The new word is faitheists.
Search
Profile
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.
Random Quote
The Christian resolution to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad.
[Nietzsche]
Recent Posts
- Mary's Monday Metazoan: Ambition!
- Our illness is their profit
- Friday Cephalopod: NUMBERLESS HOSTS!
- Dear Jezebel
- There Will Be Blood?
- Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Friday Cephalopod: Feasibility trial successful
- Making excuses
- More bad science in the literature
- An open letter to the Indiana legislature
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- Jeanette Garcia on Mary's Monday Metazoan: Ambition!
- sandra - juegos de mario on Our illness is their profit
- Owlmirror on More bad science in the literature
- Tumara Baap on Our illness is their profit
- Palaverer on Mary's Monday Metazoan: Ambition!
- Owlmirror on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Nerd of Redhead, OM on More bad science in the literature
- Zaki Aminu on More bad science in the literature
- Zaki Aminu on More bad science in the literature
- Zaki Aminu on More bad science in the literature
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
Blogroll
Other Information
« Transformer! | Main | Unscientific America: it's personal! »
More articles by PZ Myers can be found on Freethoughtblogs at the new Pharyngula!
Update your dictionaries
Category: Godlessness
Posted on: July 17, 2009 1:39 PM, by PZ Myers
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/115127
Leave a comment
HTML commands: <i>italic</i>, <b>bold</b>, <a href="url">link</a>, <blockquote>quote</blockquote>
Comments
Posted by: Andyman | July 17, 2009 1:46 PM
will do
Posted by: NewEnglandBob
|
July 17, 2009 1:48 PM
"Faitheists" will do, but I prefer "Militant New Accommodationists"
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 17, 2009 1:49 PM
Faitholes?
Posted by: Blake Stacey | July 17, 2009 1:49 PM
I think I might actually prefer "Placatheists", but Atheist Cardinal Coyne has spoken, and this edict is sure to get approval from Atheist Pope Richard I.
Posted by: speedwell | July 17, 2009 1:49 PM
Hit the filter at work. Can someone recap, briefly? (Thanks...)
Posted by: sasqwatch
|
July 17, 2009 1:50 PM
A new word has been Coyned.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | July 17, 2009 1:53 PM
speedwell it was a contest. Here were the rules
Posted by: SEF | July 17, 2009 1:54 PM
I assume "faitheist" is in addition to pre-existing useful neologisms such as "apatheist".
Posted by: James F | July 17, 2009 1:59 PM
#6: a winner is you!
I'm shocked that it wasn't "accommodatheists." A portmanteau containting the favorite term of derision? Seemed like a shoo-in.
Posted by: Ryan F Stello | July 17, 2009 2:02 PM
It's so obviously fitting, I wouldn't have been able to come up with it.
Kudos to Divalent!
Posted by: daveau
|
July 17, 2009 2:02 PM
speedwell @5
They allow Pharyngula, but block Why Evolution is True? That is one retarded categorization.
See, as the gatekeeper, I can bypass the filtering at will...
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM
|
July 17, 2009 2:04 PM
nice
Posted by: JohnnieCanuck
|
July 17, 2009 2:08 PM
My guess would be that Scienceblogs is acting as a Trojan Horse, allowing all this cephalopod porn and anti-faitheist propaganda through their gates.
Posted by: Laurie | July 17, 2009 2:09 PM
Faitheists! I love it!!!
Very OT but possibly of interest to readers of this blog: Vision Forum Ministries recently staged a "debate" between "historical" re-enactors playing John Calvin and Charles Darwin, each putting forth their respective worldviews. Holy anachronism, batman! I am pretty sure Darwin "lost" the debate, and I am pretty sure the words placed in his mouth in no way resembled anything he actually said. Unforunately, they haven't yet posted a video of the debate but there is a video (if you scroll down to July 16) of "Darwin" discussing his views of Christians and, of course, advocating social engineering:
http://www.visionforum.com/hottopics/blogs/dwp/
Posted by: tsg | July 17, 2009 2:11 PM
I may have to start using "butters".
Posted by: tsg | July 17, 2009 2:15 PM
I love it when people make shit up and pretend it means something.
Posted by: Architeuthis | July 17, 2009 2:15 PM
Oh yeah, I dig the word "faitheists" as a punchy name to describe the accomodationists, but as an etymology geek, "faith" coming from fidelis: to trust, it just seems that if you forced a strict etymological meaning on this, it's the opposite of what the intention is.
I do however like Godlycoddlers (or godcoddlers) I like the way it rolls off my tongue and kinda sounds a little dirty.
