Author Topic: Parable of the Shower Intro comments  (Read 15322 times)

Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Reply #25 on: September 21, 2011, 11:06:17 PM
The former is a condemnation, an attempt to mingle religion and secular law. The latter is just a statement of opinion informed by religion and an opening for conversation.

That said, Paladin - and I'm not disagreeing with you in general - it does often seem that the people who are most willing (eager? frantic?) to have conversations about their religious beliefs are in the former category. The latter tend not to need to push their beliefs onto others. (The former, of course, think the latter are weenies who don't really believe if they aren't constantly recruiting.)

From that, it's very, very easy to get the sense that the former kind of religious person is all there is, in every belief system. Very often, the most outspoken are also the most absolutist and if that's all you've encountered (and they may very well be all that many non-church-goers have encountered, for they - the non-church-goers - don't attend church to meet the moderate ones who don't push themselves on people), the impression you can get is that all religious people are constantly absolutist.

It's incorrect, but it's understandable, too.

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


NomadicScribe

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 53
Reply #26 on: September 22, 2011, 05:30:25 PM
Paladin, you make some good points. I don't agree with all of them, but I think that you state your case very well, and that you probably have more important things to do than argue with me. I'm not going to change my mind, and neither are you. But it is good to hear from some of the more intelligent and well-mannered religious people in the world.

For the purposes of this discussion, I'll go ahead and see it your way: If Dave meant no harm by his comments, and since in this case his ability to cause harm was virtually nonexistent, then he did no harm. It won't stop me from listening to Escape Artists podcasts, and it didn't offend me. And if it offended someone else enough to stop them from listening, that's their problem.



ElectricPaladin

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1005
  • Holy Robot
    • Burning Zeppelin Experience
Reply #27 on: September 22, 2011, 05:47:21 PM
Paladin, you make some good points. I don't agree with all of them, but I think that you state your case very well...

Why, thank you.

...and that you probably have more important things to do than argue with me.

Yeah, you'd think so, wouldn't you. :-\.

Captain of the Burning Zeppelin Experience.

Help my kids get the educational supplies they need at my Donor's Choose page.


raetsel

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
    • MCL & Me
Reply #28 on: September 22, 2011, 07:49:02 PM

For that matter, if the existence of intolerant strains rendered a movement unsuited to public discourse, science would also be disqualified. I mean, have you ever read Dawkins or Hitchins? Totally intolerant, elitist, self-satisfied dicks. Potentially, also brilliant dicks, but dicks all the same.
.....
..... I firmly believe that the only way to conduct matters civilly is to behave civilly. It doesn't matter what you're talking about - civility is an absolute.

I think you rather undermine your argument by calling people  "Totally intolerant, elitist, self-satisfied dicks." and then say civility is an absolute.



ElectricPaladin

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1005
  • Holy Robot
    • Burning Zeppelin Experience
Reply #29 on: September 22, 2011, 07:54:42 PM

For that matter, if the existence of intolerant strains rendered a movement unsuited to public discourse, science would also be disqualified. I mean, have you ever read Dawkins or Hitchins? Totally intolerant, elitist, self-satisfied dicks. Potentially, also brilliant dicks, but dicks all the same.
.....
..... I firmly believe that the only way to conduct matters civilly is to behave civilly. It doesn't matter what you're talking about - civility is an absolute.

I think you rather undermine your argument by calling people  "Totally intolerant, elitist, self-satisfied dicks." and then say civility is an absolute.

That's probably true, but I'm not actually talking to Dawkins or Hitchins (at least as far as I know...). I think that preserves at least a few points.

Also, I never claimed to be perfect.

Anyway, I could easily restate my point as "some atheists like Dawkins and Hitchins are just as triumphalist as many religions." Were I being civil, that's what I would have written.

Captain of the Burning Zeppelin Experience.

Help my kids get the educational supplies they need at my Donor's Choose page.


Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #30 on: September 23, 2011, 08:55:22 AM
What amuses me about all this is someone took the time to follow the link to Mirrorshards in this thread and then go down the page clicking the "Yuck!" reaction multiple times for every story.  That'll teach me to be an evil anti-Mormon, I guess.



Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Reply #31 on: September 23, 2011, 01:55:22 PM
What amuses me about all this is someone took the time to follow the link to Mirrorshards in this thread and then go down the page clicking the "Yuck!" reaction multiple times for every story.  That'll teach me to be an evil anti-Mormon, I guess.

You can tell they came from here? Whoa, there, big brother... ;)

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


ElectricPaladin

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1005
  • Holy Robot
    • Burning Zeppelin Experience
Reply #32 on: September 23, 2011, 03:37:57 PM
What amuses me about all this is someone took the time to follow the link to Mirrorshards in this thread and then go down the page clicking the "Yuck!" reaction multiple times for every story.  That'll teach me to be an evil anti-Mormon, I guess.

You can tell they came from here? Whoa, there, big brother... ;)

Basic Blogger tools tells you that.

Captain of the Burning Zeppelin Experience.

Help my kids get the educational supplies they need at my Donor's Choose page.


Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #33 on: September 23, 2011, 10:12:35 PM
Got five hits from the EA forums yesterday, which I don't usually get, and my stats were about five or six hits above normal, and at the same time period all the "Yuck" clicks happened.  Sure, I don't know for sure 100%, but I think my conclusions are at least reasonable given the evidence at hand.



Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Reply #34 on: September 23, 2011, 10:46:53 PM
Fair enough.

I was just teasing - I figured it was something like that.

