Atheist PZ Myers is ringmaster of the blog pharyngula. PZ has a distinct manner of presenting his anti-ecclesiastic thoughts: he doesn't edit them. Now PZ is fantasizing about killing priests. A news release from South America relates that a person went airborne using a large number of helium-filled party balloons (on purpose), but got lost from view and is now vanished. The person is a priest.
PZ could not restrain his glee that a priest is gone, and now he wishes that all priests were tied to balloons, and that he could take up an ultralight and a BB gun so he could shoot them all down.
PZ is iconic, sort of, in the Atheist world. He is recognizable as a cohort of Dawkins, and is one of the "new" atheists. When PZ squawks, his blog-band of emotional adolescents shriek with glee.
When it comes to Atheist ethics, PZ frequently lets the cat out of the bag. Tolerance is just not tolerable to PZ. He lets this darkness creep out of concealment frequently. Atheists claim the high ground, just because. Their ethic is more ethical than anyone else's, because after all they know how to invent one better than anyone else. But neither PZ's comments nor his ethics are new or different. They reach back to the French Revolutionary statement involving "strangling the last king with the entrails of the last priest".
Well, these are just comments, right? Just jokes. Well, not to the thousands butchered in the French days of terror. Or to the intellectual heirs of such hatred, or their victims. PZ seems to be one of those heirs. He projects hatred with nearly every post. And his followers wallow in it.
3 comments:
When it comes to Atheist ethics, PZ frequently lets the cat out of the bag. Tolerance is just not tolerable to PZ.
If you're right, then I'm one of the bigger fools on the planet, because I correspond with the guy, trust him with personal info and in general regard him as an ally when it comes to defending science education. As you may know, I was one of the winners of the 'Order of the Molly' on his blog for favored commenters, even though it's widely known that I am a theist. PZ has busted my chops a few times, but in general we have an understanding, that he can tolerate believers like me who are willing to work together against a common enemy if I can not go into high dungeon every time he makes a crack at the expense of some believer.
And I'm not sure what you mean about him being 'intolerant.' As I recall, you became disgusted with the tenor of discussion there, but no one banished you for having unpopular views. They just mocked the hell out of those who had them.
I certainly couldn't support the claim that PZ is intolerant based on my own experience.
(jokingly) Perhaps I am his token Christian?
Scott said,
"...no one banished you for having unpopular views. They just mocked the hell out of those who had them.
I certainly couldn't support the claim that PZ is intolerant based on my own experience."
Banishment is not the measurement of intolerance. After all, they need someone to mock. Mocking and jeering is a form of intolerance. It is at the most juvenile level. You are no threat to their worldview since you share their view, at least on the foundational issue of evolution. But see how you fare if you inject any of your contradictory beliefs, with any expectation of a rational discussion.
Mocking is the procedure of attempting to bring an opposing viewpoint or even race down below your level, without facing any strenuous calm factual discourse. Calm rational discourse is not tolerated because it works against the mocker, who is working inside a pack mentality. And a pack mentality does not welcome any challenges from outsiders (intolerance), so the pack very easily goes into a frenzy of irrational counter attack.
It is reminiscent of the old days in the South, where blacks were mocked by gangs of white youths. Resistant blacks were treated to a frenzy of violence. Violent speech is, well, violence ("the only good [fill in the blank] is a dead [fill it in again].")
What exactly had the priest done to PZ to cause PZ to want him dead? His crime was belong to a hated category. Hatred of categories is intolerance.
I don't think you are a token Christian, but you could test this by injecting any bit of Christian metaphysics into the conversation, and see what happens.
Surely you must admit that publishing your fantasies of killing all priests is not a sign of tolerance...?! Imagine for a moment what they would say if a priest somewhere published his fantasy of killing all atheists who believe in evolution. Would they scream intolerance? Of course they would.
How exactly would you describe this post? Is it tolerant of PZ's views, and particularly considering that you haven't even understood the post in question? He wasn't wishing that anyone would die. I'm afraid that I am going to have to put that down as a case of projection on your part. It was a dream; hoping for a day when there isn't a demand for priests, any longer -- you know, because religion has become far less popular than it is at present? Honestly. The subtlety of the post clearly went straight over your head. I wonder if there will be a display of tolerance as you apologize for projecting motives, based on your own mis-understanding? I won't hold my breath.
And unfortunately it seems that your own intolerance of people who you clearly enjoy mocking -- "When PZ squawks, his blog-band of emotional adolescents shriek with glee" -- has turned you in to a hypocrite, as well. It's not easy to be self-righteous, is it?
Does PZ sail close to the wind on occasions? Absolutely. As do many people. But, just like most things in life, it often requires you to dig just a little below the surface, which you clearly haven't done, to gain a true understanding. All that I can see is a parody of everything that you rail against, which is ironic.
Are there people on Pharyngula that go too far, at times? Once again, absolutely. But then, exactly how are you defining tolerance, here? As only the things that you personally find acceptable? That's not tolerance, by any definition. What about people who have been seriously affected by religion and need somewhere to vent, even if I wouldn't approve of their behavior, normally, and in all situations? I doubt that you would even care to find out. Tolerance is a far more complicated animal than you seem prepared to admit.
And you clearly have no grasp of the rhetorical weapon known as mockery, either. In my country -- Great Britain -- it has been used for centuries, and it has been highly effective in making sure that people don't take life too seriously. When a group or an individual demands extra layers of respect that are considered as undeserved, they are mocked for holding such a ridiculous position in a society that has to rub along, given its vast diversity. After all, they are displaying an intolerance of that diversity in the first place, by demanding that others conform.
That same tool has now been focused on some of the more serious aspects of religion, and for exactly the same reasons. It is dangerous to allow anyone to demand automatic respect. And, yes, some people just don't like being made fun of, but there really are far more serious things happening in the world that we should be worrying about, and it is sometimes necessary to let people know that you aren't going along with their "unwritten rules". I cannot respect someone who ignores all known evidence concerning the age of the earth, for instance, and it can be dangerous to do so. At the risk of stereotyping, I have noticed that many people in the US just don't understand this fairly simple idea, particularly where religion is concerned.
If it is the case that you were mocked when posting on Pharyngula, I hate to say it, but I am beginning to see why. By all means, take life seriously if you want to. But, please, don't expect the rest of us to follow your lead. The world is a serious enough place as it is. And the final irony is in the fact that tolerance requires an understanding of human behavior, as well as the courage to be intolerant of certain ideas, for the betterment of all. You display little understanding of any of these concepts, or the dangers of toleration at all costs, especially when it isn't reciprocated and never has been.
Post a Comment