Skeptics are dicks.

[Ravariel]

I am a skeptic. I don't believe. Not in magic, not in a higher moral authority, not in an afterlife, no in UFOs or Moon landing conspiracies or young-earth creationism, nor happily ever after.

I've been a dick about that fact, too.

How many times have I called someone a "fucking retard" for a bad-science AiG-cpypasta bullshit argument? A few.

How many times have I changed that "fucking retard's" mind?

Hmmm.

So, if my goal is to change people's minds, to bring them into the light of empirical science and evidence-based reasoning... why was I a dick? If it didn't help me achieve my goal, then what's the use? If it harmed my goal, even worse! Am I content to preach to the choir and get cheers from those who already agree with me?

We're all guilty of this. When a person is attacked, they fight back... they get defensive. When we attack someone's beliefs, they set their heels and become even more convinced... it only reinforces their belief. I mean when's the last time someone called YOU a fucking retard and convinced you that they were right? How many of you have ditched beliefs for skepticism because you were badgered, yelled at, condescended to or otherwise were on the receiving end of a verbal (or typed) dick?

Phil Plait is a PhD in Astronomy who writes the Blog Bad Astronomy and is also a skeptic, the likes of which include Richard Dawkins and James Randi. He regularly speaks at TAM, a conference about skepticism and the topics they talk about. You should all read his blog and follow him on Twitter....very worthwhile and cool stuff.

follow me, too... I could use the notoriety :P </shamelessplug>

Anyway, at the most recent TAM, he gave a speech about this very topic which you can see here. Parts 2 and 3 follow the responses to the talk and aftermath and are worthwhile, too.

So the question I pose to you, skeptics and non-skeptics alike: if your goal is to change minds... and being a dick not only does not do that, but actively works counter to that... why would you be a dick? There are those on here who might think I'm talking TO them with this, but believe me when I say I am talking to us all... myself included.

Skeptics may be dicks... but we don't have to be. And we'd probably change more minds if we weren't anymore.

[Chris-V2]

Being sceptical of everything = nihilism.

I think there's worse things in the world than being an obstinant, underminding dick.

[Drakim]

I agree with what you say, but I believe there is a time and place for everything.

Like, there are tons of things we are dicks about and it's perfectly fine. Almost everybody is a dick about the state of our politicians. But it's universally accepted. Nobody says "maybe they would do a better job and take less bribes if people like you stopped being so rude to them".

[gumOnShoe]

Its basically true, but it takes a modest amount of understanding; not of the facts, not of other people, but of yourself. You have to be able to look at yourself and say, yes I am bigoted. There are things that make me irrational and emotional and that will lead me further away from what I want to be my ultimate goal. In my experience, few people are capable of this, especially people who have a solid belief that they are right and must teach other people.

I had a professor tell me once he was lectured for calling new students stupid. He came to realize while he was in graduate school that if he couldn't ultimately respect the people he was trying to teach, they would never respect him, and so they would never buy in to what he had to say.

[poxpower]

That website has a shitty video player.
My internet is terrible and I've tried reloading it about 4-5 times and it never gets beyond a certain point and it won't allow you to fast-forward or put the slider where you want on the timeline like you can on youtube to resume loading from a specific time.

So.

Yeah.

Anyway I've been making an effort in the last.. year/month to stop being an asshole but once I realize a person is just shutting everything out I lose my patience and call them out for being a fucking moron.

If I was actually an important figure in the skeptical movement I'd make a better effort but I'm just some dude on the internet and I just see a bunch of dweebs who come in, make accounts, post a bunch of stupid rants and leave without ever debating anything.

[Miigga]

I take pride in being a dick

[SmilezRoyale]

Often times when you have a great deal of knowledge on a particular topic, more so than the average, you are liable to become 'dickish' when that topic is brought up. The more I studied economics the more angry i became with people when they put forward ideas that seemed [To me at least] Idiotic.

But yeah, if you want to convince someone you are right, you cannot rely on being condescending or being intimidating.