Nevertheless, as soon as I take off my etymology geek hat, that's a word I'll be using frequently :)
Posted by: drew | July 17, 2009 2:16 PM
I prefer placatheists myself but faitheists works I suppose
Posted by: Caine | July 17, 2009 2:17 PM
Fatheist. Sweet, succinct and at home to a curl of contempt. Well done, Divalent!
Posted by: Ryan F Stello | July 17, 2009 2:24 PM
Architeuthis (#17) noted,
Actually, even with a strict meaning, I think it works even better, if you read it as:
"to trust theists"
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
July 17, 2009 2:27 PM
Do we have a KoL player in James F?
I sense a great annoyance in the force, as if millions of faitheists suddenly cried that we're hurting science/atheism, and were suddenly unable to produce any evidence for this claim.
Posted by: Sastra
|
July 17, 2009 2:32 PM
A very useful word. Now I'm waiting to hear:
"Well, I'm a faitheist, but ... I love Pharyngula."
Faitheist Buttery.
Posted by: Architeuthis | July 17, 2009 2:41 PM
@Ryan #20.
Excellent point. Now that you've said that, I think it makes perfect sense.
Thanks!
Posted by: speedwell | July 17, 2009 2:42 PM
Thanks, Brother Chimp :)
My submission would have been "wishyists" (from both "wish" and "wishy(washy)," but I like "faitheists" just fine.
daveau, Blogspot and Wordpress blogs are all blocked under the filter's "Social Networking and Personal Sites", setting. I guess since Pharynguloids are antisocial geeks, we don't count (I include myself). Heh.
Posted by: Otto | July 17, 2009 2:43 PM
I think credophiles would have been the better choice.
Posted by: Sili
|
July 17, 2009 2:44 PM
Mmmmmmh - sweet, buttery faitheists.
(Bacon optional.)
Posted by: Mixter | July 17, 2009 2:46 PM
Apt.
Mixter
Posted by: I.Strange | July 17, 2009 2:56 PM
I don't really get it, to be honest. "Faitheist" would seem to mean "someone who worships faith." How does that describe the accomodationists, exactly? Their arguments (over) stress civility and political expediency, not the importance of faith. I think it's a confusing term...
Posted by: DoxieVee
|
July 17, 2009 3:09 PM
#28
It's. For. Fun.
Faitheist is nice. How long before people start spelling it "faithiest" just to piss off my inner spelling Nazi?
Posted by: Susannah | July 17, 2009 3:17 PM
It's going to be quote-mined. "See, atheism is a religion! Even the atheists admit it!!!!11"
Sure, that is not what we mean by it, but when did that ever stop them?
I like "Butters". (Period outside the quotes on purpose.)
Posted by: Azkyroth | July 17, 2009 3:34 PM
What's wrong with "concern troll?"
Posted by: Screechy Monkey | July 17, 2009 3:55 PM
And let's not forget to call the more vocal ones Militant Faitheists!
Posted by: Kitty'sBitch | July 17, 2009 4:04 PM
I was robbed I tell ya! PZ, you'll have to help heal my wounds by signing a book for me.
If I can make it to the "museum" on the seventh, I'm bringing my copy of Atlas Of Creation. Perhaps you can think of something suitable to write in it.
Architeuthis (godlycoddlers)
Thanks, that was mine.
Posted by: DevonR | July 17, 2009 4:06 PM
I do wish that 'accomodatheists' was chosen, it was my submission afterall.
Posted by: Architeuthis | July 17, 2009 4:24 PM
@Kitty'sBitch
It was a great suggestion, and now I'm jealous that you may be going to the creation museum w/ the gang. How cool would that be?
As a child and young adult, the church i grew up in had us going to Ken Ham's odious lectures... I guess I should thank him, it was Ham's, Gish's & the Morris cretins that solidified my love for real science by making me realize how stupid creationism was, and once I accepted that, the entire rotted edifice of christianity and religion fell. In some petty way, I want to thank them personally for guiding me towards becoming an atheist.
Posted by: Rick | July 17, 2009 4:32 PM
I'm all for arguing the issues, but I don't see the point in making it personal.
I think there is real doubt about how much free will that a person has to control what they believe and in some cases, believers have been conditioned from childhood. I don't think they are able to change. So, by all means, argue the case, but if you make it personal, then how is that different that making fun of a deaf person because they can't hear.
Does that make me a "Faitheist"? I honestly don't know.
Also, assuming that we are taking a skeptical approach, we should favor the answers that come from science and the scientific method, but we should also accept that we don't have all the answers.
I think that many Atheists get so worn down by the constant attacks by Fundy wing-nuts that we become reactionary and that can lead to extreme responses even when it isn't warranted.
A jerk is a jerk whether they are correct or not.
