Victor Reppert and Jeff Lowder Again On Ridicule

Reppert still doesn't get it and it stuns me. Maybe he refuses to consider anything I say because I'm, well, an atheist, and he knows atheists are wrong about everything! ;-) He thinks one must come up with a argument and be able to defend it--on the Harvard Yard or something?--before being entitled to ridicule a belief. For one must be careful not to end up ridiculing a true belief. Of course, Reppert surely wants to be on the committee that decides which beliefs are false and deserving of ridicule, I'll bet.

Is he serious? I think he is.

Read more »

Professor Keith Parsons's "Rules of the Use of Ridicule"

Previously Professor Keith Parsons advocated the use of ridicule, saying:

A single belly-laugh is worth a thousand syllogisms” said H.L. Mencken. Fundamentalism and fundamentalists should be ridiculed in the media, by comedians, or wherever. You don’t have to worry about fairness, since, as Poe’s Law famously notes, no satire can possibly be more absurd than the real thing. Come on. You just can’t come up with anything more ridiculous than someone who honestly thinks that all human woes stem from an incident in which a talking snake accosted a naked woman in a primeval garden and talked her into eating a piece of fruit. Again, most ridicule would consist of pointedly drawing attention to what they really believe. Nothing could be fairer than that. As a sign admonished on The Simpsons, put the fun back in fundamentalism. Laugh it to death. LINK.

Now I present for your consideration his rules for ridicule:

Read more »

Quote of the Day, By Faisal Saeed Al Mutar On Ridicule

Let's put ridicule into perspective. Faisal Saeed Al Mutar lectures on Muslim issues around the world. His focus is on Islamic problems in the Middle East and how they can be solved. On Facebook he wrote: "If you hold ridiculous beliefs, your beliefs deserve to be ridiculed. You have rights, your beliefs don't."


Now Victor Reppert has gone on record as stressing ridicule is unwarranted. So what does he advocate when it comes to Muslim militancy? A lot of us, me included, don't know that much about Islam. But we know killing and maiming others is wrong. Does Vic really think ridicule should not be used by us against these Muslims? Most of us don't really know any other way to express ourselves. I think ridicule can open the Muslim mind up to consider arguments to the contrary. It can be the grease that helps unscrew the mental bolts that shut off a reasoned discussion of their faith. And if Reppert can see this with regard to the faith of others, then he should have no principled objection to the use of ridicule itself.

Bertrand Russell Used Ridicule Effectively, as Does Julia Sweeny, George Carlin and Bill Maher

The list of people who advocate and/or use ridicule effectively should be more than enough to convince the deniers. British atheist and Freethinker George William Foote (1850-1915) wrote:

Goldsmith said there are two classes of people who dread ridicule–priests and fools. They cry out that it is no argument, but they know it is. It has been found the most potent form of argument. Euclid used it in his immortal Geometry; for what else is the reductio ad absurdum which he sometimes employs? Elijah used it against the priests of Baal. The Christian fathers found it effective against the Pagan superstitions, and in turn it was adopted as the best weapon of attack on them by Lucian and Celsus. Ridicule has been used by Bruno, Erasmus, Luther, Rabelais, Swift, and Voltaire, by nearly all the great emancipators of the human mind. ["On Ridicule" Seasons of Freethought, 2013, page 260. See the tag "Ridicule" below for others who embrace it.]

To see what Socrates, Voltaire, Jonathan Swift, Erasmus, and modern thinkers like Keith Parsons, Richard Carrier and Stephen Law said about ridicule click here. There are more people who advocate it, or use it, than can be named, including Bertrand Russell.