Much of political and religious ignorance comes from presupposition, that is, an idea or a theory is built on something that is presupposed to be true without the individual

I became an Atheist after i realized that my belief in god was based upon my presupposition that God existed.

So i started by asking myself to define God as a concept. Then, to ask myself what my reaction would be to someone putting forward the existence of this god if i had never been told about god as a child. And it seemed obvious to me that I never had a rational justification for god, it was presupposed at a young age and then justified ex-post-facto.

[morefngdbs]

In my search for religious enlightenment I came across a comment on a board where someone who said they were a believer in the FSM (flying Spagetti Monster)...not because he could PROVE there really was an all omniputent creator of everything who was made of pasta & was invisible etc.

No he wanted to believe in it, because if Christians, Jews & Muslims could believe in just 1 god & they had no more proof than anyone had about the FSM.
He might as well believe in the highly impossible.
After all we humans have no more proof of God, Jehova, Allah, than we do about the FSM.
Yet Billions of people not only believe in their god, they harm others who believe differently than themselves.
At least so far, no ones killing anyone over believing in the Flying Spagetti Monster...just yet anyhow.
So be a skeptic.
Just don't be a dick.

[Camarohusky]

At 8/20/10 04:21 PM, morefngdbs wrote: So be a skeptic.
Just don't be a dick.

More important than not being a dick is knowing what you are talking about from more sides that your own. Also, avoid the rash generalizations, they are a homing torpedo to anyone's credibility and make even the smartest look stupid... dbs.

[Imperator]

Favorite line:
How do you convince someone they're not thinking clearly, when they're not thinking clearly?

Second favorite:
Studies show debunking a misconception ends up reinforcing it later.

Third:
People's identity is wrapped up in their beliefs.

The stupidest thing I have ever tried was to use logic and reason to convince people who hold irrational beliefs. Using weapons they are immune to.

Being a skeptic is by far the most difficult thing ever. You have no true weapons. Facts and reason are useless to those holding an irrational belief.

He is right. Being a dick doesn't work. Feels good though. :)

[poxpower]

At 8/20/10 04:55 PM, Imperator wrote:

He is right. Being a dick doesn't work.

Did he ever get to the part where he says what DOES work?

[Imperator]

At 8/20/10 04:57 PM, poxpower wrote: Did he ever get to the part where he says what DOES work?

If he did, I missed it, which is my next big complaint.

On the other hand, as a counter, this is one of my favorite quotes:

A clever man says: "This is a lie, but since the people cannot do without it, and since it has the sanction of history, it is dangerous to root it out all at once; let it continue for the time being albeit with certain corrections." But the genius says: "This is a lie, therefore it must not exist."

He comes off as the clever man me thinks....

[Ravariel]

At 8/20/10 04:57 PM, poxpower wrote:

At 8/20/10 04:55 PM, Imperator wrote:

He is right. Being a dick doesn't work.

Did he ever get to the part where he says what DOES work?

...ish. He gave a good anecdotal story of talking to a Young-Earth Creationist at one of his student discussions. His ideas go more toward avoiding condescension, intimidation, ad-hominems, and bluntness. Though discussion on what TO say is limited due to the nature of peoples different styles of speaking.

If you got to read through the articles, comments and rebuttals, you'll notice a lot of people hung up on the definition of what "being a dick" was. One poster put it similar to that infamous SCOTUS ruling on Pornography: It's hard to define but you know it when you see it. SImilarly with not being a dick... you don't have to be a milquetoast in order to not be a dick, you don't have to walk on eggshells or not be invested emotionally to avoid the dickishness. My best idea about that is imagine someone saying to you, what you are saying to them, only about their point of view. If you would be angered and frustrated and think "what a dick" to such a post, perhaps it's best to revise.

I put in my own comment on the third article that I thought one problem of knowing when you're being a dick is the fact that it's kind of hard to realize you're being mean or condescending when others are agreeing with you. It's easy to see dickishness when it's pointed at you, but hard when it's about a topic you agree with and pointed at someone else (especially someone who you believe is behaving irrationally).

