Skatje is revealing all of the family secrets! I'm going to have to track her down in far-off Madison and superglue her fingers together…right after I track down all the disgusting boys who are calling her "hot" and thump 'em up a bit.
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
It cannot be too often repeated, that truth scorns the assistance of miracle.
[Robert G. Ingersoll]
Recent Posts
- 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
- One Carnival of Evolution, coming right up
- Botanical Wednesday: Walking? No way
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- Amphiox, OM on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Amphiox, OM on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- ebay.moshe on Friday Cephalopod: NUMBERLESS HOSTS!
- Nerd of Redhead, OM on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- 'Tis Himself, OM on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Ichthyic on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Mike Elzinga on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Nerd of Redhead, OM on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Stanton on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Stanton on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
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
« Friday Cephalopod: I don't think it's going to be our friend anymore | Main | Hey, I was ambushed in that interview! »
More articles by PZ Myers can be found on Freethoughtblogs at the new Pharyngula!
Oh, no! Daughter is spilling the beans on Reddit!
Category: Personal
Posted on: August 6, 2010 2:53 PM, by PZ Myers
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/144968
Leave a comment
HTML commands: <i>italic</i>, <b>bold</b>, <a href="url">link</a>, <blockquote>quote</blockquote>
Comments
Posted by: Glenn G
|
August 6, 2010 3:00 PM
I would have expected her to be a bit more enlightened with you as a father :S
I mean really, a lump of cells with an underdeveloped brain is now human?
Posted by: Franklin Percival
|
August 6, 2010 3:02 PM
Hope your practicing irony here, my man!
Posted by: nejishiki
|
August 6, 2010 3:09 PM
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=attention%20whore
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
August 6, 2010 3:11 PM
If mind != brain, then I'd have to say that we don't have mind (and it makes no sense to say mind is what brain does, although it might be fair to say that mind is a functioning (not dead or seriously malfunctioning) brain). That brain is "mind" is about as certain as that knees are joints.
And no, we don't say that "materialism is true," or at least if we do we don't mean that it's "metaphysically true." I don't go for terms like "materialism" or "naturalism" anyhow, however I would say that science gives us the answers that mean something to us, without claiming that science is "true" beyond the notion that it gives us meaningful and useful answers.
Glen Davidson
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
August 6, 2010 3:11 PM
gotta love the "wish I had been raised a christian, because then I wouldn't have to deal with shades of gray in my ethics" stuff.
Posted by: PZ Myers
|
August 6, 2010 3:11 PM
No. More like a daughter who has left home and is living in a distant city with no car and who wants to talk to someone.
Posted by: irenedelse
|
August 6, 2010 3:12 PM
Kids! Anything to be different from Dad, of course ;-)
Posted by: 朴競花/박경화 (Gyeong Hwa)
|
August 6, 2010 3:14 PM
Duuuude, not smooth at all.
Posted by: Shplane, some shit in french
|
August 6, 2010 3:16 PM
Huh. So she buys the whole mind/body dualism thing?
Posted by: Erulóra (formerly KOPD)
|
August 6, 2010 3:22 PM
I'm not in the mind=brain camp, just like I'm not in the light=bulb camp.
Posted by: mclean.malcolm
|
August 6, 2010 3:27 PM
Brendan, responding to a question about who PZ is says "He is well spoken and has a rye sense of humor".
I don't know it that's true, but it sounds like fun.
Posted by: Kieranfoy, Faerie Godfather of Death, GMKSC, OED
|
August 6, 2010 3:29 PM
Wow, P Zed. How does it feel to watch the Horde Pharyngulate your own flesh and blood?
Posted by: Moosey
|
August 6, 2010 3:33 PM
An internet sensation. You read it here first.
Posted by: Randomfactor
|
August 6, 2010 3:39 PM
The mind is not the brain. The hole is not the shovel.
The mind is what the brain *DOES.* The hole is what the shovel *DOES*.
Posted by: IslandBrewer
|
August 6, 2010 3:39 PM
Hey, I gotta applaud PZ, here. He and the Trophy Wife raised a daughter (and two sons) who think for themselves. What they think are what THEY come up with, what THEY decide is more likely true than not, not necessarily what their father taught to them ought to be true.
And Skatje's still young. It's perfectly fine to grapple with things and change your mind over and over again at that age. Kudos to her (and PZ) for having a Dad that has let her figure out things for herself without running in and saying "No, THIS is the truth! Trust me, I'm your much wiser father!" He sounds like a great Dad to have, despite any boy thumping he may engage in.
Posted by: Caine, ghetto féministe
|
August 6, 2010 3:41 PM
Jadehawk:
That got a laugh; the "biblical morality and christian morality are totally different things" got a raised eyebrow and a shake of the head.
Posted by: jeffery.g.davis
|
August 6, 2010 3:41 PM
I like all the "free thinkers" on here giving her a hard time for disagreeing with her father. It seems to me like she is following exactly in his footsteps and thinking for herself. On a side note PZ, I'm afraid she is kind of cute; but, since she and I are about the same age i'm not sure I deserve the thumping.
Posted by: Randomfactor
|
August 6, 2010 3:42 PM
"He is well spoken and has a rye sense of humor".
I suspect ergot is involved.
Posted by: Jason A.
|
August 6, 2010 3:46 PM
Are you sure that's why they're giving her a hard time?
Posted by: casey.oneill.is
|
August 6, 2010 3:47 PM
Dualism is not the only other solution to the mind/body problem. I'm rather fond of Searle's solution. Yep, there's a mind and a brain, and the mind comes from the brain but isn't the brain.
Of course, here on the internet people can't stand him because they aren't so fond of the chinese room argument, mostly because they don't understand it.
Posted by: mikerattlesnake
|
August 6, 2010 3:54 PM
She sounds like a smart person who maintains some of the prejudices of youth. It can take a long time to develop nuanced and logically consistent positions on complex topics, but I'm sure she'll turn out fine. Her critics in this thread seem to be prone to exaggeration.
Posted by: Kawa
|
August 6, 2010 3:56 PM
Thump me up all you want, Doc. Your daughter -does- look nice.
Posted by: otrame
|
August 6, 2010 3:58 PM
@ 12
Oh, this is far from the first time that most here have disagreed with the Overlord's Offspring. She has a mind of her own. And if Madison is anything at all like it was back in the mid-70s, she's getting lots of different points of view, ranging from brilliant to psychotic, just on her way to the bus stop every day. She'll sort things out and eventually have a mature set of ideas that will not match her father's perfectly and [sarcasm] that will be just unheard of, won't it? [/sarcasm].
