tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post6970896114035107036..comments2023-10-10T05:07:13.577-07:00Comments on En Tequila Es Verdad: I Think Maybe We Could Use a HandbookDana Hunterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00890312745525306991noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-49931933653886537922008-06-10T12:56:00.000-07:002008-06-10T12:56:00.000-07:00@Eclectic: Good points! If any more come to you, ...@Eclectic: Good points! If any more come to you, please do leave them here. The more input I get, the better this will be. <BR/><BR/>@Efrique: I've been waiting for this! I started reading that study at work yesterday - scary stuff. Definitely going to change a bit o' my approach, I think.Dana Hunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00890312745525306991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-49048532274093131892008-06-09T21:20:00.000-07:002008-06-09T21:20:00.000-07:00Finally made it back.Here are three of the points ...Finally made it back.<BR/><BR/>Here are three of the points I wanted to make that got lost.<BR/><BR/>(i) I see a fair bit of overlap between II and IX (what an atheist is vs what an atheist isn't).<BR/><BR/>It might be possible to merge them somewhat. <BR/><BR/>(ii) On the other hand, I wanted to point to a study that I saw a while ago that said "when people have a misconception, saying 'that conception is wrong' doesn't work - if anything it serves to strengthen it". I didn't find the study, but a similar study just popped up that says about the same thing (this time relating to politics). <BR/><BR/>See <A HREF="http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2008/06/when_correction.html" REL="nofollow">when corrections fail</A>.<BR/><BR/>The message from the first study (which if I find again I will post a link to) basically said that if the aim is to convince the person with the misconception, you are better off not saying "you think 'X is true', but that's wrong for these reasons", and instead saying "Y is true".<BR/><BR/>So instead of a list of misconceptions, you need a list of <I>re</I>conceptions. For each misconception, you instead start with what's actually true.<BR/><BR/>Which brings me to ...<BR/>(iii) who is really the audience? I suspect most people who would read this will either not be theists, or if they are, they'll be the sort of theist that we mostly don't have much of a problem with (non-fundies, ones capable of following a logical argument). The ones that have the misconceptions probably won't read the handbook anyway.<BR/><BR/>So if it's going to end up rallying the troops, a list of misconceptions would be okay. On the other hand if it's partly a book on how to explain atheism to confused theists, the "setting up a conception is better than arguing a misconception" message would be an important thing to talk about.Efriquehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08526031804261484547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-35471376818233670912008-06-09T01:27:00.000-07:002008-06-09T01:27:00.000-07:00A lot of godbots seem to get stuck on this "why do...A lot of godbots seem to get stuck on this "why do you hate (my) god" thing. Um, no, I don't hate Yahweh, any more than you hate Horus or the tooth fairy; it's only his fan club that annoys me.<BR/><BR/>In "why you can't convert", I'd also quote from St. Augustine's work on "The Literal Interpretation of Genesis," where he advises that, when talking about the real world that everyone can see, "It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters".<BR/><BR/>Finally, in the "you can't prove god doesn't exist" category, I can't prove that reality exists (as opposed to being a giant Matrix-like simulation), but saying that I have theories that describe and predict the real world is simply more compact than saying that I can describe and predict my perceptions of the real world.<BR/><BR/>I don't know with 100% certain that reality exists; all I know is that so far, my perceptions match very will what I'd expect if it did.<BR/><BR/>And one more tidbit: "What's up with the Flying Spaghetti Monster?" Many people don't understand that the whole pastafarian thing was invented to show how silly creationism is by providing a farcical alternative with <I>just as much evidentiary support</I> as "intelligent design". It's advice to the school board, "if you set the bar that low, you'll have to let us in, too". So please don't set the bar that low.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-29970450278452800402008-06-08T04:04:00.000-07:002008-06-08T04:04:00.000-07:00@NP: I look forward to seeing us plugged there! T...@NP: I look forward to seeing us plugged there! Thank you, heart sister!<BR/><BR/>@Woozle: Thank you very much for the links. I'll be combing through them within the next few days, and we'll see where we get. You're going to have to get a cut of this if publication happens, considering the work you're putting in!<BR/><BR/>I absolutely do think we can interest a print publisher in this. There's a growing market for books on atheism, and this one's going to be rather unique. It's why I'm going to give it a chance on that circuit.