Read more »

More On the Effective Use of Ridicule

If you have ever read Plato's Dialogues you know Socrates ridiculed his opponents. Anyone who has read the ending of the Euthyphro dilemma sees this plainly:

Read more »

Quote of the Day On Ridicule, By G.W. Foote

British atheist and Freethinker George William Foote (1850-1915) wrote:

Goldsmith said there are two classes of people who dread ridicule–priests and fools. They cry out that it is no argument, but they know it is. It has been found the most potent form of argument. Euclid used it in his immortal Geometry; for what else is the reductio ad absurdum which he sometimes employs? Elijah used it against the priests of Baal. The Christian fathers found it effective against the Pagan superstitions, and in turn it was adopted as the best weapon of attack on them by Lucian and Celsus. Ridicule has been used by Bruno, Erasmus, Luther, Rabelais, Swift, and Voltaire, by nearly all the great emancipators of the human mind. ["On Ridicule" Seasons of Freethought, 2013, page 260. See the tag "Ridicule" below for others who embrace it.]

Ridicule and Shaming Work, So Let's Use Them. The Arguments Behind This Are Solid and Factual

Who says ridicule, and now shaming, doesn't work? No one, probably, but it does, most emphatically, as I've written in several posts to date. Now there is a call to ridicule and shame the anti-vaccine movement, just as we do to the KKK. Now, let's consider the impact of ridicule and shame on religions like Christianity and Islam. No wonder Muslims don't like being ridiculed. They know where it can lead.

Examples of Ridicule

Recently I've defended the use of ridicule. Good ridicule must be based on some truth, otherwise it wouldn't be funny. It must also bring home an important point. Some of it is gentle humor while some of it is quite mean-spirited. Some people focus on ridicule while others focus on elaborately reasoned arguments. If you think ridicule is unbecoming of an atheist, or anyone for that matter, then you cannot like the comedy style of Stephen Colbert, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, or even Jay Leno or David Letterman. Look at the following good examples and then try to honestly tell me ridicule has no place in our cultural wars. [Click on the tag "Ridicule" below for more on this topic.]

Read more »

An Excellent Example of Ridicule!

James Lindsay said theism is done, won't last into the future. Victor Reppert responded by saying a bit sarcastically: "Oh yeah, theism is losing adherents, it's down to 74% in the latest Harris poll." Then Lindsay, well, ya gotta read this short play:

Read more »

Ridicule is a Type of Peer Pressure That Changes Minds

We know that peer pressure changes minds, even against what seems quite clear to someone with a different opinion. We KNOW this. If you doubt that then watch this four part ABC Dateline Program, What Were You Thinking? Go ahead. Watch it. Ridicule is a type of peer pressure. If a person says she doesn't agree with belief A that tells you something important, even if this is all she says. But if she laughs at belief A that tells you she doesn't have any respect at all for belief A. Now imagine most of the people you know laughing at belief A. That would get your attention and could indeed change your mind. Peer pressure works. Ridicule is a type of peer pressure. Ridicule changes minds. Ridicule from lots of people has more power to change minds. It's quite simple really, such that anyone who disagrees is ignorant. There are other questions to address, but let's start with baby steps.

Ridicule! Who Says We're Not Supposed to Play God? ;-)

No One Should Have The Right To Die Until God Is Done Toying With Them.

Quote of the Day On Ridicule, By Doug Krueger

Doug Krueger is the author of the excellent book, What is Atheism? On Facebook he said:

We should ridicule the ridiculous. This is sometimes more effective than arguments because believers often substitute emotion for argument, which is why they are so resistant to evidence.

He joins an ever growing list of other atheists. See tag "Ridicule" below.

Jeffery Jay Lowder: "It's Self-Defeating to Ridicule Beliefs"

Jeff is once again disagreeing with me. That's okay as far as it goes and expected sometimes, but I truly find his ignorance surprising. [Edit, this type of exchange finally led me to the opinion that Jeffery Jay Lowder is a dishonest person, a hypocrite, seen right here. I have found he only has a B.S. college degree in computer science, yet goes around calling himself "a philosopher", even though he's so ignorant about this and so much more. [See tag below.]

On his Twitter account (@SecularOutpost) Jeff boasts of being "Paul Draper's Bulldog." I think Draper is the reason we disagree on the issues we do. Draper is wrong on those issues even though I too have a respect for him. I really do not understand Jeff's claim that it's self-defeating to ridicule beliefs, and he certainly failed to defend that claim. Recently I argued that ridicule has value in our cultural wars, right here. Jeff commented:

Read more »

Quote of the Day On Ridicule, By Walter Sinnott-Armstrong

"Our best hope for progress is for atheists to speak out and (as politely as possible) tell any theists who will listen why religious beliefs are ridiculous." -- Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, in Louise Antony’s anthology, Philosophers without Gods, p 78.