If I can handle my youngest telling me he "got saved" when he was about 15, I'm sure PZ can handle this. (BTW, youngest is now every bit as much an atheist as his Mom)
*wipes proud tear
Posted by: Dave A
|
August 6, 2010 3:58 PM
Kid Rock was asked if he used Twitter. His reply was twitter my dick. Who the fuck has time for tweets, texts, facebook(a complete waste of time and invasion of ones own privacy. The same with Reddit bullshit. It's bad enough that we walk around with our cell phones all day. Are we afraid we won't have instant communication. Fuck all of this shit. Oh, don't forget your fucking Blackberry.
Posted by: mike1921
|
August 6, 2010 4:01 PM
When did you take him out to eat his first baby?
Posted by: Pilchard
|
August 6, 2010 4:04 PM
Charming.I'd like to think that most people don't like it because it's not entirely convincing:
1. Our intuitions are terrible guides to reality
2. Our intuitions about something that is nothing like the human brain are terrible guides to...the human brain.
3. Searle is a property dualist, despite his protestations to the contrary, a position that amounts to "we don't know, therefore X".
4. Even if his argument was sound, it may very well amount to a modus ponens rather than a modus tollens. I see no reason to postulate more going on in our heads than pure syntax.
Posted by: gussnarp
|
August 6, 2010 4:07 PM
@otrame - Oh my, your child got saved? Is there a vaccine for that? I think if my child wants to start going to church some day I'm going to make them go to a different one every week until they've tried every religion and sect within a thirty mile radius, then ask them why they think one is any more true than another.
Posted by: Rey Fox, Bird Caller Guy
|
August 6, 2010 4:08 PM
*Rey leaves to play on Dave A's lawn*
Posted by: mikerattlesnake
|
August 6, 2010 4:09 PM
@24
If we're picking sides, I want to be as far from Kid Rock as possible.
Also, this link was worthwhile just for the PZ Lemmy-stache pic. Never saw that one before and it has me thoroughly convinced that PZ has always been awesome.
Posted by: sfbay4ever
|
August 6, 2010 4:09 PM
It's just so sad that your daughter is what people here call "a demented fuckwit.". I hope she cures herself and becomes a rational person someday.
Posted by: rob
|
August 6, 2010 4:11 PM
she is in college and can think for herself.
i just recommend that she *not* grow a beard like her dad.
Posted by: bytesmasher
|
August 6, 2010 4:19 PM
I'm fairly sure that Skatje's point regarding the mind = brain thing is that the mind is software while the brain is hardware. It's a semantic issue, surely... but it makes logical sense. Granted, we have no way of transferring said software in its entirety, simply one meme at a time... but aside from the thought patterns that are entirely hard-wired and instinctual, our mind is still plainly software ;) .... and before you go claiming that because it's physically stored information, it's one in the same as the brain: Keep in mind that hard drives and DVDs also have their information stored physically.
Also, the "biblical morality and christian morality are totally different things" thing makes sense too when you realize that most christians don't really follow their own book. In fact, most christian moderates are closer to being humanists than biblical christians. In fact, the more extreme christians often come up with outlandish things that are plainly not in the bible as well.
Posted by: Rey Fox, Bird Caller Guy
|
August 6, 2010 4:19 PM
"If we're picking sides, I want to be as far from Kid Rock as possible."
QF F'in' T. Now I really will leave because these Skatje threads invariably turn mega-creepy.
Posted by: otrame
|
August 6, 2010 4:24 PM
@ gussnarp
I found simply saying "Ok" and listening to him without arguing worked pretty well. After he'd actually been to church five or six times he came to the conclusion that "those people are crazy" and that was pretty much the end of it.
I like your idea of taking him to several churches, but don't be dismissive (hush, I am not an accommodationist). You don't want to trigger the "My mom hates it so let's DO it!" syndrome if you can help it.
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
August 6, 2010 4:30 PM
The Chinese Room problem was answered quite neatly by Daniel Dennett. Two Black Boxes: A Fable. (Thanks, truth machine OM.)
I find the Chinese Room to be a misdirection. All he has done is remove the symbols from the symbolic processing engine and declared that neither can truly understand Chinese. Of course not: the symbolic representation requires symbolic processing, and the processor requires symbols.
That's like stripping hydrogen from oxygen and declaring neither is water. Uhm... duh.
Of course, that's how I see it. I could be wrong.
Posted by: Caine, ghetto féministe
|
August 6, 2010 4:38 PM
mikerattlesnake:
You've never been in one of the 1,000+ threads with Skatje, have you? A lot of us here have been involved in heavy...discussions of certain issues with Skatje. Just sayin'.
Posted by: weez
|
August 6, 2010 4:41 PM
It's indeed typical for one's children to attempt differentiation through rebellion. The grrrrrlchild from this pro-choice/liberal/atheist household has dabbled with wicca, charismatic xianity, garden-variety rightist social politcs etc. However, she's the master of her uterine domain in no uncertain terms and now works for a xian operated but truly altruistic social justice organisation. I have no fears for Skatje- she'll come around in due time.
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk
|
August 6, 2010 4:44 PM
She needs to give this a bit more thought. Unless and until she can come up with something other than the real world that influences our minds, the equal sign is entirely appropriate.X + 0 = X is perfectly correct mathing.
Posted by: casey.oneill.is
|
August 6, 2010 4:44 PM
@Pilchard
None of which addresses the fundamental point, which is that there is no way to get from calculation to consciousness. The brain is not merely a calculator, it is a symbol manipulator. I think the chinese room argument has some problems and you're right about intuition not being the best guide. But the other side of the argument seems to be that we can build a perfect model that will be the thing, the brain in this case. That's what he's arguing against. The analogy of software might be right in some respect, but not as some program that runs on a calculating machine, which is what a computer is.
Posted by: mikerattlesnake
|
August 6, 2010 4:45 PM
I think I've seen her show up, but I've never witnessed an extended discussion. I'm just going by people's interpretations of her views (dualist, anti-abortion, etc.) which clash with her actual, more nuanced explanations on this reddit thing. I certainly don't agree with a few of her positions, but they don't seem hard-line or immune to change.
Posted by: lumbercartel
|
August 6, 2010 4:49 PM
Sounds like work. I much prefer the "forethought" approach: teach the daughter unit to do her own dirty work.
A little positive reinforcement at the right time, and before you know it you have a daughter who gets a serious kick out of having the boyz in terror. Oh, at first it's when they realize that the "ten rules for dating my daughter" might actually be for real, but later it's because she'd intimidating in her own right.
Kids: as an investment, just can't be beat.
Posted by: j-brisby
|
August 6, 2010 4:51 PM
You'd think a college grad would know the difference between phased and fazed.
Posted by: James F
|
August 6, 2010 4:51 PM
#24 Dave A,
Twitter is actually useful as a search engine - if there is a breaking story somewhere in the world, just head to the home page and you'll get multiple links to reports at various news outlets. It's also makes for an amusing case study of how rapidly rumors spread through social networking sites right along side actual news (e.g., Bill Cosby's "death").
