The Heathen Hub

A community where people can talk about atheism, religion, science, humanism, evolution, politics, Creationism, literature, reason, rational enquiry, logic, cooking, reading, travel and life.

Spacer
To select different styles:

Spacer Go Back   The Heathen Hub   >  General   >  Towards a moderate, middle-ground in the atheist movement
Reload this Page Fincke and Vacula on Feminism and Secularism
Spacer

Spacer   Spacer

Tags: , , , ,

Reply

Fincke and Vacula on Feminism and Secularism

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-Jun-2013, 01:49 AM (01:49)     1        46897
D4M10N
Stochastic Counterinsurgent
 


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 294
Default Fincke and Vacula on Feminism and Secularism

I assume that a few of you guys have had the chance to see this one by now:


Your thoughts?
D4M10N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-Jun-2013, 02:15 AM (02:15)     2        46899
D4M10N
Stochastic Counterinsurgent
 


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 294
Default

Justin,

If the secular arguments for any given systemic injustice are few in number, not particularly persuasive to secular people, and not widely supported by secular people, while at the same time the faith-based arguments for the same injustice are numerous, highly persuasive to people of faith, and widely supported by them, does it follow that secular people have a moral duty to help dispel that particular injustice (along with dispelling theism) because of our epistemic privilege with respect to that particular issue?

Put another way, what exactly is the point in freeing minds of theism if we aren't also helping them become more ethical people in the process?
D4M10N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-Jun-2013, 02:27 AM (02:27)     3        46900
EdwardGemmer
Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 30
Default

I can't wait to hear Justin speak in the next one.
EdwardGemmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-Jun-2013, 03:38 AM (03:38)     4        46903
Notung
Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 95
Default

Yeah the questions were all one-way, though I couldn't really find much to disagree with from what Dan said. Justin (if you're reading this) - do you understand how you're mis-using the term 'consistent'? Two things are consistent iff they aren't inconsistent (i.e. they don't contradict each other). I see no reason to think feminism and atheism are inconsistent.

The danger is that people may think you're arguing that they are inconsistent - so if I were you I'd try to clarify this point.
Notung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-Jun-2013, 04:33 AM (04:33)     5        46904
D4M10N
Stochastic Counterinsurgent
 


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 294
Default

I couldn't find much to disagree from Dan either. Part of the problem, I think, is that Dan brought specific propositions to the table that he was hoping to establish about the state of the community, whereas Justin mostly brought a sort of generalized skepticism, e.g. "What about the Asians?"

Justin, if you are reading this, what exactly were you hoping to establish? What propositions did you bring to the table that you would affirm and Dan would negate?
D4M10N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-Jun-2013, 04:47 AM (04:47)     6        46906
Submariner USN
Get Some Time
 
Submariner USN's Avatar
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 91
Default

It seemed to me that Dan was espousing a different "brand" of feminism than what we are seeing in practice from the FTB/SkepChick movers and shakers.

Dan was it seemed arguing equity feminism, something that even moderate MRA's don't find objectionable. That does not seem to be the feminism being practiced "in the wild" so to speak.

A refresher for the various "brands" of feminism :

http://sparkcharts.sparknotes.com/wo...s/section4.php
__________________
Love is that condition in which one person's happiness is essential to your own.-Heinlein
Submariner USN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-Jun-2013, 01:21 PM (13:21)     7        46914
EdwardGemmer
Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 30
Default

The issue though isn't really about the ideas as much as demonizing everyone who doesn't automatically agree with the ideas.
EdwardGemmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-Jun-2013, 03:53 PM (15:53)     8        46921
D4M10N
Stochastic Counterinsurgent
 


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 294
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardGemmer View Post
The issue though isn't really about the ideas as much as demonizing everyone who doesn't automatically agree with the ideas.
Which is part of why I'm trying to refocus the conversation on the ideas themselves, trying to suss out where the true points of disagreement really are.
D4M10N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-Jun-2013, 05:37 PM (17:37)     9        46927
EdwardGemmer
Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D4M10N View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardGemmer View Post
The issue though isn't really about the ideas as much as demonizing everyone who doesn't automatically agree with the ideas.
Which is part of why I'm trying to refocus the conversation on the ideas themselves, trying to suss out where the true points of disagreement really are.
I think that would be a good area - Vacula is often called anti-woman, as have many people. A discussion on what Vacula has done that is specifically "anti-woman" and why might be interesting.
EdwardGemmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-Jun-2013, 11:25 PM (23:25)     10        46978
EdwardGemmer
Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 30
Default