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


Scattercat

  • Caution:
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 4904
  • Amateur wordsmith
    • Mirrorshards
Reply #35 on: September 24, 2011, 03:35:35 AM
Also a leprechaun told me.



FireTurtle

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
Reply #36 on: September 24, 2011, 03:42:29 AM
 
Also a leprechaun told me.

Was it a Mormon leprechaun?
Or maybe a Quaker dwarf?
Or a Hindu fairy?
« Last Edit: September 24, 2011, 03:44:36 AM by FireTurtle »

“My imagination makes me human and makes me a fool; it gives me all the world and exiles me from it.”
Ursula K. LeGuin


ElectricPaladin

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1005
  • Holy Robot
    • Burning Zeppelin Experience
Reply #37 on: September 24, 2011, 06:30:30 AM
Also a leprechaun told me.

Was it a Mormon leprechaun?
Or maybe a Quaker dwarf?
Or a Hindu fairy?

Don't mention the lepechaun's religion!

Captain of the Burning Zeppelin Experience.

Help my kids get the educational supplies they need at my Donor's Choose page.


birdless

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
  • Five is right out.
Reply #38 on: September 27, 2011, 08:34:33 PM
…it does often seem that the people who are most willing (eager? frantic?) to have conversations about their religious beliefs are in the former category. The latter tend not to need to push their beliefs onto others. (The former, of course, think the latter are weenies who don't really believe if they aren't constantly recruiting.)

As one of the latter, Wilson's observation is generally correct (if not absolutely). See? I wasn't going to comment on this thread (which is normally one I would have definitely commented on, but after reading all the posts, I was just too tired). But I had to give some props to Fowlie on this statement.

But, for the record, I feel I know Dave well enough to defend him on this whole topic, insofar as his intention was not to slam Mormons. Whether the mention of OSC's particular brand of faith was necessary, I might say no, but he explained himself, so that's enough for me (not that I needed an explanation, but I sympathize with those who might care for one).

But apropos to this discussion, I have a question regarding this statement:
The only really civil way to conduct matters involving multiple faiths is to leave all faith-based matters completely off the table.
Why do believers in "There is no God" (note, I didn't say "unbelievers," because they do believe, just in the absence of rather than the presence of) feel theirs is the trump card? What about those of us who like these discussions? This sounds rhetorical, but I'm genuinely curious (okay…well, maybe there is a hint rhetoric).



ToooooMuchCoffeeMan

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 24
Reply #39 on: September 28, 2011, 01:29:10 PM
I've been listening to Escape Pod and Podcastle for quite some time, and until now I've been a free-rider. I just donated some money, solely because the apologists for bigotry on this thread annoyed the piss out of me.

Keep calling it like you see it, Dave.



Dave

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
    • I Can Bend Minds With My Spoon
Reply #40 on: September 28, 2011, 11:39:17 PM
This was highly amusing. And hooray for the return of Laurice White!

I am really tempted to get into the religious debate here... but I think I'll just let this one go.

*EDIT* Ack, sorry, this was supposed to go on the story comment thread- I must have confused the pages, my bad
« Last Edit: September 29, 2011, 12:06:52 AM by Dave »

-Dave (aka Nev the Deranged)


Wilson Fowlie

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1475
    • The Maple Leaf Singers
Reply #41 on: September 29, 2011, 11:03:15 PM
Nothing stopping you from copying your text, removing the post from here and reposting it over there...

"People commonly use the word 'procrastination' to describe what they do on the Internet. It seems to me too mild to describe what's happening as merely not-doing-work. We don't call it procrastination when someone gets drunk instead of working." - Paul Graham


Unblinking

  • Sir Postsalot
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 8729
    • Diabolical Plots
Reply #42 on: December 07, 2011, 02:37:42 PM
I've already commented on the story in the appropriate thread, so this will just be regarding the intro.

I don't think that Dave's comments were over the line.  He can call whatever he wants blasphemy, and his definition makes a lot of sense to me.  I wouldn't say it's a common definition, but maybe it should be.  It was clear to me that he was not bashing Mormonism in general, only complaining about the specifics of a single story by a famous author.  He told us the facts and gave his opinion of them.  No problem.

I can't say I agree at all with the commenter who said that the only way to be civil about religion in a mixed-religion environment is not to discuss it.  I don't agree with that at all.  For one thing, I as a single person could be described as a mixed-religion environment, and I'd hate to have to fight myself all the time.  For another, I've known and co-existed well with people of various religions with very little friction, even if I don't agree with some aspects (i.e., original sin, forbidding birth control in an overcrowded world, saying that Harry Potter is morally wrong when Lord of the Rings somehow isn't, etc...)

So I can't say that I really disagree with Dave, and I enjoy the religious discussion.  I keep forgetting Dave is a Quaker.  I think he's the only Quaker I've met--which is evidenced by the fact that when I hear that I just think of the guy on the Quaker Oats packaging.  I suspect it's not all that different from what I'm used to, though.  I was raised Lutheran, but of what I've seen of other branches of Christianity the differences to me are trivial--just slightly different rites and rituals and traditions but with the same underlying morals and stories.

But to me, the intro was not a great place for this discussion.  Although I think his reasoning for calling OSC's story blasphemous were well founded, and I don't have a problem with him saying it, I feel bad for the author of "The Parable of the Shower" having that in their intro.  In a discussion of religion where someone is called blasphemous, there's likely to be tempers and opinions involved.  Tempers and opinions are fine, as long as its kept from going into an all-out flame war, but in this case I suspect that it cost the author some listeners from their story, when the author wasn't even expressing an opinion but may have suffered a lower listenership because of it. 

Just my 2 cents.