I like Facebook for keeping in touch with old friends and colleagues. The time required to email back and forth with everyone is prohibitive, but with a quick scan of status updates, you have a sense of how things are going in their lives, when they might be coming through town, and so forth. Definitely a positive overall, but I avoid Farmville and similar games like the plague.
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk
|
August 6, 2010 4:53 PM
I am so sad for you. Perhaps disownment would be too extreme, but this is going to make those family holiday get-togethers a bit tense.Posted by: Caine, ghetto féministe
|
August 6, 2010 4:55 PM
mikerattlesnake:
I was one of the people on the front lines in two posts regarding rights, autonomy and abortion when Skatje was involved. I'll just say this: her views regarding abortion are not remotely nuanced.
That view might change, it might not. However, please don't think those of us who have engaged with Skatje are exaggerating or just being mean. Skatje is highly opinionated; so am I. I do respect her enough to think she can hold her own in an argument and I respect her enough to state my views without reservation rather than "tone things down" to "protect" her.
Posted by: Andrew Hall
|
August 6, 2010 4:56 PM
@ 41 Kids are a good investment, but they must be attended to otherwise chaos ensues.
http://laughinginpurgatory.blogspot.com/2010/08/raising-atheists-or-what-im-not-getting.html
Posted by: danielm
|
August 6, 2010 4:58 PM
Damn atheists! you force your convictions into your children with a sledgehammer, that they parrot your same views in lock-step...
*whisperwhisper*
what, she holds numerous beliefs that are radically different from her father's (and perhaps mother's)...?
...damn atheists! instilling values such as critical thinking and allowing freedom of thought to your offspring! How dare you!
Posted by: the.white.wizzard
|
August 6, 2010 5:04 PM
I am a Redditor and your daughter is good looking !
I have read your site before I was on reddit, although not as much.
I am an engineer/geek/nerd whatever you want to call me by trade.
I live my life in the computer, seeing someone relatively famous (even by association) is a status symbol, and having that person answer questions is even better.
It probably would be more important to me , but I have meet many celebrities when I work as a security guard (working through college).
Just posting some insight on why this happens.
Posted by: Teshi
|
August 6, 2010 5:12 PM
I really, really don't think we have to fault this young person for any of her beliefs. People fluctuate and deviate and it's what keeps everyone on their toes. She is fine.
Posted by: https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawnISIh-2Arb7DuG3kekM-xoHUJGkGYjwKs
|
August 6, 2010 5:22 PM
Congratulations on raising an intelligent daughter capable of not only thinking for herself but expressing herself rather well. It is to your (and her mother's) credit that she is not your clone.
Posted by: Newfie
|
August 6, 2010 5:24 PM
I have a single buddy in Madison, if you need somebody to track her down, and *thump* her. :P
Posted by: MadScientist
|
August 6, 2010 5:33 PM
Hot? But she has no tentacles - and no brilliant colors flashing across her skin.
As for no car - obviously those millionaire godless Democrat profs. don't love their children. Get her a motorbike and all will be forgiven.
Posted by: Algernon, elle sans chapeau
|
August 6, 2010 5:35 PM
Meh. I don't get along with her. She said something that hurt me and was just about as nasty as anything slanted science ever said about women and I see no reason not to hold her to the same standard I would other people here.
I really don't care to hear any more from her about it. And unless she's changed her mind her "nuances" are bullshit that wipe right off after a little while.
Oh man... PZ is probably going to hate me now. Whatever. I'm just being honest. They're my damned feelings and I'm entitled to them.
Posted by: Caine, ghetto féministe
|
August 6, 2010 5:41 PM
Teshi:
I really, really think you can fuck off with that. Skatje's not four years old and she's said some damn vicious things to people here. She doesn't get special treatment because she's young (lots of Pharyngulites are young) and she doesn't get special treatment because she happens to be PZ's kid.
There's nothing wrong with treating her like an adult, after all, she is one.
Posted by: Joe Fatzen
|
August 6, 2010 5:43 PM
She respects and fears cephalopods?
I'm surprised you haven't disowned her.
Posted by: Pilchard
|
August 6, 2010 5:47 PM
[quote]None of which addresses the fundamental point, which is that there is no way to get from calculation to consciousness. The brain is not merely a calculator, it is a symbol manipulator. I think the chinese room argument has some problems and you're right about intuition not being the best guide. But the other side of the argument seems to be that we can build a perfect model that will be the thing, the brain in this case. That's what he's arguing against. The analogy of software might be right in some respect, but not as some program that runs on a calculating machine, which is what a computer is.[/quote]
Computers are perfectly capable of symbol manipulation, especially once we bring in feed-backward connectionist networks. A calculator can also be a symbol manipulator. Neurons aren't binary, but they can have their analogue properties easily simulated in binary.
Once a simulation becomes fine-grained enough I'm not sure on what grounds we can make a distinction. The only issue I can imagine is that, aside from functional aspects, phenomenal consciousness is hard to believe. But incredulousness ain't all that good an argument, and that's what all arguments against the possibility of phenomenal machine consciousness resolve down to.
Posted by: cartman86
|
August 6, 2010 5:48 PM
I am a huge gamer and computer programmer and I've noticed how much this group either
A. Holds onto an agnostic label and dismisses anyone who chooses a "side".
B. Believes conspiracy theories involving religion and are atheists because of emotional reasons NOT on a rational or scientific basis.
Posted by: millamouse
|
August 6, 2010 5:59 PM
Kid seems pretty cool. She's got a mind of her own and it seems sharp, whether I agree with all of her conclusions or not. Nice job dad.
Posted by: Sastra
|
August 6, 2010 5:59 PM
Yes, your daughter does indeed 'spill the beans.'
You and you wife named her after the Norse goddess of hunting and skiing.
Aha! A closet Asatruar. I just knew it!
Wait. No I didn't.
Posted by: Joe Fatzen
|
August 6, 2010 6:02 PM
Apparently your non-bearded face is terrifying. I am now very curious...
Now I shall link this, because I am compelled to:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/upload/2006/08/skatje_and_her_dad.jpg
Posted by: Shplane, some shit in french
|
August 6, 2010 6:05 PM
#60
DEAR SWEET ATHEISMO, what happened to your FACE PZ?
8\
Posted by: PZ Myers
|
August 6, 2010 6:13 PM
Yeah, we did name her after a Norse goddess. I do sort of regret the failure of nerve we had when we softened the ending -- we were considering "Skadi", but had the sexist worry that everyone would mistake it for a boy's name. It would have been cool to name her Skaði, but we would have just had to have substituted a "d" for the "eth" everytime anyway.
Posted by: Dhorvath, OM
|
August 6, 2010 6:19 PM
The Ace of Squids
The Ace of Squids
Love the `stache.