[RubberTrucky]

Being a dick does have an impact I feel. It shows your sturdy and sure of your theory and you can scold the other into submission, especially if you can back up the facts and outclass his arguments. I'm not entirely insensitive to such debating strategies. But that's also due to the fact that I have like no trust in myself and most of my opinions or arguments are stuff I am not sure if they are valid.

However in most debates I kind of hope to at least score some middle ground. Something like "That may be true, but..." It annoys me when the only thing people reply is "Well you're a frickin retard because..."
It makes me not want to get along with that person ever...

[Kwing]

Skeptics aren't really skeptical. They just want to listen to other people talk about things they don't believe so that they can't start a fight... And I think they know they can't change anyone's mind.

Real skeptics should always be open. I was thinking about a friend I had back in 7th grade who was the first person that proposed the idea to me that maybe modern science and atheism didn't apply the scientific method and simply ignored certain paranormal occurrences or focused only on "false alarms". Two and a half years later I've formed my own religion because of her.

Another friend from around the same time period has labeled himself as a skeptic, but he's actually open. He wants explanations, but he doesn't seem to have a "starting" affinity to a certain belief or another. I think this is how we all should be.

[Imperator]

At 8/20/10 10:32 PM, Kwing wrote: Skeptics aren't really skeptical. They just want to listen to other people talk about things they don't believe so that they can't start a fight... And I think they know they can't change anyone's mind.

Real skeptics should always be open.

Please replace the word "skeptic" with "Scotsman".

Thank you. :)

[poxpower]

At 8/20/10 10:32 PM, Kwing wrote:

Real skeptics should always be open. I was thinking about a friend I had back in 7th grade who was the first person that proposed the idea to me that maybe modern science and atheism didn't apply the scientific method and simply ignored certain paranormal occurrences or focused only on "false alarms".

Of course, being a true skeptic, you investigated this claim, right?

[Camarohusky]

At 8/20/10 11:01 PM, poxpower wrote: Of course, being a true skeptic, you investigated this claim, right?

Not all investigations have to be outward.

[Gario]

At 8/20/10 10:44 PM, Imperator wrote:

At 8/20/10 10:32 PM, Kwing wrote: Skeptics aren't really skeptical. They just want to listen to other people talk about things they don't believe so that they can't start a fight... And I think they know they can't change anyone's mind.

Real skeptics should always be open.

Please replace the word "skeptic" with "Scotsman".

Thank you. :)

... *chuckle*...

In all seriousness, though, I believe trying to convince people of your own position using text on a screen doesn't take anyone too far, since everyone has the ability to shut their eyes and ignore a comment (which is a very common response to something adverse, like evidence contrary to their current belief). Thus, simply typing the facts can only take you as far as the reader will allow you to (which is only as far as they feel comfortable answering to, which isn't far at all). Readers will hide to real confrontation, either ignoring arguments or arguming the same points ad nausam.

'Being a dick' can change this natural reflex to one of restlessness and the urge to fight back, so ironically it could help the reader actually pay some attention to the posts (for a time). The real problem is knowing when to stop - take the asshattery too far and the reader will think you're ignoring his/her argument and 'give up on you', which kills the conversation.

Being a dick has it's place, but resist the temptation of taking it too far (as much fun as that is). Successful asshattery is an art form, and one that I've rarely had the pleasure to witness in action. When you see an asshattery artist performing his/her magic, though, it's a sight to behold.

[satanbrain]

i will write what i think and i don't care if you like it or not.

[Camarohusky]

At 8/21/10 06:41 AM, satanbrain wrote: i will write what i think and i don't care if you like it or not.

Dick

[RubberTrucky]

How do people feel about Penn & Teller bullshit, by the way?
It's a funny thing to watch sometimes and they really go hard to defend one side of certain debates. But does that make them right all of the time?
There has been some retorts, like this one on global warming.

[X-Gary-Gigax-X]

Haha what? When is being a skeptic a bad thing? Scrutinize everything! Scrutinize the HELL out of stuff!

