Reader Rants: Skept-Artist on Being a Dick

[RoyGBiv]

I think this individual has hit on a bona fide phenomenon.

My new project is offline grassroots skeptical outreach. In my endeavor to save the world with skepticism, I have to remember that sometimes it’s important to not be a huge asshole when talking to people. We’ve all done it. Sometimes not intentionally, but anyone who’s been a skeptic for more than a few weeks is likely to have offended someone with a flippant remark about a “stupid” belief or an outright dismissal.

...

Before I had ever considered myself a Skeptic, I already loved arguing with people. Not necessarily in an aggressive way, but I liked to have honest discussions because it really helped me learn. However, when I discovered skepticism and the skeptical movement a few years ago, my style of argument became what I can only describe as “Rabidly Overzealous” (Redundant, but accurate).

Happily, this phase didn’t last for too long, because I recognized that I was being a huge jerk. Having accurate and interesting information to share with people is one thing. Shouting that information at people with a smug, misplaced sense of satisfaction? Yeah, that’s a horse of a different color. That’s not the kind of person I was before, so there was no reason why that should have changed.

...

I’m much happier now just sharing a bit of information if someone wants it, without feeling like I have to stick it in their craw. Does my blood still squirt out of my ears when I hear a bunch of garbage. Oh sure. Can I fly off the handle if the situation calls for it? Yep. But in daily conversation, with someone who might even come to understand a point I have, and change their mind, why shouldn’t I try my best to be, at least, polite?

http://skepchick.org/blog/2010/04/reader-rants-skept-artist-on-being-a-dick/

In my endeavor to save the world from the evils of Republicanism, I have to remember that sometimes it's important not to be a huge asshole when talking to people.

[canetoad]

1. The old story Roy

about catching more flies with honey than vinegar.

Read this very pertinent article weeks back. There was an atheist's convention in town. Now I don't believe there is a god/s/ess but I don't like to go around trumpeting or indeed labelling, myself as an atheist and am very familiar with the smug condescention that those with 'all the answers' often bring to the table.

Then again, I also don't believe that everything needs to be debated to death, who is right or wrong and who can win points by winning a snark fest. Much more peaceful life to keep quiet, not get myself worked up over what others believe and spend a lot of time wandering the river bank with a fat joint and my dogs.
-------------

Atheists’ ridicule won’t win friends and influence people
March 16, 2010


Richard Dawkins addresses the Global Atheist Convention

If the meek really do inherit the earth, it won’t be the atheists who turned out in force in Melbourne at the weekend for what organisers believe to be the world’s biggest atheist conference.

It probably does mark in some way a coming of age for the militant atheist movement: they are visible and vocal, energetic and starting to become organised. They are gaining in confidence, which is no bad thing — but, as a couple of brave speakers observed, they would be much more persuasive if a touch less strident, a touch less dogmatic, a touch humble.

We are all enriched when people think through serious issues rather than inheriting parental or cultural assumptions, and when atheists advocate a view of a better society they must be taken seriously. By implication, of course, they must extend the same courtesy.

One lesson the atheist movement is learning, as the convention shows, is that it must broaden its appeal, reaching out to secularists, rationalists and others who share similar goals.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/blogs/the-religious-write/atheists-ridicule-wont-win-friends-and-influence-people/20100315-q9wj.html

[RoyGBiv]

2. Yeah ...

I have a good friend who quit drinking about a year ago. Since then, he's been Permanently Pissed Off. I've never told him this (and won't), but, sadly, he was much easier to be around when he was drunk all the time.

He's been going to AA meetings for the past year, multiple times per week. While he seeks out the meetings that aren't heavy on the religious stuff, he has reacted to what he knows is the subtext of "higher power" in all of it by becoming what your article refers to as a "militant atheist." So, I thought it was interesting that you offered this. I may send it to him.

He actually sent me the article in the OP as an explanation for some overly "dickish" behavior he's exhibited lately. I've called him on it multiple times, but this has gone to the point recently of me just ignoring him, i.e. not taking his bait. When I ignored him, he seemed to "get it." He likes to argue, and he picks fights with me on issues I really don't even care about or some on which I actually agree with him, but he's developed this way of framing it so it irritates me, e.g. introducing a non sequitur into a discussion about something else to try to offend me or one of my friends. We've known each other a long time, and he knows my buttons. The fact he's intentionally pushing them to get a response is the "dickish" part. It's actually all a part of his alcoholism recovery, I realize, so I try to remain tolerant. I've known a lot of recovering alcoholics, and they all seem to go through this phase ... picking on someone they know won't just write them off precisely because they know they won't be written off.