Posted by: tonysidaway
|
August 6, 2010 6:27 PM
Ah, religious differences, I see. Dr Pascal has raised a closet Lisper!
Posted by: Hydrogenman
|
August 6, 2010 6:27 PM
she's kind of boring, no offense
Posted by: https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawk8H0BXaTmhbysApXhTPly-kjwVZyHYwkY
|
August 6, 2010 6:44 PM
Wow, how disappointing.
She seems like a very bright girl, but with that typical arrogance of "if I don't understand it and it goes against my intuition, it's not true".
PZ is a biologist and a major polemicist, I have never read him being so categorical about complex issues such as the supposed inability of a brain to mechanistically yield our mind.
Unfortunately, she is clearly part of the problem, not the solution. The latter being the development of our collective ability to say "I don't know".
Posted by: Newfie
|
August 6, 2010 6:55 PM
uh-oh.. two 'personal' posts in a row. PZ's on the beers.
Posted by: Tom S. Fox
|
August 6, 2010 6:58 PM
PZ, are you saying your daughter is not hot?
Posted by: Benjamin "pardon my French" Geiger
|
August 6, 2010 7:00 PM
First of all: she *is* hot. Can't fault a guy for noticing. (Can fault a guy for being a sleaze, though.)
Anyway, I learned Java in college, but I'm a .NET developer now. Between the two, I prefer .NET. Actually, I'd rather code in Ruby, but those jobs always seem to require web design talent, and I have absolutely zero CSS-fu.
Posted by: azumahazuki
|
August 6, 2010 7:07 PM
As one of her new-ish friends and city-mates I kind of have to agree. She's a lovely person (and yes, kind of cute, I'll get in line for the smacks too), but she doesn't think things through as completely as she should and tends to be more emotionally-ruled than you'd expect for being PZ's spawn.
That said, yes, give her time. I also happen to think it's premature to say the brain *is* the mind, though (apparently?) unlike her I'm in the "brain is to mind as shovel is to diggin' holes" camp.
The anti-abortion stance kind of surprised me though. While the "fetus = parasite" meme is definitely toxic and has to go, you'd think she'd dig just a bit deeper into this. Does abortion suck? Yes. Do we all wish it didn't have to happen? Yes. Should it be banned? Hell no.
Also, the "wish I were a Christian" thing is very telling and gets some sympathy: she simply means that it's hard to be constantly re-evaluating yourself and keeping your morals up to date. Welcome to reality, sweetie.
Posted by: Teshi
|
August 6, 2010 7:16 PM
Posted by: Teshi
|
August 6, 2010 7:18 PM
Oh blast, complete fail on the blockquote tag... again.
Posted by: Benjamin "pardon my French" Geiger
|
August 6, 2010 7:28 PM
azumahazaki:
As a CS major, I prefer the "mind is to brain as operating system is to hardware" analogy.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
August 6, 2010 7:29 PM
1. Most of us are atheists, not agnostics.
b. What is a "side"?
iii. If you can defend your argument with logic and evidence then we won't dismiss it. Some of us might argue against it but the argument will be considered on its merits. However if you make a bald assertion, as you did in the quoted statement above, we'll dismiss it. So what's your evidence for your assertion?
I believe you're wrong. Here's a random post I made about atheism which is rational rather than emotional.
Posted by: sqlrob
|
August 6, 2010 7:32 PM
And it's true for another reason (at least the soundbite is, dunno about the whole argument, didn't RTFA).
An orthodox Jew is following biblical morality and isn't Christian.
Posted by: SubTachyon
|
August 6, 2010 7:37 PM
Your daughter looks like the sort of person I would love to argue with. Especially on the brain-mind duality.
Posted by: articulett
|
August 6, 2010 8:26 PM
She's way further along in her thinking than I was at her age, that's for sure.
Posted by: Cath the Canberra Cook
|
August 6, 2010 8:32 PM
Tis, the relevance is that cartman seems to be using the words "this group" to apply to the group that he mentioned in the previous sentence. You seem for some strange reason to be applying it to Pharyngulites. Need moar coffee, maybe??
Posted by: John Frum
|
August 6, 2010 8:39 PM
@73 Benjamin Geiger
I like the mind == software analogy too. I would like to point out that software doest *really* exist either. Software is a useful abstraction for the hardware in a particular state. In reality it's just hardware all the way down though.
I also like the brain == ant colony analogy. Each ant isn't very smart but a "mind" emerges from their cooperation. Our mind is just an emergent property of the complexities of our brain.
Posted by: Ternon
|
August 6, 2010 10:25 PM
Hm, I was surprised how intellectually lazy his daughter is...hating Pinker on the basis of a single line in a newspaper without even reading his book...seriously?
I don't know, she seems very immature and she's older than me.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
August 6, 2010 10:34 PM
And you are mature how? Not by making that observation...Posted by: Joe Fatzen
|
August 6, 2010 10:37 PM
I say we chain ourselves to PZ's front door until he posts a beardless pic to frighten our children into obedience.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
August 6, 2010 10:46 PM
I know you're a nerdy academic, which makes this meme never more than a joke, but as someone who grew up under a dad who takes it VERY Seriously.... ngh. I don't know how I feel about the meme in general. PZ Myers shouldn't have a beard like PZ Myers has, really.Beards suck.
You fail.Gamers and programmers are discrete groups. Conflating them together tells me all i need to know about your analyses.
Posted by: skeptifem
|
August 6, 2010 11:00 PM
I am younger than Skatje.
I am here to cash in my youth sympathy, plz. Gimme.
Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline.
|
August 6, 2010 11:05 PM
Well, it's your fault for giving her such good genes. (Well, your and Mary's, but you shoulda known that would happen when you married her. Of course, so should she, but I'm being sexist and laying all the blame on you.)Posted by: skeptifem
|
August 6, 2010 11:11 PM
All you guys harping on her appearance are frickin creepy.
This is why I don't spread my picture around like I used to.
She isn't a model. She isn't here to look good for any of you, where would any of you get the idea that we *care* about what you think of anyone's appearance in a completely unrelated thread? It is just that most of you think you have the right to her body as a form of entertainment, and think rating is a fine hobby.
Posted by: Rorschach
|
August 6, 2010 11:28 PM
Fuck, I agree with skeptifem.I really do completely not get why anyone should even mention her appearance, one way or another.There is well and truly enough to comment on what she says and thinks.
Btw, to the folks asking for threaded comments, go look at that reddit link with Skatje and tell me how readable that mess is.
googlemess @ 66,
I agree with that.A big problem in medicine, too.The younglings coming through seem to have lost the ability to admit they don't know something.
Posted by: Jason A.
|
August 6, 2010 11:38 PM
QFT.
Threaded comments make it so hard to keep up with the conversation. If I read through the thread, then go do something and come back later, I don't want to have to read the whole thing again to see the threaded comments added after I left. I just want to pick up where I left off last time.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
August 6, 2010 11:38 PM
Thanks, Skeptifem. I didn't quite have the courage to comment on that like I should have.