<BR/><BR/>And hey - royalties! I wouldn't mind believers dropping a few coins in our pockets. ;-)Dana Hunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00890312745525306991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-65573618030731658222008-06-07T13:24:00.000-07:002008-06-07T13:24:00.000-07:00Love it! And I look forward to eventually posting...<I>Love</I> it! And I look forward to eventually posting a generous review on my faith-based blog!NPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01971083012537277697noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-14603414958037138552008-06-07T11:36:00.000-07:002008-06-07T11:36:00.000-07:00No online publication: Ok, and great if you think ...No online publication: Ok, and great if you think you can get a publisher interested; I was thinking something like lulu.com, but since you're actually in the Pofeshnul Awthering Biz...<BR/><BR/>I do have a secured wiki (pages viewable only by authorized users) if you think that might help for collaboration.<BR/><BR/>Possibly-relevant links for the book:<BR/>- <A HREF="http://www.issuepedia.org/User:Woozle/2007-07-03_chat" REL="nofollow">chat transcript</A> wherein a former Mormon asks why the heck his atheist friends didn't try harder to de-theize him, and I offer some possible explanations<BR/>- <A HREF="http://www.issuepedia.org/User:Woozle/Morality_Without_God" REL="nofollow">Morality Without God</A> was an essay I started to write in which I was going to explain one way of constructing a set of morals without involving God. Ran into writer's block partway through and haven't had time to get back to it; maybe it will give you some ideas.<BR/>- <A HREF="http://www.issuepedia.org/User:Woozle/Reasons_to_believe_in_God" REL="nofollow">Reasons to believe in God</A>: an early attempt to separate the non-disprovable Inconsequential God from the God-of-consequences that everyone is <I>really</I> talking about. Written for recovering theoholics.<BR/>- <A HREF="http://www.issuepedia.org/User:Woozle/interfaith_treaty" REL="nofollow">Interfaith treaty proposal</A>: some stuff which it seems to me any rational person would agree with, religious or not. Take-away message: If you disagree with any of this, then You May Be Part Of The Problem.<BR/>- <A HREF="http://issuepedia.org/God" REL="nofollow">God</A> gets into the more obvious rational objections to the idea of God, in which theists should probably have a good solid grounding before attempting discussion with atheists.<BR/>- <A HREF="http://issuepedia.org/Religion" REL="nofollow">Religion</A> gives a similar treatment to its namesake, though a bit more conjecturally<BR/>- <A HREF="http://issuepedia.org/Einsteinian_religion" REL="nofollow">Einsteinian religion</A>: Einstein is often quote-mined to "prove" that he believed in God; this page thoroughly trashes that idea.<BR/>- How do we deal with the <A HREF="http://issuepedia.org/Religious_right" REL="nofollow">religious Right</A>? We should probably stipulate a few things; some suggestions:<BR/>-- (a) they are a bunch of wackos many of whose key views are immoral and firmly repudiated by all decent folk, despite their alarming degree of influence in the halls of power; we don't care if we're going to hell, we do care if we have to put up with these types in our faces or governments.<BR/>-- (b) we won't assume that people who are actually willing to discuss their beliefs with atheists, <I>without</I> foaming at the mouth, agree with the views of the RelRight -- but we do need to understand what their beliefs <I>are</I> in order to have a meaningful conversation involving said beliefs. If you're not prepared to define {Christianity as practiced by you}, then why defend it? Why even bring it up?<BR/>-- (c) moderate theists need to understand, nonetheless, how their defense of irrational beliefs aids the wackos, and something needs to be done about this. You may believe something completely different from what Fred Phelps believes, but you both use "God" and "The Bible" to justify or explain it; our distaste for those terms (and others) should be understandable. ...Introduce the whole "clean out your stables or we'll have to do it for you, because we're not having <A HREF="http://issuepedia.org/Anti-gay" REL="nofollow">this</A> <A HREF="http://issuepedia.org/Anti-abortion" REL="nofollow">crap</A> in our <A HREF="http://issuepedia.org/Threats_to_civilization" REL="nofollow">civilization</A>" argument.<BR/><BR/>Hope the chaff content isn't too high.Woozlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17948248776908775080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-52163344290761003602008-06-07T00:25:00.000-07:002008-06-07T00:25:00.000-07:00Ye gods, you guys - I'm stunned. I'm so glad you ...Ye gods, you guys - I'm stunned. I'm so glad you think this is a good idea! I think with your input, we could actually have something going here. <BR/><BR/>What I'm envisioning is a book that's brief enough to work as the kind of tract you can hand over to a Christian and say exactly what Leroy said. <BR/><BR/>There could be follow-up books if this succeeds, because there's bountiful material here. Far too much for one thin book. Think of this as a quick-and-dirty introduction for the clueless Christian - and for the clued-in Christians who just want to know more about us.