Another topic that might be interesting is the definition of a hate site. The Slymepit gets called a hate site, but is the "hate" from there even approaching the hate from a site like Pharyngula? Is Pharyngula a hate site as well? How do we define and deal with hate sites?
EdwardGemmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-Jun-2013, 01:03 AM (01:03)     11        46988
EdwardGemmer
Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 30
Default

And btw we don't need to wait on this stuff. We have lots of smart people who could argue multiple points of view. I feel strongly that part of being a skeptic is promoting critical thinking and looking at alternative points of view, so I'm sure we could pretend to be skepchicks for a day and argue something we don't necessarily believe.
EdwardGemmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-Jun-2013, 04:09 PM (16:09)     12        47017
Outwest
Junior Member
 
Outwest's Avatar
 
member


Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Notung View Post
Yeah the questions were all one-way, though I couldn't really find much to disagree with from what Dan said. Justin (if you're reading this) - do you understand how you're mis-using the term 'consistent'? Two things are consistent iff they aren't inconsistent (i.e. they don't contradict each other). I see no reason to think feminism and atheism are inconsistent.

The danger is that people may think you're arguing that they are inconsistent - so if I were you I'd try to clarify this point.
This one, you're going to have to explain to me. For me, any "ism" is an ideology (Liberalism, Conservatism, Feminsim, etc.). So how is an ideology and Atheism not inconsistent?
Outwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-Jun-2013, 04:46 PM (16:46)     13        47019
D4M10N
Stochastic Counterinsurgent
 


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 294
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardGemmer View Post
I feel strongly that part of being a skeptic is promoting critical thinking and looking at alternative points of view, so I'm sure we could pretend to be skepchicks for a day and argue something we don't necessarily believe.
Agreed! Anyone with a background in debate or moot court knows how to argue off-brief. It's an excellent excercise, and often mind-expanding.

Oh and welcome to the Hub, Outwest! Love your new avatar.

Last edited by D4M10N; 04-Jun-2013 at 04:51 PM (16:51).
D4M10N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-Jun-2013, 06:19 PM (18:19)     14        47023
Outwest
Junior Member
 
Outwest's Avatar
 
member


Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D4M10N View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardGemmer View Post
I feel strongly that part of being a skeptic is promoting critical thinking and looking at alternative points of view, so I'm sure we could pretend to be skepchicks for a day and argue something we don't necessarily believe.
Agreed! Anyone with a background in debate or moot court knows how to argue off-brief. It's an excellent excercise, and often mind-expanding.

Oh and welcome to the Hub, Outwest! Love your new avatar.
Thanks. Just want to see what's going on here. My new avatar is my reaction to some of the things going on in the "community".
Outwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Jun-2013, 12:45 AM (00:45)     15        47037
EdwardGemmer
Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D4M10N View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardGemmer View Post
I feel strongly that part of being a skeptic is promoting critical thinking and looking at alternative points of view, so I'm sure we could pretend to be skepchicks for a day and argue something we don't necessarily believe.
Agreed! Anyone with a background in debate or moot court knows how to argue off-brief. It's an excellent excercise, and often mind-expanding.

Oh and welcome to the Hub, Outwest! Love your new avatar.
We should get on it. It could be like Iron Chef.

VACULA v. REINHARDT.

Secret topic: ARE WOMEN DESTROYING THE UNIVERSE

This could actually be a lot of fun. I'm up for it. Who else?
EdwardGemmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Jun-2013, 03:07 PM (15:07)     16        47058
Notung
Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 95
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardGemmer View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by D4M10N View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardGemmer View Post
I feel strongly that part of being a skeptic is promoting critical thinking and looking at alternative points of view, so I'm sure we could pretend to be skepchicks for a day and argue something we don't necessarily believe.
Agreed! Anyone with a background in debate or moot court knows how to argue off-brief. It's an excellent excercise, and often mind-expanding.

Oh and welcome to the Hub, Outwest! Love your new avatar.
We should get on it. It could be like Iron Chef.

VACULA v. REINHARDT.

Secret topic: ARE WOMEN DESTROYING THE UNIVERSE

This could actually be a lot of fun. I'm up for it. Who else?
I'll join team SJW!
Notung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Jun-2013, 03:08 PM (15:08)     17        47059
Notung
Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 95
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outwest View Post
This one, you're going to have to explain to me. For me, any "ism" is an ideology (Liberalism, Conservatism, Feminsim, etc.). So how is an ideology and Atheism not inconsistent?
Well, where's the inconsistency with atheism? I can't see it in any of those three ideologies.
Notung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-Jun-2013, 05:54 PM (17:54)     18        47118
alicat
faithless and unreasonable
 
member


Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 586
Default

I didn't watch it all, seemed like an hour of saying the same thing. Dan wants everyone to think the same thing and unite the community, Justin is saying atheism doesn't necessarily imply feminism or other ideologies. I like Justin, groupthink is probably the real culprit for a lot of problems blamed on religion.