Posted by: Matthew Gill
|
August 7, 2010 12:04 AM
#83
Beards suck.
Maybe on you they do, but PZ with no beard is not a PZ to me.
#86
I didn't really see anyone rating that intensely other than a simple comment (most referring to PZ's statement). I didn't see anyone treating her like they felt they had "the right to her body as a form of entertainment" at all.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
August 7, 2010 12:09 AM
seriously?!shit, now I feel old again. that lost decade really stings sometimes :-/
Posted by: skatje.myers
|
August 7, 2010 3:16 AM
I sure do love being flamed on my dad's site. I've almost gotten used to it!
To answer everyone crying about mind/body distinction, I would like to highlight Randomfactor's earlier post:
Thanks, dude. I feel like that's a good way of putting it. Bytesmasher has some excellent points too.
Also, I would like to point out the ridiculousness of the fact that I was getting "Wow! You're so mature for your age! Your dad made you so smart!" whenever I posted down the party line, but now I'm getting "Oh, she's just grappling with new ideas. It's okay. She'll be smarter later. I can't believe this came out of PZ's spawn." now that I say things that are controversial later. Thanks for confirming everything that I hate about you guys. :|
Posted by: skatje.myers
|
August 7, 2010 3:22 AM
Oh, also, it's not that I wish I had been raised a Christian. I was answering a question regarding moral clarity. I stick to my answer that getting spoon-fed answers to moral questions does more to moral "clarity" than not getting spoon-fed answers.
Posted by: John Morales
|
August 7, 2010 3:24 AM
skatje, in your OP:
So you railed against the claim that the equal sign was "mathing", whilst all along you agreed that "The mind is what the brain *DOES.*"?
You sure made it sound like you thought that was "most of sciencey-atheist crowd"'s belief, then mocked it.
Grats, you beat that straw dummy with true panache, there. Way to go.
Sure, you clearly differ from your dad's view, if you assume he's with the "crowd".
Again, nice technique, there.
Posted by: 朴競花/박경화 (Gyeong Hwa)
|
August 7, 2010 3:27 AM
Are you actually generalizing all of us?
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
August 7, 2010 3:33 AM
we are pharynguborg. *facepalm*that is the default position of most sciency types, not whatever straw-version you've imagined with your "mind=brain" stuff. sorry to disappoint, but you actually agree with us soulless materialists.
Posted by: skeptifem
|
August 7, 2010 3:33 AM
I don't know of any group that doesn't react the way you characterize the responses at pharyngula. It is fair, and true, and a shitty side to human nature.
I commend you for being able to put up with criticism so well though, I took forever developing that skill. It is pretty cool that you have felt comfortable arguing with such a passionate crowd for so long, thinking what you have to say is important. It is something I wish more women had, it is a basic piece of humanity that many of us were denied early on.
And really, kids who turn out just like their parents are fucking weird. You have to be brainwashed hard (like mormonism) to end up that way.
Posted by: skatje.myers
|
August 7, 2010 4:09 AM
Another thing I wished to address, from Hazuki:
Interesting to hear this coming from you, given that half your time in #pharyngula is spent whining about how scared you are to believe or not believe anything.
With extreme resentment, I must disagree with this statement. You really have not learned jack shit about me.
Oh good. You agree that fetus = parasite is a toxic meme. Now read the other things I said re: abortion.
Also, the "wish I were a Christian" thing is very telling and gets some sympathy: she simply means that it's hard to be constantly re-evaluating yourself and keeping your morals up to date. Welcome to reality, sweetie.No. Read previous statement I made, sugar.
Posted by: Matthew Gill
|
August 7, 2010 5:54 AM
Ah.. Yeah, I thought people who said that the "brain is the mind" generally meant the "shovel creates a hole" situation. I don't see how that claim can mean anything else. Is there really any other way to put it without invoking dualism?
Posted by: John Morales
|
August 7, 2010 6:13 AM
Matthew, it'd be hard to mock the "sciencey-atheist crowd" if you granted that it wasn't an equation, but a pithy short-form representation.
But it uses an equals sign, so it surely must be what is meant.
Skatje has clearly said that us sciencey-atheists are neo-Platonists who believe the mind is a mathematical construct and the brain is also a mathematical construct — the same construct, in fact. Which would be the case for her dad, if she assumed he was with one of those sciencey-atheists who constitute the crowd.
Of course, she doesn't say whether or not she assumes this.
Yeah, pretty pathetic.
Posted by: Darren
|
August 7, 2010 6:15 AM
Holy crap, I agree with skeptifem. I feel so dirty.
Posted by: Darren
|
August 7, 2010 6:31 AM
@skeptifem, #97
It is also unfortunate that it is only easily recognisable when you are on the "outgroup" side of the ingroup/outgroup divide.
Posted by: John Morales
|
August 7, 2010 6:50 AM
Darren, by your claim, you and skeptifem are indulging in group-think too, then, because you're part of the group (the group is the set of commenters here, no?).
But you and her are special — you recognise this group-think though you're in the group, and not out of it. That's not easy!
Sheesh.
Posted by: Darren
|
August 7, 2010 7:06 AM
John, 103
Sheesh, indeed. I saw this one coming a mile off.
No, I don't claim to be special. I *try* to recognise when I may be engaging in a herd mentality, and I'm sure I fail a lot of the time.
It's not about being perfect or claiming to be perfect. I'm just trying to be as honest a skeptic as I can, and that includes occasionally being skeptical of my skepticism (though I arbitrarily terminate the regression there, for the sake of practicality!)
Who knows? Maybe I am just engaging in a bit of projection here. It is a flaw I have noticed in my own thinking from time to time, and since my mind is the only reference point I have, I assume other minds work in a similar way. I have no reason to think otherwise.
Anyway, this is a discussion I don't particularly feel like having at this late hour, so I'll leave it there.
Posted by: mjhacker
|
August 7, 2010 7:32 AM
I actually don't mind Skatje's statement about "moral clarity." Her point is well taken. But that anti-abortion stuff... yeah, that was the kind of shit I was spouting when I gave up on religion but couldn't let go of my religion-induced anti-abortion hysteria. Potentiality and all that nonsense. A sperm could potentially hold the genetic makeup of the person who could cure cancer, but most of us don't cry foul when the genetic material is deposited into a kleenex.
The issue here is the autonomy of the woman and her body, her right to control her reproduction, and the examination of possible suffering that could be a result of that decision. A fetus is a developing human that will eventually be born (if all goes well). If you abort a pregnancy before the fetus' brain develops fully enough to have the capacity to suffer, are you inflicting suffering of any sort? If you trim the vine before it can grow, are you destroying the grapes that weren't even there yet?