Anyway ... not wanting to make this about religion or anything. The same sort of behavior infects pretty much everyone who is passionate about anything. I think a lot of people in various computer forums across the Internet world could benefit from a bit of self-reflection on this point as well.

[canetoad]

3. Computer forums are the best entertainment

I occassionally post but for the most part like to 'people watch' because there is absolutely NO subtlety about communications on the net. It's like watching my dogs snarling and playing mind-games with each other.

As you know I work for a small company, and the boss RJ is a paid up, card carrying skeptic but he's a bit of a softy-bully about it. I suppose it's better than working for Fundies though.

We need the passionate people; without them we would stagnate and stultify. Now everyone is passionate or enraged or incensed and it's become a howling racket with no voices to be heard.

I was watching the docu 'Auschwitz, the Nazis and the Final Solution'. One survivor said 'All the SS people had the same expression. They were always furious looking'.


-------
On edit: Teeny bit stoned, hence the disconnected ramblings :smoke:

[RoyGBiv]

5. A little post-amateur night indulgence ...

:)

I found the Apple/Microsoft wars on Usenet fun back in the day, but it was all new then. Now it's just boring. I haven't seen an original argument or manner of insulting an aficionado of one or the other in a long, long time. The worst part is that most of those who still play this game don't even seem to realize how unoriginal they're being.

I mean, c'mon. If yer gonna fight, at least make it entertaining.

[canetoad]

6. Remember alt.conspiracy?

Some real gems among the nutters.

Don't have an active usenet account any more. The number of groups still readable dwindled till I turned it off. Even here on DU you can read an OP and know instantly where the thread is going to be by the tenth post.

Do you know there is a forum dedicated to slagging-off DU posts and members? The must watch here constantly, reporting back with quotes of entire threads.

[RoyGBiv]

7. Now THAT was entertaining ...

The somewhat lesser known talk.bizarre was good too, good in a better way. It's actually made a bit of a resurgence lately.

I liked reading alt.test. People would post some of the craziest shit in there.

I've had a high retention Usenet account since around 1994. Believe it or don't, I think the Long December may be coming to an end. If you get out of the alt.* hierarchy, there are some decent groups around nowadays. It's nothing like it was in the days when there were around 2000 groups and the majority of its participants were in some way affiliated with a university, but there is wheat in the chaff.

And, yes, I've seen that forum. There are several, actually, but they're like Lord Voldemort and must not be named. :)

[canetoad]

8. Or the Scottish play....

I don't have anyone on my ignore list. Do you?

Been tempted a couple of times and made a serious effort with Grovelbot but on the whole, it's much better entertainment value to read the unabridged version.

One deliciously catty group was alt.gossip.royalty a few years back. A couple of minor aristocrats with the accompanying airs and graces, a zillion sycophants and the odd republican (not GOP, the original meaning). Hell, never thought I'd be sentimental over usenet. Must fire up the account and do a trawl of the groups and see whats happening.

[Book Lover]

9. You folks are making me feel oooooold!

Usenet. Indials. 2600 the magazine (yes I know it's still around). The very word "baud".

Sigh.

[RoyGBiv]

10. Oh, it's good to remember ...

I met some really great people because of Usenet.

Hell, half my education came about because of Usenet. It was, at one time, a great social networking tool that had none of this insanity that follows the current popular web-based groups.

That said, I like remembering the word "baud," but I don't miss using it in daily conversation. :) Being able to read a post FASTER THAN IT APPEARED ON THE SCREEN is not something I want to go back to.

[RoyGBiv]

11. Two people ...

I did have four, but to of them were TSed.

These two particular people are just too negative and too ubiquitous to ignore entirely without some assistance, usually by starting a thread, which I now never even see. I'd try to ignore them without software assistance but found myself sucked in by a sub-thread.

I haven't seen any "ignored" messages for quite some time within threads I find interesting, so I don't feel as though I'm missing much.

I did use killfiles (score filters, etc. depending on what reader you were using) on Usenet. The real psychos could SPAM a group with a thousand messages in an hour, and I had no desire to wade through that crap.

Some of the good groups I used to frequent were writing/reading related. Back then, some rather famous authors actually participated. I think Terry Pratchett still might, but I'm not sure. I got into a running debate via e-mail with one notable about the historical accuracy of a claim he'd made in a novel, which just a weird discussion to have. But, it was good.

[Hannah Bell]

4. who wants to catch flies in the first place?