Wednesday, September 24, 2014

What Sam Harris Doesn't Know About Women (Condensed)

Another week, another atheist demands we call his sexism not-sexism.

Another week, another dudely atheist whose supposed rationalism can’t seem to stop him from engaging in emotion-driven temper tantrums because those mean ladies insist you actually apply the same rational lens to sexism as you do religion. This week’s contestant is Sam Harris, who was criticized for suggesting that it’s women’s biological inferiority to men that drives women out of the atheist movement and not, say, the widespread acceptance of sexism that makes women feel unwelcome.

“I think it may have to do with my personal slant as an author, being very critical of bad ideas. This can sound very angry to people..People just don’t like to have their ideas criticized. There’s something about that critical posture that is to some degree instrinsically [sic] male and more attractive to guys than to women,” he said. “The atheist variable just has this – it doesn’t obviously have this nurturing, coherence-building extra estrogen vibe that you would want by default if you wanted to attract as many women as men.”

His theory that men are inherently better at being able to take rough-and-tumble criticism and women are inherently reluctant to participate in such a thing was immediately put to the test, as his comments received quite a bit of rough-and-tumble criticism from women who, defying their estrogenic destinies, told him where to shove his gender essentialist ideas. He, in turn, defied his testosteronic heritage by getting his fee-fees hurt.
Sam is used to making unsupported and unsupportable claims without any pushback from his own side of the fence. But this time he really stepped in it by making stupid claims about women in general. Yet his ensuing defense is even more stupid, and Marcotte shreds him. Women are equal in every way; Sam should know that about Atheist/Feminist women. He deserves whatever he gets on this one - he brought their wrath upon himself. He'll be under the bus for a while. At least until he belly-crawls before the RadFems and acknowledges their superior form of equality and his own sins.

1 comment:

Phoenix said...

Stan

I recently finished my article "10 Atheist Quotes Demolished" on my blog.I'd like you to have a look at quotes no.7 and 9 especially.Can you please tell me if I have it correct or did I blunder somewhere?

7.Delos B Mckown:“The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike.”
This quote is not very specific,the assertion is broad so I have little choice but to interpret it literally and I'm justified in doing so, since Atheists tend to interpret Theist terminologies literally.
According to the literal interpretation of this quote gravity,electromagnetic,weak and strong nuclear forces do not exist because they're invisible.Now the Atheist will object and say they're still detectable.Sure,but the quote should have specified that only both invisible and detectable forces are excluded.Let's go another step further.Then there are other invisible particles such as axions,squarks and photinos at the subatomic level which are neither detectable nor visible.As well as the "very special" type of Dark Matter,known as Cold Dark Matter, it's invisible,undetected,unknown and its prediction of hundreds of tiny satellite galaxies surrounding big galaxies are inaccurate.Yet physicists believe they exist because they have good reason to.
Likewise, people believe in God,soul,afterlife,etc. because they have very good personal reasons to believe them,despite being invisible and not physically demonstrable
.


9.Ernest Hemingway:"All thinking men are atheists"

(All P's are Q's) It's a categorical assertion and the first premise of an Universal Syllogism or Predicate Instantiation,of which the second premise and conclusion are missing.The presupposition is ; No Theists are thinking men.Hemingway asserts that all members of subset P are members of set Q ,but failed to demonstrate that with a complete deductive argument,so it is both invalid and unsound.
In Math and Logic,to disprove a universal statement it's enough to find one counter example.One particular case contradicting the statement falsifies it.So here's about twenty counter examples of thinking Theists
:

MaxPlanck Nicholas Copernicus
GeorgeLemaitre Galileo Galilei
GregorMendel Rene Descartes
WilliamThomsonKelvin Isaac Newton
MichaelFaraday William of Ockham
BrianJosephson Gottfried Leibniz
RobertBoyle Antoine Lavoisier
BlaisePascal Thomas Bayes
FrancisBacon Louis Pasteur
Johannes Kepler
Joseph Murray