https://the-orbit.net/almostdiamonds/2009/10/07/skeptic-on-skeptic/ Politics. Sex. Science. Art. You know, the good stuff. Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:58:34 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.1.6 https://the-orbit.net/almostdiamonds/2009/10/07/skeptic-on-skeptic/#comment-2631 Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:58:34 +0000 http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2009/10/07/skeptic-on-skeptic/#comment-2631 This is all assuming that the groupings we assume are natural (e.g. skeptics, atheists, etc.) are actually oriented toward the same goal at all. Take, for instance, the accomodation schism. While Mooney may be an atheist, and he may be pro-science, he's also doing a lot of damage to other folks in these "same camps". When people like him get your side completely and utterly wrong, how much should you defer? http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/10/my_regrets_on_your_traumatic_b.phpI don't have any answers as to what to do. There should not be any sort of purity movement, but when the attacks come from, ostensibly, within your own camp, and they are not only damaging but demonstrably false, we can't hesitate to set the record straight or our silence becomes like a tacit agreement. And we obviously can't claim them as allies while they're punching us in the head repeatedly.

]]> https://the-orbit.net/almostdiamonds/2009/10/07/skeptic-on-skeptic/#comment-2632 Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:19:04 +0000 http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2009/10/07/skeptic-on-skeptic/#comment-2632 Jason,I agree that these "should" be goals, and I htink you and I can probably brainstorm up a great list of internet-based conflicts where, if they had been applied, the outcome would have been radically different. Honestly, half the time when I "get in trouble" on blogs, it is precisely because these rules aren't being adhered to.That said, "should" and "would" only getyou so far. Like it or not, there are those who claim for themslevs the mantle of Skeptic who are adamant that THIER ideas really are the only good ones in an argument, and they and their supporters will literally run someone into the ground rather then admit there might be a different view on something. What do we do about those folks? I haven't a clue – but I'd love to hear some ideas.

]]> https://the-orbit.net/almostdiamonds/2009/10/07/skeptic-on-skeptic/#comment-2633 Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:09:58 +0000 http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2009/10/07/skeptic-on-skeptic/#comment-2633 I don't think I could agree more with this, especially as concerns our corners of the interwebs. We should not only be willing to discuss openly our points of disagreement, but we should be able to do so without bruising one another's egos or undermining one another's public image. I think the best way to set about doing that would be, when confronted with facts that contradict what we've said elsewhere, we should own up to our errors and correct them.

]]>