Phil Plait - Don't be a dick

Well, let me make it clear that one doesn't start with ridicule. One starts with reason, rational argument and objective evidence. But then, what is one left to do with those like Buzsaw, ICANT, Faith or archaeologist, to whom facts and reason are completely foreign concepts? Perhaps. But when reason and evidence fail, at least ridicule is entertaining.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas JeffersonFor we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack ObamaWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- PhatIt has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

Much more so than the bashing of ones skull against a brick wall that is dealing with ignorance.....

---

Your god believes in Unicorns

Hi, Subbie. Okay, so I guess there is one metric.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

I fully understand that you meant that in jest, but I think it's an important point. We're never going to convince the True Believer, but there's a wide range of those whose beliefs are necessarily not as unshakable. The first step to reaching those people is engaging them, getting them to at least listen to what we have to say. If we are at least entertaining, that can get their attention. Then, if they start listening closer to the reasoning that goes along with the ridicule, and think about their beliefs, that's when we can begin to make progress.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas JeffersonFor we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack ObamaWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- PhatIt has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

There have been a few recent responses to Phil Plait. A comment by Phil Plait himself, responding to the responders;
Jerry Coyne thinks that Phil Plait is being too accomodationist, and note that Richard Dawkins is one of the commenters to that post.
Greg Laden tries a more balanced approach.

Of course, PZ had to chime in."There is a fair point being made, that there are multiple strategies that work to convince people to rethink bad ideas, and they don't all involve punching people in the faceand many of the best strategies do involve politely listening and criticizing. But I think the best ideas involve a combination of willingness to listen and politely engage, and a forthright core of assertiveness and confrontation tactical dickishness, if you want to call it that."
The Dick Delusion

Oops, I missed that one, probably because it is from before this thread was initiated. Thanks for bringing it up.Personally, I rather enjoy PZ's style. I tend to think of PZ as ridiculing religion when it is being ridiculous (which is often).

I'll never understand why people feel it's all right to be rude to others while it's never all right to be rude to them.It's entirely hypocritical.Respect goes both ways.

What would Jesus do?--Percy

Preach alot and tell elaborate parables while being a dick to the pharisees?

You've entirely missed the point. I, as an asshole, fully welcome criticism if I say something retarded. IF I do say something worthy of ridicule, I will take the verbal lashing like a man and rethink my position.The way I see it, we can't pander to dumbfuckery for the dumbfucks will feel as though they are correct in some fashion in that their quackery is garnering valid responses. One would imagine that if the dumb things you say get only brash responses, you may either shut your trap or change tact. Unless, of course, you are sadistic and enjoy the ridicule, a-la "ooh, I can spew idiotic drivel and lots of people will respond to me".

---

Your god believes in Unicorns

Braid a whip and run out the moneychangers?Not bring peace, but a sword?

I enjoy the comedy of it as well. However, I think we can all agree that while PZ is right on many things he can also be a dick, and unapologetically so. While Plait never named names I think we can all agree that he had PZ (or someone like PZ) in mind when he made those comments. PZ knows the buttons to push, and theists are all too willing to produce the reaction that PZ is looking for.

Hi, Percy. I generally think that question is a pretty good guide.But he would be crucified by the real dicks.

---

Have you ever been to an American wedding? Where's the vodka? Where's the marinated herring?!
-Gogol Bordello

Thanks for the link to Jerry Coyne's blog, which included the quote from Richard Dawkins. I think it's worth quoting a section of Richard Dawkins' comments here. I think he makes a very good point.Dawkins says: "Similarly, when I employ ridicule against the arguments of a young earth creationist, I am almost never trying to convert the YEC himself. That is probably a waste of time. I am trying to influence all the third parties listening in, or reading my books. I am amazed at Plait’s naivety in overlooking that and treating it as obvious that our goal is to convert the target of our ridicule. Ridicule may indeed annoy the target and cause him to dig his toes in. But our goal might very well be (in my case usually is) to influence third parties, sitting on the fence, or just not very well-informed about the issues. And to achieve that goal, ridicule can be very effective indeed."I entirely agree with that. If you're trying to convince a lot of fence sitters, it's no good saying that your opponent is making a very reasonable point if he's saying something ridiculous. If you can show that your opponent's position is utterly ridiculous, that is a perfectly valid way (possibly the very best way) of winning a debate. Edited by Jumped Up Chimpanzee, : The quote I've copied here from Dawkins is not his full statement, as I originally indicated, but a section of his statement.