Maybe it's semantics, replace "doesn't necessarily imply" with "in inconsistent with."

Last edited by alicat; 06-Jun-2013 at 05:56 PM (17:56). Reason: semantics
alicat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-Jun-2013, 05:25 PM (17:25)     19        47167
D4M10N
Stochastic Counterinsurgent
 


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 294
Default

I'm highly confident that Dan has never, ever, anywhere, at any time, expressed a desire for "everyone to think the same thing" on any contentious issue, even though he does forcefully argue for his own position.

His civility pledge in actually goes on in several places about how disagreement should be a positive and constructive excercise. Here is one snippet therefrom:

Quote:
I will always seek to maintain positive rapport with those who disagree with me as much as they enable. I will focus my criticisms on people’s ideas first and only if necessary criticize their attitudes, behaviors, or apparent character. I will not demean them fundamentally as a person. I will not uncharitably and hastily leap from specific bad thoughts, attitudes, or actions to wholesale disparagements of their entire character until there is overwhelming evidence that I am dealing with a fundamentally immoral person.
Those do not sound to me like the words of someone who hopes to enforce ideological conformity.
D4M10N is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-Jun-2013, 09:01 PM (21:01)     20        47174
alicat
faithless and unreasonable
 
member


Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 586
Default

Never be critical of anyone until you have first walked a mile in their shoes.
That way..
if they don't like what you have to say..
they are a mile away..
and not wearing any shoes.
alicat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-Jun-2013, 06:24 AM (06:24)     21        47258
birdterrifier
Junior Member
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 18
Default

Is that a Jack Handey, alicat?
birdterrifier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-Jun-2013, 04:39 PM (16:39)     22        47269
alicat
faithless and unreasonable
 
member


Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by birdterrifier View Post
Is that a Jack Handey, alicat?
Sounds probable, I have a Swiss cheese mind and don't always remember where things come from
alicat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-Jun-2013, 12:29 AM (00:29)     23        47283
DianeBruce
Not a geek.. Nope. Not me.
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D4M10N View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardGemmer View Post
I feel strongly that part of being a skeptic is promoting critical thinking and looking at alternative points of view, so I'm sure we could pretend to be skepchicks for a day and argue something we don't necessarily believe.
Agreed! Anyone with a background in debate or moot court knows how to argue off-brief. It's an excellent excercise, and often mind-expanding.

Oh and welcome to the Hub, Outwest! Love your new avatar.
I tweeted something like that in May

Diane Bruce @Dianora_1
If one cannot entertain another's position unemotionally without rancour, you ar
e no sceptic.
09:10 PM - 29 May 13

It is indeed good exercise.
DianeBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-Jun-2013, 12:38 AM (00:38)     24        47284
DianeBruce
Not a geek.. Nope. Not me.
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alicat View Post
I didn't watch it all, seemed like an hour of saying the same thing. Dan wants everyone to think the same thing and unite the community, Justin is saying atheism doesn't necessarily imply feminism or other ideologies. I like Justin, groupthink is probably the real culprit for a lot of problems blamed on religion.

Maybe it's semantics, replace "doesn't necessarily imply" with "in inconsistent with."
If you think in terms of scepticism instead of atheism, it makes more sense to me. I'm sceptical and arrived at atheism from that direction. Being sceptical also led me to equity feminism.

P = scepticism
Q = atheism
R = feminism

P->Q
P->R

but P->Q->R is clearly wrong.

I think Dan is conflating atheism with scepticism.
DianeBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-Jun-2013, 01:24 AM (01:24)     25        47285
theArmchairSkeptic
Junior Member
 
member


Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: California, USA
Posts: 18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DianeBruce View Post
I think Dan is conflating atheism with scepticism.
If so, he's not the only one... perhaps that would make another good discussion topic here?
theArmchairSkeptic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-Jun-2013, 01:48 AM (01:48)     26        47286
DianeBruce
Not a geek.. Nope. Not me.
 
