-through, badly-worded article" but something far more insidious: a very public attack on an already marginalized group.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00949235143438711942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-86285886986133959882010-09-28T01:43:33.597+10:002010-09-28T01:43:33.597+10:00One badly worded article can have an immense cost ...<i>One badly worded article can have an immense cost in good will</i><br /><br />I agree that it would be intemperate to make a decision on CFI based on this one article.<br /><br />However this does not seem to be an isolated incident, what with the hiring of Mooney, the bizarre defence of de Dora's ramblings by Ron Lindsay and now the Shook Incident.steve oberskinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-49406547408218729002010-09-27T17:39:49.316+10:002010-09-27T17:39:49.316+10:00Edit - a typo corrected. Thanks to the person who ...Edit - a typo corrected. Thanks to the person who pointed it out to me.Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.com