<BR/><BR/>Woozle, I gladly accept your help, and your links!<BR/><BR/>The actual book itself, even drafts, I don't think should be published online anywhere. Publishers get bitchy about that, this is going to be a physical book (something that can be pressed into a proselytizer's hand), and previous publication online will mean a lot of publishers won't touch the thing. I haven't got the money for self-publishing, or the time or interest in trying to get bookstores to carry it. Major or at least known publisher would make it far easier to deal with. But we'll definitely hold discussions, for anyone who's interested in helping put this together, and anyone who wants to be a Wise Reader gets to read drafts and go crazy with the red pen.<BR/><BR/>You've all given me some excellent ideas, and I need to process them. Keep 'em coming!Dana Hunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00890312745525306991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-75526190884051366092008-06-06T19:56:00.000-07:002008-06-06T19:56:00.000-07:00Just wanted to point out that there are those amon...Just wanted to point out that there are those among us Christians Who have searched and have thought deeply and still choose to believe. Does that mean we take what Our religious authorities tell us as gospel? Hell no! They are flawed humans like the rest of us and I prefer to do my own thinking thank you very much. I consider myself a Catholic, but the last person I would have tell me how to live is the Pope.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-39843992528250437542008-06-06T18:02:00.000-07:002008-06-06T18:02:00.000-07:00chaos lee: I hope Dana will correct me if I'm wron...chaos lee: I hope Dana will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the idea is to write a book <I>for atheists</I> (Dawkins, Hitchens, and others have done that already) but <I>for theists</I> as a guide for dealing with atheists.<BR/><BR/>It's not so much a set of boundaries for us to follow but more a declaration of independence from dogma and preconception, as I see it: <I>Here's what we aren't, here's a realistic sampling of what we are, and here's a brief map of the place we call "rationality" so you won't get lost when you visit. Note these brown smudges on the map -- avoid those spots, and try not to wake any sleeping dragons if you want to avoid having your mind opened.</I><BR/><BR/>If you're still not seeing it as a net positive, please elucidate further and I'll try again.Woozlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17948248776908775080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-62391734590297839582008-06-06T17:23:00.000-07:002008-06-06T17:23:00.000-07:00It's a noble sentiment. And I think that anyone a...It's a noble sentiment. And I think that anyone attempting to put order to thoughts and rational exploration of the concept could potentially benefit. That said, the notion of reference manuals is highly unappealing to me, largely because it seems to be doctrination, even unintentionally. The moment you create a book or a guideline, suddenly now you're establish definitions and boundaries. Don't get me wrong, books are inherently good as is information that might just risk forcing people to re-evaluate their little preconceptions. But next thing you know someone's put out "Atheism for Dummies" and then I have to stab even MORE people at the fucking bookstore.Chaos Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03439992454942426990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-64201145899329393252008-06-06T16:14:00.000-07:002008-06-06T16:14:00.000-07:00Waaugh! I just typed a really long reply. It has a...Waaugh! I just typed a really long reply. It has apparently been sucked into blog-comment-hell, because it's gone.<BR/><BR/>I don't have time to try to reconstruct it now. Umm. The short version: Yeah, sounds good. <BR/><BR/>When I get time I'll try to type what I can remember into notepad and /paste/ it back in here (so if it gets lost again it isn't gone).<BR/><BR/>Dammit.Efriquehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08526031804261484547noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-19803562700644005882008-06-06T14:47:00.000-07:002008-06-06T14:47:00.000-07:00"...they keep rehashing the same arguments over an..."...they keep rehashing the same arguments over and over again." This is one of the reasons I started Issuepedia: so I could document those arguments and the answers to them.<BR/><BR/>Then, whenever a particular argument is trotted out for another show, I can just point at the page where that argument is presented in its most eloquent form and subsequently demolished. No need to think the whole damn thing through again; just say "We've already been here, why are you bringing this up again?"