Sinnott-Armstrong joins a long list of philosophers, pundits and essayists who see the value of ridicule. <-- Take a look see! The people being ridiculed don't like it, okay, but that cannot be a reason against doing it. Anyone who argues against the importance and value of ridicule is just an ignorant person. I can see no reason not to do it, nor can anyone argue consistently against its value. Christians have been ridiculing atheists for centuries. Now that they are on the receiving end they look silly when they argue against doing what they've been doing way too long. It just goes to show you they'll say anything in defense of the indefensible when it comes to faith, for faith itself is irrational. So let them continue to argue against the use of ridicule. That in itself is ridiculous!

Professor Keith Parsons Advocates Ridicule

He advocates this as one response to fundamentalism. He writes:

“A single belly-laugh is worth a thousand syllogisms” said H.L. Mencken. Fundamentalism and fundamentalists should be ridiculed in the media, by comedians, or wherever. You don’t have to worry about fairness, since, as Poe’s Law famously notes, no satire can possibly be more absurd than the real thing. Come on. You just can’t come up with anything more ridiculous than someone who honestly thinks that all human woes stem from an incident in which a talking snake accosted a naked woman in a primeval garden and talked her into eating a piece of fruit. Again, most ridicule would consist of pointedly drawing attention to what they really believe. Nothing could be fairer than that. As a sign admonished on The Simpsons, put the fun back in fundamentalism. Laugh it to death. LINK.

It's not just the so-called "new atheists" like Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher and PZ Myers who advocate ridicule. I do too. So does Richard Carrier, as does Stephen Law. Keep in mind we don't advocate this as the only response.

On Justifying the Use of Ridicule and Mockery

Hey, I KNOW Christians don't like being mocked. I get that. So it's no surprise they would object to it by saying it doesn't cause them to change their minds, that it makes them dig their heels in deeper, and that it just makes them think less of the one doing the mocking. You would expect them to say this. The facts however are different. Ridicule and mockery have been very effective in any cultural war and they will forever be effective and necessary, despite Jeffrey Jay Lowder, the lone atheist holdout.

Professor Keith Parsons joins with others in advocating ridicule. He advocates this as one response to fundamentalism. He writes:

“A single belly-laugh is worth a thousand syllogisms” said H.L. Mencken. Fundamentalism and fundamentalists should be ridiculed in the media, by comedians, or wherever. You don’t have to worry about fairness, since, as Poe’s Law famously notes, no satire can possibly be more absurd than the real thing. Come on. You just can’t come up with anything more ridiculous than someone who honestly thinks that all human woes stem from an incident in which a talking snake accosted a naked woman in a primeval garden and talked her into eating a piece of fruit. Again, most ridicule would consist of pointedly drawing attention to what they really believe. Nothing could be fairer than that. As a sign admonished on The Simpsons, put the fun back in fundamentalism. Laugh it to death. LINK.

It's not just the so-called "new atheists" like Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, and PZ Myers who advocate ridicule. I do too (see below). So does Richard Carrier, as does Stephen Law. Keep in mind we don't advocate this as the only response.

Read more »

I Still Want a Respectful Educated Discussion of the Ideas That Separate Us

Have I changed my attitude from wanting a respectful discussion of the issues that divide us? If so, why? Have believers changed me? Should I let them change me? Will they be better off if they do?...or worse off? Can I remain steadfast in hopes of the ideal in the midst of some utterly ignorant comments and personal attacks from people I think are delusional? Am I that kind of person? Should I even care?

Once again Victor Reppert has taken a pot shot at me. He has become somewhat fixated on me. I guess that's a compliment since he wouldn't do this if I was not a threat to his faith. And while I don't respond to many criticisms posted by Christian Bloggers I do feel the need to respond to him, which is a compliment to him as well. Should I bother responding?

Read more »