1. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #181241 by Nikolaj on May 16, 2008 at 5:50 pm

To the best of my recolection, it was my cousin, who has a degree in history, who once relayed the following to me:

In a speech-manuscript by Winston Churchill, there was in the margin a note from Churchill to himself, pointing to a particular part of the speech. The note said: "Argument weak. Shout"

I feel compelled to mention this, though it is doubtless just an urban legend, that has grown to be "fact" in my mind. it is almost too good to be true, so I hesitate to relay it as such. But I suppose it is checkable, if you are skeptical.

But true or not, it is a funny story, and does speak to the power of voice, sometimes even over the power of words. And having seen Boteach speak it appears to me that he is, consciesly or unconsciesly, telling himself to raise his voice when the arguments get weaker.

P.S: As a certified Anglofile, I am a fan of Mr. Churchill, but one must admit that he used his great speaking-talents to sway people to his side, not just with the words he said, but also by the way he said them; a less than flatering tactic, I must admit.

2. Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propaganda

Comment #165345 by Nikolaj on April 21, 2008 at 11:29 am

I wanted to post this comment yesterday, while reading through the posts in this thread, some of which said things to the effect of: "I think Richard's letter is a good one, but I fear it is falling on deaf ears. The person (Mr. J) clearly wants to be decieved, and nothing we can say will change his mind". If the following has allready been pointed out in the above posts, please forgive me for not having read through all the ones added since yesterday.

The first thing I noticed when I read the excerpt from Mr. J's letter, was that he said: "My great-grandparents died during WWII".

My grandparents where grown-ups during WWII, so I concluded that, if the generations in Mr. J's family roughly followed my family's he will be very young. I am 27, and had he been In my family he would be my son, so, no older than 8 years old.

I imagine he is older, but judging from this observation, and the general tone of his letter, I imagine he is probably a teenager: anything from 15 to 20 years old.

Now think back to yourself when you where that age: cocky, self-assured, and prone to jumping to factial conclusions based on emotional experiences .

I can readily imagine that Mr. J will be very susceptable to Richards letter, if not now, then surely later in his life.

There is hope for the future. Young people are strong in their convictions, but they are much more pliable than people who are still fundies at the age of 50. Those are the kind that REALLY worry me.

3. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163728 by Nikolaj on April 18, 2008 at 10:37 pm

SharonMcT:

You are of course right, which is why I appologised to you in my previous post, and I shall do so again now.

I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that I thought you thought that Ben Stein and Mathis are pure evil. I had a feeling you were alot more observant than that, and I was right, as your statement: People may be greedy because they are under the impression that they are serving their own loved ones, for example." clearly shows.

I wanted to make a more general statement that jumping to the simple conclussion of "Evil people" is not a very skeptic and open-minded thing to do, and I used your first post here as a starting-point for my own diatribe, and it wasn't meant to be specifically aimed at you.

I really am sorry for that.

I live in a country that is almost completely atheist, and on a day to day basis the ignorance I encounter is never of a religous kind, but rather of a conspiracy-theory kind, and recently I have been confronted with many, otherwise clever people, who seem to have fallen into the trap of simplifying issues by seeing malice, where I see much more ignorance and incompetance.

This has gotten me going a bit, cause I don't like to see my atheist countrymen believing in the devil. Saying: "George Bush is hellbent on world-domination, and anyone who's not a socialist like us is willfully hurting people only for their own sick pleasures" is doing just that, I think.

So I'm sorry again for letting my diatribe, which was really aimed at some my own peers here in Denmark, be directed at you in stead. It wasn't intended as such.

4. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163723 by Nikolaj on April 18, 2008 at 9:53 pm

You're right, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to make you angry, and I am sure it must be very frustrating to live in a country that produces people like Ben Stein.

I do not wish to denegrate your position by saying it is naive or that you haven't considered it at all before you took it.

All I wanted to do was to make a broader statement that saying: "They do it because they are evil, period" is not a useful statement, because it is not true.

If there really was such a thing as a purely evil person, there would be only one logical way to deal with them: destroy them, quite literally. Armed revolution would be the only reasonable response to Dick Cheney's government if he were truly "Evil".

But only religious people believe in the devil. Only they are willing to say, "kill the infidel", and it is because they can provide an absolute answer to why it is reasonable: "because they are evil, because the devil has them."

I live in a world that doesn't contain PURE evil. Every person is motivated by more than just evil. Even Hitler liked children, as long as they were blond and blue-eyed.

That doesn't mean that one shouldn't be outraged and insulted and angry about things like Big coorberations exploiting the poor to getting rich themselves. That doesn't mean what Ben Stein is doing is just a misguided, but ultimately well intentioned attempt to save our souls.

No, what he is doing is immoral and deceitful and selfish, and it should be met with rightous indignation and serious rebutal. But it should not be labeled EVIL, or willfully malicious and NOTHING more, for that is losing sight, not just of the issue at hand, but the truth of the not-at-all-black-and-white world in which we live.

5. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163715 by Nikolaj on April 18, 2008 at 9:18 pm

SharonMcT:

I too, do not like to be naive about people's motivations, which is why I never jump to quick conclutions about such motivations.

Are the creators of Expelled atheists, like us, but evil, unlike us, and therefore willing to dupe ignorant people into believing in their BS so they can make money?

If you believe that, then I would have to say, it is my opinion that you believe in ellaborate conspiracy theories.

If you believe that they DO believe in some sort of God, then, is it not fair to say that their motivations could well be more complex than simply greed? Their motivations would likely also include bringing the "truth" to the poor people that are not aware that Big Science is oppresing them.

If that is true then their motivations are already alot more complex than simply greed.

I do not mean to say that people are not willing to lie and decieve others for their own benefit, but only that people's motivations can hardly be boiled down to one single malicious intent, like greed.

Indeed, it is my impression that people have a plethora of motivations for any one action, both emotional and practical, malicious and well intentioned, all at the same time.

That said, i agree with you that Expelled IS propaganda, and all the evidence points to them having used willful deceit to get P.Z, Richard, and others to agree to do interviews, and borderline law-breaking (in the form of using un-licensed music, and the Harvard-cell-movie thing). So some people are willing to go to great lengths for their own world-views, which I find both offensive, and unacceptable. But I think they are almost always lying to themselves as well, when they are lying to others.

To simplify their motivation to pure, unbridled malice, is to simplify a complex thing with an explanation that doesn't require any skepticism, but just a simple answer: "They are evil"

This, in my opinion, is excactly why people should be atheist: Because it produces nothing useful to produce a simple answer to a complex question, only the usefulness of not having to think for yourself.

6. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #163700 by Nikolaj on April 18, 2008 at 8:00 pm

I agree, Frankus. "Never expect to find malice, where ignorance or incompetence will suffice". I think it is very important for skeptical people to never fall into the trap of seeing conspiracies everywhere.

Very few people, willfully, and persistantly, do bad things to other people, knowing full well what they do all along and for two good reasons.

1. Their conscience catches up to them (most people have a conscience, even if not a very moral one)

2. The most important reason: it is EXTREMELY difficult to continiusly conspire against people without getting caught, especially in todays open societies. Point in case: 911 truthers. If you seriously believe that the Bush-administration could pull of that stunt without it leaking to the press from just one of the thousands of people it would necesseraly involve, you are betting on VERY long odds.

HOWEVER: people's ignorance, imcompetence, smallmindedness, and self rightous sensibilities can acount for most of what is wrong with our world, including the "Expelled" people. I most certainly think they THINK they are doing good, and only turning to willful deceit in small doses in some instances.