This can all be summed up as "The woman's rights take precedence over that of a developing fetus." The woman is a person, the fetus is not a person, at least not yet. The only moral ambiguity I have for this is late-term abortions - I believe those should only be done in dire circumstances, because the fetus has developed enough at this point to have the capacity to suffer.
Posted by: llewelly
|
August 7, 2010 7:43 AM
bytesmasher | August 6, 2010 4:19 PM:
The software/hardware division we are all familiar with is (0) completely artificial, and (1) particular to the very narrow family of computers humans put in household appliances, in personal devices, and on desktops.
It has nothing whatever to do with the kinds of computers that drive humans and other animals around.
Posted by: Jason A.
|
August 7, 2010 7:45 AM
Yeah, it sounds very mystic, like the grapes exist in the aether somewhere and you've prevented them from stepping through to the physical world. If you rather see the grapes* as something that simply doesn't exist yet, how can you wrong it?
*and yet I'm referring to these things** that don't exist as 'grapes'
** makes that 'nothings'
Posted by: llewelly
|
August 7, 2010 7:46 AM
oh, and (2) the software/hardware division is an engineer's convenience, and the brain was not built by an engineer.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
August 7, 2010 7:54 AM
Of course not, it was built by a designer, one with intelligence. :-)
Posted by: llewelly
|
August 7, 2010 8:12 AM
azumahazuki | August 6, 2010 7:07 PM:
Fact: A fetus makes no contribution to the well-being of the person carrying it.
Fact: A fetus extracts all the resources it needs - food, shelter, toilet, etc, from the body of the person carrying it.
Therefor, a fetus is a parasite. That meme won't go away unless the word "parasite" is completely wrecked. Then, a new word will arise to rest in the place "parasite" now sits. And you'll be saying "fetus = [new word]" is a "toxic meme". Running on the hamster wheel of reality denial.
Posted by: RijkswaanVijanD
|
August 7, 2010 10:02 AM
Oooh she IS hot:P
The CS however.. I don't know; I'd rather watch critters instead of computer screens myself.
So maybe no marriage yet, no disrespect PZ
Posted by: Peter Ashby
|
August 7, 2010 12:43 PM
Hey PZ you might want to point out to Skatje the meaning of that good old Anglo Saxon word Faze. Unless someone has fired a phaser at you recently.
Posted by: serpdesu
|
August 7, 2010 1:14 PM
@RijkswaanVijanD Not to you, buster! D:
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
August 7, 2010 2:54 PM
I sure do love that you're still seemingly surprised by it.It's delicious. Not as much so as Warlock Tears, but delicious. We call your dad out when we think he's fucked up, and you think being a blood relation should somehow be protection? Haha. Fat Chance.
As someone who never gave a shit about what you had to say before, or who's child you are, let me just go ahead and treat you like every other godbot that annoys me.Your beliefs are stupid, and if you had a shred of decency you'd abandon the most toxic ones right now, rather than pretending that you or we give a shit about what the fetus could be. Living babies first, then you could maybe hold a moral claim to really give a damn about possible babies. It still wouldn't matter, because it'd still be a dumb argument and miss the whole point of bodily autonomy, but it wouldn't be hypocrisy on your part.
Posted by: azumahazuki
|
August 7, 2010 3:36 PM
So, after actually READING the threads on Reddit, it looks like I owe Skatje a BIG apology. I never got the chance to dig down and see her at her deepest in personal conversation, unlike on the Reddit forums...
...and wow, holy CRAP. I don't think I was that well spoken at 24, let alone 19. I didn't even know half of those thing could be spoken OF last year. Respect++ by a large margin.
The anti-abortion thing still baffles me a bit, and I think some of the other posters are still right about some of what they're saying. But, there really IS a disturbing level of groupthink in here and it's a good thing she isn't a perfect swap-gender clone of her father, since that would imply the kind of brainwashing we bitch at, e.g., Mormons for.
That said, Skatje, you have no idea what I've been through. YOU try going through life not scared stiff when you've had a lifetime of OCD, panic attacks, depression, and anxiety disorders, on top of almost a decade of being constantly one family paycheck away from homelessness and having several dozen artery-clenching close calls along those lines. You're lucky you weren't raised Catholic, too, which will REALLY fuck a person up.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
August 7, 2010 3:51 PM
well, I mind, because it's not even true on its own terms. Youth that is raised Christian has moral dilemmas to sort thru as well, and that can be just as hard for them as it is for an atheist child, if they're not so thoroughly brainwashed that they'll accept and internalize the answers given to them by authority instantaneously.I suppose I'll grant her than growing up to be an unthinking robot in a cult does wonders for "moral clarity", but merely being Christian? not so much. I mean... the whole "struggling with my faith" is such a common theme among Christians, you'd think she'd picked up on it at some point.
Posted by: Kristjan Wager
|
August 7, 2010 3:52 PM
I get really tired of this claim.
No, there is no "groupthink" here. What there is, is a large, and very vocal, group of commenters who tend to agree on some issues, which is why the were attracted to the blog in the first place, but who also disagrees on a lot of other issues (heck, even PZ gets told of for his opinions sometimes).
Just look at any thread on libertarianism or feminism, on Islam in relationship to Europe, or even free speech related threads.
This leads to some major disagree between longtime commenters sometimes. It also, sometimes, lead to people changing their opinions as they are persuaded by the comments of other commenters.
Groupthink would be if everybody agreed with each other, and didn't listen to other peoples' arguments - see the Intersection for a good example of how group think can happen in the comments section. If that starts to happen, I will no longer read the comments here.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
August 7, 2010 4:06 PM
As someone who's opposed The Horde on multiple occasions,a nd watched others oppose it, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Thanks, those were exactly the things I was going to point out.Posted by: windy
|
August 7, 2010 4:10 PM
I agree with the first part, but I don't think the analogy is all that great. Once the hole has been dug, it exists independently of the shovel.
Maybe it is more analogous to "digging" with the shovel? But the mind is not merely the instantaneous thought processes, but the memories and dispositions that are stored in the brain as well.
I would not put an equal sign between the mind and the brain either, since the brain does a lot of un-"mindful" tasks as well. Brain > mind?
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
August 7, 2010 4:12 PM
When ever I hear people accuse us of "groupthink", the first thing I think of is that they say that because we don't believe in the same presuppositions they do. Presuppositions like their deity exists, their holy book isn't mythology/fiction, that libertarian economics really work, or that fetuses are babies. They obviously also don't see the threads where the true socialists (not the version used by the wingnuts where Obama is one) argue with the anarchists, the vegans and the vegetarians argue with the meat eaters, the animal rights folks argue with those who feel we still need animal testing, or those with empathy argue with those without. This blog has a wide diversity of regulars, but since they tend toward reality based, and reality has a liberal bias, those on the right or religious could see us as a group through their telescope. Their comment actually says more about their beliefs than ours.