<BR/><BR/>The more I think about this book idea, Dana, the more it seems totally awesome -- and I wanna hellllp! (In all my lack-of-free-time, of course.) It seems like something about which there is a lot yet to be said -- Dawkins et al. have certainly presented the philosophical arguments for active atheism, but nobody has written a book about atheism <I>for theists</I>, as far as I know. It may be a challenge to keep it from growing into a monster.<BR/><BR/>I've got a lot of essays and bits and pieces which get into some of the areas you're covering; let me know if you'd like some links (not that you seem to need any help writing incisively ^_^).Woozlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17948248776908775080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-89088201151232939492008-06-06T13:17:00.000-07:002008-06-06T13:17:00.000-07:00Sounds like a good idea to me too... so many deba...Sounds like a good idea to me too... so many debates seem to go round and round in exactly the same circles that this might help clarify the waters somewhat!<BR/><BR/>I think chapter 4 could also cover what counts as evidence (e.g. why one person's mystical experience doesn't prove anything - perhaps linking the Derren Brown youtube vid that PZ posted a few days ago), and perhaps things like probability and significance, reversion to mean and double blind testing.<BR/><BR/>I also wonder if it's worth exploring (somewhere) the different reactions that fundies are going to get compared to moderates.<BR/><BR/>Finally, rather than smackdowns, I think it would be good to throw in a liberal scattering of the sort of way-out-there-quotes that should make any sensible Christian blush - if only to explain what we have to put up with.Lironehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01186563179366227913noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-88330054788119209562008-06-06T13:11:00.000-07:002008-06-06T13:11:00.000-07:00I think that this would actually be most useful fo...I think that this would actually be most useful for teens from a religious area who are interested in atheism. I believe that if someone accepts all the ideas in this book then they are actually halfway to becoming a free thinker.<BR/><BR/>One theme I get over and over again from my friends who are atheists is a strong sense of anti-authoritarianism.<BR/><BR/>As for actual people who want to convert you, on one hand it would be nice to have a complete text that sums up your beliefs--a tract. This is nice because it's not always easy to come up with this stuff. Most atheists agree with all of this so it's very convenient. Instead of repeating oneself over and over again, one can just give them the book. If and when they come back you can merely say, actually if you had read the book, it's all in there. No need for discussion.<BR/><BR/>I hate any kind of religious "debate" with strong believers of any kind because they keep rehashing the same arguments over and over again. Meanwhile, much smarter people have actually had the final say on these issues and have moved on and in most cases died a few hundred years ago. You either accept an authority or you don't. If you don't then a whole can of worms gets opened that is pretty much summed up in this book. So don't waste time.<BR/><BR/>I _am_ interested in discussion of what people think when this book and the bible and all the other religious texts have been read and digested by all speakers. Then I might have a chance to hear something new.<BR/><BR/>I would say, that true believers who are going to bother you will not have anything to do with this book. They are not there for discussion. In fact, I think that they leave their ears at home. It is utterly frustrating to talk to someone who keeps going on and on when clearly all shit had all ready been addressed. It's like talking to a wall. I guess it would be nice to have a book and say, "OK, I'll take your tract and read it, you take mine and read it. Be fair now."Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03297322821136176923noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6851578517872251953.post-72185147932346495122008-06-06T11:54:00.000-07:002008-06-06T11:54:00.000-07:00I think this is an excellent idea.And I would say ...I think this is an excellent idea.<BR/><BR/>And I would say that even without the benefit of your generous and influential contribution to my re-election campaign. Really.<BR/><BR/>...What? Oh, sorry, wrong reality. In this reality, I still think it's an excellent idea, and your <A HREF="http://entequilaesverdad.blogspot.com/2008/05/talking-past-each-other-few-simple.html" REL="nofollow">earlier post</A> giving some guidelines for well-meaning Christians already had me thinking along these lines; it's good to see that great minds continue to think alike ^_^ (and I say that with all modesty, though you may need a microscope to find it).<BR/><BR/>Would you mind terribly if I started a wiki page for the guide-to-be, and pasted large wodges of your post into it (later to be ruthlessly edited into something more final)?Woozlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17948248776908775080noreply@blogger.com