member


Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theArmchairSkeptic View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by DianeBruce View Post
I think Dan is conflating atheism with scepticism.
If so, he's not the only one... perhaps that would make another good discussion topic here?
It did not help one little bit when PZ came out with his screed against "dictionary atheist".
DianeBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-Jun-2013, 03:51 AM (03:51)     27        47287
alicat
faithless and unreasonable
 
member


Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 586
Default

Sure P, Q and R will be differently weighted for each individual, and one or more may be nonexistent for some. Then to visualize all the people together maybe Venn diagrams. Atheism and skepticism will not completely overlap. Disclaimer: I don't understand what the hell the group of new members mean in a lot of these posts as far as terminology and abbreviations and general references. I think skepticism in this thread approximates ontological naturalism which is a belief that things can addressed through reason and science and judged to be true or not true. I am skeptical of this belief. First, I think it leads people to defer to experts to analyze things instead of developing tools to think about ethics. We don't need advanced degrees in social sciences to learn how to act ethically and virtuously. Reason and science are great tools but developments of dichotomies like confirm deny, prove disprove lead to rigidity and even dogma. Ethics always has a subjective quality, prescriptions and lists of rules don't adjust to the situation and evolve with changing times. Ethics also is going to change across cultural groups, so we need a fluid way of understanding. Even if studies and analysis could be done it's impossible to take time to that with every situation so the paradigm should be flexible. Perceptions of truth are going to vary somewhat among a community, statistics and research might show some trends, but each individual is actually a case study

A lot of these discussion are based on ideas of Abrahamic religions. I might put some variations of Eastern religions in the atheist circle on the Venn diagram. They might consider spirits as part of earthly phenomena, but they're not necessarily seen as important in some branches of Buddhism and there are no creator gods. Hindu concept of Brahman can be fairly pantheistic, basically that all things are one. So ontological naturalist world view and Islam are pretty similar in the belief that things exist and judgements can be made about them according to some criteria, rather than that things are illusions and don't actually exist.
alicat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-Jun-2013, 07:03 PM (19:03)     28        47293
Outwest
Junior Member
 
Outwest's Avatar
 
member


Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Notung View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outwest View Post
This one, you're going to have to explain to me. For me, any "ism" is an ideology (Liberalism, Conservatism, Feminsim, etc.). So how is an ideology and Atheism not inconsistent?
Well, where's the inconsistency with atheism? I can't see it in any of those three ideologies.
I was thinking of this
Outwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-Jun-2013, 02:30 PM (14:30)     29        47315
alicat
faithless and unreasonable
 
member


Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alicat View Post

A lot of these discussion are based on ideas of Abrahamic religions. I might put some variations of Eastern religions in the atheist circle on the Venn diagram. They might consider spirits as part of earthly phenomena, but they're not necessarily seen as important in some branches of Buddhism and there are no creator gods. Hindu concept of Brahman can be fairly pantheistic, basically that all things are one. So ontological naturalist world view and Islam are pretty similar in the belief that things exist and judgements can be made about them according to some criteria, rather than that things are illusions and don't actually exist.
"As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such." Max Planck, Nobel laureate

So, Christians might just believe in one more thing that actually does not exist than materialists.

In some ways I find the theistic view more open minded in that people seem to accept the idea of mystery and things beyond understanding of human brain and senses.
alicat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-Jun-2013, 05:40 PM (17:40)     30        47330
D4M10N
Stochastic Counterinsurgent
 


Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 294
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alicat View Post
"As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such." Max Planck
Throw a shoe at him, see if he ducks.
D4M10N is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:04 PM (14:04).

       

Credits and thanks:
Basic Style design: Design By: Miner Skinz.com
(much altered by Gurdur)

For smilies:

Koloboks, including Aiwan, ViShenk, Just Cuz, Laie, Connie, snoozer, Viannen,
and especially Mother Goose too.
KitKatty. and PederDingo, and phantompanther.

For help, coding, and/or modifications:

Different people at vBulletin.com, and a whole lot of people -- too many to be individually named, sorry -- at vBulletin.org

For artwork, avatars, backgrounds and so on:

KitKatty, and verte, and britpoplass


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright is asserted for the Heathen Hub itself and for its owner by its owner, from 2008 onwards. Copyright of individual posts remains the property of the original poster, however by posting on the Hub the poster grants the Hub the rights to host and present the posted messages for perpetuity. The Hub is in no way responsible for opinions or messages posted in any way on the Hub by its members. Please also see this here. Copyright of individual icons and other graphics, as for individual vBulletin styles, remains the property of the original owner/creator. Copyright for the vBulletin software itself, and the vBulletin Blogs software, remains with Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd, as in the copyright notice above.
Welcome to a place to talk about atheism, religion, science, humanism, evolution, politics, Creationism, literature, reason, rational inquiry, logic, cooking, reading, and travel - the Hub: a community for everyone.