PZ -- I think you are brilliant, but sometimes you sound so harsh. Consider the position of a scientist who supports an incorrect theory and devotes his career to exploring it. Very often they will go to their graves without ever being able to admit that they were wrong. It is even harder to admit you are wrong if you face ridicule and derision.
Anyway, just a few thoughts.
Posted by: askewmind
|
July 17, 2009 4:42 PM
To #36,
Your argument is fundamentally flawed in that the reason we militantly oppose this kind of theistic behaviour is not that they think differently or that we think they are wrong (though they are in most cases, as these people are ignoramus, unable to find the "on" button of their brains!) but the harmful way their decisions, opinions and actions based on fantasies affect ALL OUR LIVES!!
If you CANNOT get that, maybe you should keep looking for that "on" switch, trust me it is there somewhere, you just need to look hard for it.
Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM | July 17, 2009 4:43 PM
Sastra@22:
"A very useful word. Now I'm waiting to hear:
"Well, I'm a faitheist, but ... I love Pharyngula."
I am to oblige. What am I, really, but an 'Atheistian'?*
* = sincere God-botherer, who excludes God as a formal matter from certain domains, among them the conduct of science and public policy?
Posted by: Randy | July 17, 2009 4:53 PM
@5: "They allow Pharyngula, but block Why Evolution is True? That is one retarded categorization."
If it is like my workplace, they block *.wordpress.com, *.blogger.com, *.livejournal.com, and so on. But scienceblogs appears to have a "real" domain, and isn't apparently to be confused with those "social networking" sites the blog-hosts listed here (and others) are. Pretty sure that's the thinking that gets such things banned here.
Posted by: Glen Davidson | July 17, 2009 4:58 PM
I'm not going to hold back from disagreeing with the choice just because I entered and lost. Doesn't matter, I barely cared about the contest, but do care about horrible word hybrids.
It's just a bad choice, having little or nothing to do with what they actually are or do. They (most at least) don't have faith, and may not even be atheists--could be agnostics.
And it sounds cutesy, like a word some ad agency thought up, that would go out of date in two or three weeks. Now Coyne's stuck using it for years, probably.
Coyne's a great guy to have on our side, but I don't think he knows much about how quickly "cute words" cloy.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: Laurie | July 17, 2009 5:00 PM
I think Rick raises some important points. I too question how much free will we have in choosing our world view and belief systems. We are all, to some extent, products of our place and time and surely all have some blind spots and prejudices. That's why I have nothing but admiration for people brought up in fundie households and yet manage to break free -- and major historical figures, such as Darwin, who follow where the evidence leads even when it undermines all conventional wisdom. So, on the one hand, I do have some compassion for otherwise bright people I know who seem to be caught in fundamentalist beliefs.
At the same time, though, harshness is also warranted because so many of these people, and especially their leaders like Ken Ham, engage in dishonesty. These people lie outright. And they do it so THEY can claim a monopoly on truth and use their special pipeline to God to control others. Thus, destructive religious concepts like patriarchy derive directly from this notion that what the Bible says must be correct, and that of course a select group of men truly have authority to teach the Bible.
Posted by: Kitty'sBitch | July 17, 2009 5:14 PM
Architeuthis
No reason to be jealous. Y'see, the reason that I can go to the creation "museum" is that I LIVE NEAR THE CREATION MUSEUM.
See what I mean? If anything, you should pity me.
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
July 17, 2009 5:28 PM
You know, "symps" might have been good. Symps for sympathizers, with overtones of "simpletons." Short, pejorative, not cute.
Oh well, too late for Coyne.
Glen Davidson
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
July 17, 2009 5:54 PM
Laurie #41
My father, who I love dearly*, is a Catholic conservative. I'm an atheist liberal. Possibly there's more free will about selecting beliefs than you might think.
*I remember my father's last words to me the day that I left home: "And don't come back!"
Posted by: Jack
|
July 17, 2009 6:11 PM
It's cute, but I think I'll stick with "fifth columnists", "concern trolls" and "twats".
Posted by: MoxieHart | July 17, 2009 8:22 PM
@ # 36: I really dislike the argument that being raised from childhood with certain ideas is some kind of exemption from critical thought. There's something cravenly and cheap about it. There comes a point in your life when you really need to question what you're taught, especially what you've always assumed to be true. It seems that people who are raised in religious households get a free pass from this course, but I'm certain that they'd be sharply criticized if they came from a racist or homophobic or sexist background (ALthough those are by no means mutually exclusive.)
Posted by: John Harshman
|
July 17, 2009 8:32 PM
I can't say I'm all that happy to have another word we can use to put people into arbitrary categories, say that makes them different from us, and hate them for it. Shouldn't we leave that to the theists?