Posted by: Noddin
|
August 7, 2010 4:25 PM
Hello. Well, I see it. That Doctor Myers daughter at the least, has one trait without change. There is not modesty in that family!
Maybe this person, might be a fan of P.Z. Myers if there is no relation. However. The child needs to be unique. It is common.
OK. So, you are being nice on the appearance. Because, saying something honest will be wrong here. But, then we fail in every ways. It is rude in all ways to talk about a face.
I will need to leave soon, but tomorrow I will be back.
Posted by: Kristjan Wager
|
August 7, 2010 4:29 PM
Don't bother.
Posted by: Lori Meyer
|
August 7, 2010 4:31 PM
azumahazuki-
Skatje has been more or less my best friend since soon after she moved to Morris. We did our seventh grade science project together, went full-time PSEO the last two years of high school together, and now I'm typing this from her apartment after driving ~8 hours to visit. Also, I was raised Catholic, have panic and anxiety disorder, and some other personal junk that I don't feel like rattling off because everyone deals with shit sometimes.
Being close to her, Skatje has obviously *seen* me deal with much of this, yet even I don't expect sympathy when I criticize her because the "my life is hard" card is pathetic. Don't put your views out on the internet if you can't handle some backlash.
I don't always agree with Skatje, but I'm not about to slander her on the internet because even my naive 20-year-old mind knows how stupid and pointless that is.
Posted by: azumahazuki
|
August 7, 2010 5:17 PM
Lori, don't get the wrong impression -- I'm not saying any of that is an excuse for not having read up on what she was saying on reddit first.
The only reason I brought the life issues up was her pointed jab along the lines of "and who spends half her time in the IRC room hyperventilating?" That's a bit of a cheap shot, and it's not something I expect a person who had the good luck not to be raised in Catholicism to understand. That's all that was a reference to.
And I did NOT slander her. Of several hundred people I've known in life, she's in the top 10 or 20 of the ones I'd want to spend time around. But wrong is wrong (or perhaps unexamined is unexamined). I'm much harder on myself than on anyone else, if that counts for anything. Put the knife down.
Posted by: skatje.myers
|
August 7, 2010 5:58 PM
The cheap shot is calling yourself a friend, while simultaneously turning around to comment to others on a blog that I don't read that I don't think things through and are emotionally-ruled. At least I've got the stones to levy condescending criticism directly at "friends" instead of being two-faced about it. My trust is not easy to come by, and I do believe you just ruined it for yourself.
Posted by: azumahazuki
|
August 7, 2010 6:18 PM
I really think you're taking this too hard, but that's your choice. I thought you DID read this blog, given that people have mentioned you did before.
And, you know, I was APOLOGIZING for not having read your posts on reddit before commenting; we'd only met in person a few times before this. I was trying to patch thing up. But if you'd rather wallow in anger and righteous indignation, go right ahead. You will be proving a point I wasn't even trying very strongly to make (viz., being ruled by the emotions).
Posted by: Kristjan Wager
|
August 7, 2010 6:22 PM
azumahazuki, I don't think it is "being ruled by the emotions" to strongly dislike people talking negatively about you behind your back (or even in front of you).
Posted by: azumahazuki
|
August 7, 2010 6:35 PM
Oh for the love of whatever God there probably isn't...did I say she was an idiot or a bimbo? No. I said for PZ Myers' kid she seems not to think things out as much as I expected, and be more ruled by emotion than I expected. This is hardly character assassination.
And does no one see the second post up there, where I actually went to Reddit, read her stuff, and said I was too hasty? Does this not matter to anyone? Don't make me break out the clue-by-four, plz :(
Posted by: Camels With Hammers
|
August 7, 2010 8:50 PM
azumahazuki, you had the opportunity to become a little bit familiar (but, it seems, not much) with the daughter of a rather famous person whose work you obviously follow and then you chose to exploit your rather minor brush with fame to parlay it into a chance to analyze and insult her publicly based on the "cred" you think you acquired by simply being able to make her acquaintance. That makes you rather extraordinarily rotten and self-serving.
And then all the special pleading for sympathy when you belittled her reasoning skills? Now these laments that you deserve sympathy because you hadn't bothered to read before you wrote about her? What happened to having some expert first hand testimony for us about the "lovely" and "cute" but not so rational little woman is *really* like? Surely, your first hand insights meant to bait our breath were extensive enough even as a "new-ish" friend that you can tell us much more than what was in a few posts on Reddit?
And then this:
Dude, I've never seen anyone try to kiss someone else's ass while his head was still so far up his own.
Let me put this simply to you, az, she has every right to resent you and want nothing to do with you. When you become a quasi-famous person's friend in a personal way and you're a piddily little nobody, exploiting your acquaintance with that person to sandbag them in public over something petty---you're an asshole. From your weird interlacing of awkward flirtatious praise, I get the feeling you're also just a kindergardener punching a girl you have a crush on. Here's a tip, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG.
If you get to know someone famous, or even someone only quasi-famous (or famous-by-association) like Skatje, the cool and respectful thing to do is to be someone who keeps his mouth shut about anything you learn by dint of your special access to that person. That's how mature and trustworthy people treat the cooler-than-they-are people that they are lucky enough to hang around. Unless there are crimes occurring, they don't abuse their access to those people by going online to trash them while bragging about their access to them. Doing that makes you come off pretty awful.
And, finally, she has every reasonable right to want nothing to do with you after you tried to parlay your access to her into a chance to knock her with some (presumed) extra credibility. That's not being ruled by her emotions, it's having the morally appropriate response. You haven't even bothered to apologize for trying to abuse your access to her but whined that you didn't read the Reddit article, meaning you're still oblivious to how you betrayed her trust. Why should she be inclined to forgive you under that circumstance?
And stop telling people you hurt that they're being "ruled by their emotions" when they get angry with you. How godddamn slimy and manipulative a thing to try to pull.
And, just in general, for my two cents, I like the way Skatje thinks, and in particular when she scolds the many atheists (though of course not all) who feel no compunction about blathering on about philosophical topics they haven't themselves researched or treated as matters of serious inquiry. Far too many atheists underestimate the seriousness of genuine philosophical questions or give embarrassingly trivial answers to them as if they can be answered with pretty much no rigorous investigation.
In those cases, atheists indeed fall prey to scientistic attitudes that cannot discriminate philosophical from scientific questions. This is not a critique of the Pharyngulites in particular (and Skatje didn't target you guys in particular anyway), for all I know the Pharyngulites or any particular Pharyngulite might be pretty sophisticated in philosophical questions. But I encounter too many atheists who don't get philosophy's importance.
