tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post8961632072978474198..comments2023-10-26T22:06:11.166+11:00Comments on Metamagician3000: A multi-cultural dystopia?Russell Blackfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-9378268694961773222010-03-15T10:24:47.687+11:002010-03-15T10:24:47.687+11:00Amiable brief and this mail helped me alot in my c...Amiable brief and this mail helped me alot in my college assignement. Gratefulness you seeking your information.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-78482088540189392492010-03-10T19:52:09.289+11:002010-03-10T19:52:09.289+11:00This conversation is a welcome tiptoe towards the ...This conversation is a welcome tiptoe towards the kind of conversation "new" atheists are generally not inclined to have. For that, I compliment Tanir Edis.<br /><br />However, even after allowing for the limitations of the blog format (brevity and rapid turnaround), core issues remain at a very safe distance.<br /><br />A proper conversation would not spend much time on Locke & Mill. It <i>would</i> try to bring neuropsych & behavioural economics to bear on the emergent disenchantment with secular humanistic liberalism. It would talk about death-anxiety and social isolation and depression and open-ended moral systems. It would talk about social capital and trust networks, fitness displays, risk-aversion and prestige seeking and shaming. <br /><br />It would talk about neural development, parenting norms, and what public education is failing to achieve in rich countries. It would talk about professional scientists and how the need for daily bread, butter and cappuccino limits free thought to fashionable compartments.<br /><br />It would not make jokes about herding cats!<br /><br />It would talk about the inspiration-starvation, thin-skin, and self-righteous bickering of the vocal atheists and humanists of the present moment, the degree to which so many are deeply embedded in their own entertainment-oriented (escapist, novelty-seeking) cultures.<br /><br />It would talk about broad swaths of atheists in various socio-economic strata (including the simultaneously brilliant, rich <i>and</i> beautiful) who call zero attention to themselves as atheists, and for whom the problems of secularism are other people's problems.<br /><br />It would talk about ipods and video games; about porn, hook-up culture and slutty 8 year olds at beauty pageants.<br /><br />It would talk about 50 million pairs of eyeballs glued to late night talk shows, guffawing along to jokes attending to the "stupidity" of politicians.<br /><br />It would talk about key civilizational patterns: empire, the exuberance of expansion emerging from discovery of resources & exploitation techniques, and advances in military technology. It would talk about dominance & hierarchy, bureaucratic expansion and self-propagation, decadence, and resource wars (Jared Diamond stuff).<br /><br />It would explore the relationship between human rights (i.e., <i>aspirations</i>) and privileges necessarily earned at some cost.<br /><br />It would not shy away from certain features of the Stalin/Mao question. Or feminism. Or racial egalitarianism.<br /><br />Or the tension between the urge to be compassionate and the urge to survive.<br /><br />The discussion would not hide from questions about population control, nor group differences in rates of reproduction, crucial features of the natural world (which we pronounce we are part of almost daily in battle with creationists, but then whose implications we deny).<br /><br />Eugenics does <i>not</i> equal killing fields and gas chambers! Genetic screening, IVF, even choosing a neighborhood to live in and positioning your kid for certain universities and such are selective breeding strategies, a component of eugenics.<br /><br />I may have left some things out but in any event I don't see there would be a lot of political philosophy in there. Both Tanir Edis and Russell Blackford might consider sabbaticals of immersion in subjects that matter much more than philosophy.<br /><br />It ought to be at least plausible that if intellectuals who purport to be anti-fascist never talk about these unpleasant things, a vulnerability is created allowing the ascent of <i>very</i> thick-skinned people, people who will be eager to face these problems, and who won't be very Lincoln-like.<br /><br />Lisa Bauer: My compliments for an interesting historically-grounded post (although I think you're wrong about some very important matters).Neil Schippernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-79270699145116735072010-03-10T03:33:20.494+11:002010-03-10T03:33:20.494+11:00As an atheistic humanist of Jewish descent, living...As an atheistic humanist of Jewish descent, living in the state of Israel, I live under religious Orthodox Jewish courts when it comes to marriage and divorce, and some other issues. I can attest from personal experience that this is not respectful of my rights as an individual - I was forced to marry abroad so as to avoid a religious marriage ceremony, which was the only other option to get (legally) married. I'm also not allowed to do other things, like work on a Sabbath, based on this group affiliation. I don't want to belong to that group, to be under that group's laws. The multicultural system is a system of oppression - in this case, religious oppression.יאיר רזקhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15798134654972572485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-88285512562020187332010-03-10T01:20:25.835+11:002010-03-10T01:20:25.835+11:00Thank you Russell, Lisa and Ophelia. You have put ...Thank you Russell, Lisa and Ophelia. You have put modern liberal secularism into clear definition. You have made it easier to support. Taner Edis is off-base on thisNewEnglandBobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07190715223856189053noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-54616083450359208602010-03-09T22:09:05.756+11:002010-03-09T22:09:05.756+11:00I find Taner's post unfathomable, frankly! He ...I find Taner's post unfathomable, frankly! He says:<br /><br />"In a multicultural environment where it is important for groups to maintain respect as a precondition of being legitimate and effective political participants, speech that is perceived as disrespectful will be problematic."<br /><br />This is entirely self-defeating, surely? These cultures are often antithetical to each other, so their very doctrines are disrespectful of other cultures, necessarily. <br /><br />But does Taner thinks it's non-believers *only* who say disrespectful things? How so?<br /><br />"Speech that seems a mere exercise of individual liberty to a liberal secularist can easily be seen as unhelpful as best, the equivalent of speech inciting violence at worst."<br /><br />So theists must be quiet too?Mark Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04982524614308121228noreply@blogger.com