[poxpower]

At 9/1/10 03:50 PM, RubberTrucky wrote: How do people feel about Penn & Teller bullshit, by the way?

They are horrendoubly biased and present a terrible, terrible image of skepticism.
70% of their show is centered around personal anecdotes that have 0 relevant to anything.

Also I don't like how Mythbusters are considered to be doing 'science'. I mean most of the time they run an 'experiment' on one or two people and then conclude things based on that. Seriously one day they'll slap Jamie in the face and he won't say anything so they'll conclude that slaps don't cause pain,

I still watch those shows...

[Rory]

At 9/2/10 08:51 AM, poxpower wrote: Also I don't like how Mythbusters are considered to be doing 'science'. I mean most of the time they run an 'experiment' on one or two people and then conclude things based on that. Seriously one day they'll slap Jamie in the face and he won't say anything so they'll conclude that slaps don't cause pain,

I honestly can't wait for that, but the thing, no matter how thoroughly you run an experiment, there is always someone who would say that you're not being thorough enough, still, mythbusters makes a mockery of actual science, for some reason, they seem to beleive one attempt is conclusive evidence.

I also still watch those shows...

[Jon-86]

At 8/20/10 10:44 PM, Imperator wrote:

At 8/20/10 10:32 PM, Kwing wrote: Skeptics aren't really skeptical. They just want to listen to other people talk ] ... [ know they can't change anyone's mind.

Real skeptics should always be open.

Please replace the word "skeptic" with "Scotsman".

Thank you. :)

Bugger you :)

[RubberTrucky]

At 9/2/10 08:51 AM, poxpower wrote:
Also I don't like how Mythbusters are considered to be doing 'science'.

All those hi-fi science shows centre more around awesomeness, than factual science. I personally had noticed this on a similar show "brainiac", where they were "proving" which gender spends most of the time in the toilet. they took one woman and one man and served them some drinks. Then they measured the time they spend in the toilet and concluded that men spend more time on a toilet then women.

[Ravariel]

P&T are really biased, but they admit that up front. So anyone watching the show really needs to take their conclusions with a grain of salt (or, y'know, a mine of salt). That said, they do serve a good function of challenging a lot of the bad reasons we believe shit. Even in their global warming show, pointing to the media hyperbole of previous climate problems is a good thing. We need to be aware that what is reported about science is not always what is really there. And on shows where they got it wrong, if they are later proven wrong, they'll own up to it, so bully for them on that.

Mythbusters is science... to a point. They are limited by budget and time constraints so cannot be as thorough as is probably necessary for your normal peer-reviewed journal... but they do try a lot of things, and do try to find the right answer... and if you're a frequenter of their forums, they are held to an impressive standard for an entertainment show. Noone should put them on the same level as published studies, but for rule-of-thumb stuff they're okay.

[poxpower]

At 9/3/10 12:43 AM, Ravariel wrote: P&T are really biased, but they admit that up front.

They said it ONCE in ONE show in the span of like 6 seasons now...
I mean... if you just admit to it outside your show when you get fans questionning you, that's sort of dishonest.

Noone should put them on the same level as published studies, but for rule-of-thumb stuff they're okay.

I know but still.

Also did anyone see that show, Sci-Fi science, with Michio Kaku?
That show is terrible. TERRIBLE I SAY.

[ChainsawNinjaZX]

At 8/19/10 03:02 PM, Ravariel wrote: if your goal is to change minds... and being a dick not only does not do that, but actively works counter to that... why would you be a dick? There are those on here who might think I'm talking TO them with this, but believe me when I say I am talking to us all... myself included.

Skeptics may be dicks... but we don't have to be. And we'd probably change more minds if we weren't anymore.

Mature conclusion. You are asking the wrong question though, you should be asking, "how do we get them to change their minds?"

However, to answer your question, I wouldn't be a "dick." It just makes you look ignorant and egotistical. However, a question I pose to you is, why do you care about what other people believe in? As long as they aren't doing anything wrong or hurtful to anyone else, it quite frankly is none of your business.