Posted by: Rorschach | July 17, 2009 10:47 PM
godlycoddlers would have been more accurate.
Its not faith that's those people's problem,it's the "be nice and dont say anything offensive" attitude.
Posted by: gdlchmst | July 17, 2009 10:57 PM
But, godlycoddlers and credophiles sound so much better. Imagine, you are in a hopeless argument with an accommodationist. You get frustrated, scream in his/her face, "up yours, you fucking godlycoddler/credophile" and walk away. So much more powerful than "faitheist."
Posted by: Mixter | July 17, 2009 11:03 PM
Oh, you naysayers... It's all in good fun, isn't it? I mean, that was the point, right? What, does the fact that the word "faitheist" is being used playfully on some blogs somehow make it "official?"
Mixter
Posted by: Estragon | July 17, 2009 11:38 PM
I guess I just don't see the point of being a jackass. What's wrong with being nice to Christians? Why does that automatically make you co-conspirator in some dominionist plot to take the US into another dark age?
Posted by: Estragon | July 17, 2009 11:40 PM
I guess I just don't see the point of being a jackass. What's wrong with being nice to Christians? Why does that automatically make you co-conspirator in some dominionist plot to take the US into another dark age?
Posted by: Azkyroth | July 18, 2009 1:48 AM
Actually, in many quarters those from racist, homophobic, sexist, etc. backgrounds DO get a free pass in this regard, if they're old enough.
Ah, strawman-false-dichotomy hybrid. Tried and true...
Posted by: Rorschach | July 18, 2009 2:23 AM
I saw that, and just couldnt bring myself to respond to it.
SIWOTI burnout I guess..:-)
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
July 18, 2009 6:58 AM
There's nothing wrong with being nice to Christians. Some of my best friends are Christians. I've even been known to invite Christians to visit chez moi (I don't offer them the good sherry, one must have some standards).
Posted by: Laurie | July 18, 2009 9:56 AM
'Tis Himself,
Perhaps you are right -- maybe I underestimate people's ability to see through their parents' and culture's bullshit. As someone raised by liberal atheists, I can only try to imagine what it must be like to deal with having been religiously indoctrinated from day one.
Please note that despite my sympathy for people raised fundy, I STILL believe that mockery, ridicule, and harshness are perfectly warranted and acceptable when critiquing stupid religious beliefs. We shouldn't tiptoe around stupidity just because it is cloaked in religion. We aren't doing religious peopple any favors by massaging their sensibilities.
Posted by: Trish | July 18, 2009 10:45 AM
@ #36:
One- this term isn't aimed at theists, it's aimed at atheists who believe we should be overly nice and accomadating to those who believe. I do agree that we shouldn't let attacks get personal. But attacking what a person believes is rarely personal, especially when it comes to religion that is shared by possibly millions.
Two- attacking what a person believes is *not* the same as attacking a deaf person for being deaf. Ultimately, what you believe is *your* choice, whether or not you decided to never question the beliefs that your parents/community raised you in. Being born deaf is an accident of nature and not that person's choice.
Posted by: bluescat48
|
July 18, 2009 11:32 AM
Actually, I would prefer creotardofaithiest.
Posted by: KevinC | July 18, 2009 1:31 PM
I am the very model of a militant New Faitheist
I won’t accommodate the dissing of accommodationists
I frame my science papers to appease the fundamentalists
Believers Catholic, Baptist, Presbyterian, and Calvinist
I’m very well acquainted with faiths Islamist and Brahmanist
I’m tolerant of anything but cracker-mocking atheists
I’ll silence P.Z. Myers Jerry Coyne and Richard Dawkins too
And any atheist who likes to criticize religious woo
And any atheist who likes to criticize religious woo!
And any atheist who likes to criticize religious woo!
And any atheist who likes to criticize religious Bible woooooo!
I am the Jedi Knight who knows the secret things that you should do
My book will show you how to make believers love the science too
In short, in matters of communication use my To Do list
I am the very model of a militant New Faitheist
Posted by: Astos | July 18, 2009 2:22 PM
I wonder how I should translate "faitheists" to Portuguese...
Posted by: efrique | July 19, 2009 4:27 AM
I used the term "faitheism" back in 2007, in a response to the theist argument that "atheism is a faith" here:
http://ecstathy.blogspot.com/2007/10/faitheism-and-im-politically-active-by.html
Posted by: mayhempix | July 19, 2009 6:04 PM
Glen D @ #40
"It's just a bad choice, having little or nothing to do with what they actually are or do. They (most at least) don't have faith, and may not even be atheists--could be agnostics."
Glen D is a Naytheist.