Regardless of whether or not I agree with all of her particular positions, I think her concern to supplement scientific clarity with philosophical clarity is her primary animus and that most people in this thread have indeed been too nasty to her and acted like genuinely difficult philosophical questions are simply settled and undiscussable. (And the nitpicks like of her misuse of phase for faze are just childish and petty).
Ultimately, even where I might differ from her (though I generally agree with her), I see the motivation as the right one---to make sure that important philosophical distinctions are not lost to an overly simplistic reading of certain scientific realities' implications for philosophical questions.
Posted by: Illuminatus
|
August 7, 2010 9:04 PM
What is this thread, Pharyngula 90210?
Posted by: Birger Johansson
|
August 7, 2010 9:12 PM
OK, it seems to be time for many here to cool off a bit. When things get personal, I try to check and double-check for phrases that might be misunderstod, but it gets harder the later it is in the evening.
For the record, Skatje, it is almost a law of nature that teenagers and old farts like me see things differently (this is not intended to sound patronising, since it is not a value judgement).
In regard to abortions, the earlier the abortion, the smaller the ethical dilemma. In a perfect world, sex education would keep unwanted pregnancies near zero, but the education issue is a major issue in itself.
Late-term abortions are almost only the results of very severe pathologies of the fetus that did not show up in early ultrasound examinations -these fetuses would usually not survive birth by more than a few hours.
It is three in the morning, Swedish time...have a good weekend, or what's left of it.
Posted by: John Morales
|
August 7, 2010 9:16 PM
Ahem.
Google search term:
Posted by: skatje.myers site:http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/
Response: About 325 results.
Posted by: skeptifem
|
August 7, 2010 9:45 PM
Wait... 19? I am pretty sure I am older than skatje now. Didn't she say she had a bachelor's in the reddit thread though? I am confused.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
August 7, 2010 9:49 PM
She started college at 15. Smart girl, but still young. (Spoken as an old fart with an AARP card.)Posted by: Camels With Hammers
|
August 7, 2010 9:50 PM
She started college very early
Posted by: skeptifem
|
August 7, 2010 11:02 PM
Oh well then I am older than her. Im in my early 20s. I hope this can undo jadehawk's crisis somehow...
Posted by: azumahazuki
|
August 7, 2010 11:53 PM
Okay camels, I'm going to rip this one apart a bit. You have some really fucked-up ideas about my "relationship" with Skatje. For the record, I only met her a few times, and most of our interactions have been on IRC. Where, sorry to say it, she DOES come off as a bit flaky and inconsistent.
Let's get down to brass tacks.
Where the HELL did you get the idea I was trying to exploit fame or anything like that? I've not even been following Pharyngula for very long, only a few months at best. You've got a bizarre idea about why I would pipe up and say ANYTHING, too, which I think speaks more about you than me. If you knew me at all, you'd know ideas like "fame" or "street cred" have near-zero weight with me. Next.
AS EXPLAINED IN A PREVIOUS POST, the only reason I brought up the load of shit I'd been through was in response to her going "yeah, well which of us spends her time panicking over matters of epistemology in-channel?" She doesn't know my background, so I thought a bit of that would explain WHY some things were creeping me out so much. Ne~xt.
Okay, several things wrong with this. First off, I was not being insincere. I had not read her reddit before posting my own impressions of her; after reading it, those changed. And I have never had training in philosophy or formal logic, having only started to teach myself about 6 months ago. I recognized that, contrary to earlier impressions, she DOES check her premises, and seems to have a rather large "stack segment" for holding onto several ideas at once. This is a quality I admire in people.
Second, again with the "exploiting fame for prestige" idea; where are you getting this? Do you really think I was trying to come out here and ruin someone's reputation? What the hell is the point in doing that?
Third, good Lord, you actually think I'm flirting with her?! I HAVE a girlfriend already, and as far as I know Skatje isn't interested in other women. And even if she were, the age gap is over 5 years, which is kind of creepy. And even if it weren't, she is NOT my type. Sorry. I need someone older and more experienced and, apparently, less of a spaz. And I was never social enough to know how to flirt to begin with, so I've never tried. It's a sleazy thing to do anyway. Thanks for assuming I'm a guy because I talk rough too, asshole.
Deprecated by the above. You have some seriously weird ideas about my motives, personality, and character. Of course, you DO know me inside and out even though you've never talked to me before; I should have remembered that. [/sarcasm]
Please do continue to tell me what I'm thinking, saying, and really meaning. By all means, expose my bizarre, insane master plan to ruin the reputation of a woman I hardly know who happens to be the offspring of the owner of a blog I follow. This should be FUN. Go on.
Once again, look closer: "ruled by one's emotions" in this case refers to the hissy-fit that got thrown, NOT the anger itself. There are better ways to deal with this that throwing a thermobaric tantrum in public (and playing passive-aggressive games on Facebook in private). The adult thing to do would be to get in personal contact first.
See, now we're getting somewhere. You perceive someone whose beliefs you agree with in "danger" and it spurs you to her defense. As it happens, I AGREE with the motivations behind her thinking, if not some of the results. In fact, I routinely get bitched out for taking philosophy into account at all. Why didn't your little mindreading trick pick up on that, despite apparently being able to read my motivations, character, and state of mind? Oh, and gender, too.
In summary: read closer and/or fuck off. Your Freudian slip is showing, and it's got holes in it.
Posted by: Noddin
|
August 8, 2010 3:25 AM
Hello "Azumahazuki". I think you are not seeing it the way you should! You are taking it to the heart. But it is not meaningful. Nothing here means something special. Stop. Do not argue it, because you will be seen as a Primate getting power (Monkey). You can't win it here, you are now trying to get foot, but you will fail this.
I will come back. I know, some of you don't like my posting. But, if you read your enemy, you will be a superior. I promise it. I will be back, very soon. Thank you.
Posted by: Alice Bluegown
|
August 8, 2010 7:15 AM
@ Dog: it's not that we don't like your posting, we just find it generally incomprehensible...
That's a very specific fetish, and I see no evidence that azumahazuki is into it.
Posted by: Camels With Hammers
|
August 8, 2010 9:43 AM
Er, where did I say I assumed you were a guy? I said you were flirtatious and acting like a kindergardener punching a girl on the playground. You could be a woman flirting with a woman. I mean, now I learn you have a girlfriend. Now you're telling me despite your attraction to women that it is beyond conceivability that you, as a woman, would flirt with another woman?
Oh, and it's because you already have someone that you would never nurse an unadmitted crush on someone else? Because of course people in relationships never crush on other people. And why in the world would a ~25 year old be attracted to a ~20 year old? I mean, how absurd! Romantic attraction towards a woman a few years younger than oneself? How unheard of in human emotional history!
I did however think once the crush became an obvious inference that you were more likely male because it doesn't take a genius to realize that more often someone with a crush on a female will be a male (hence PZ's playful threat to the "disgusting boys" to whom he attributed remarks that Skatje was hot). I did actually explicitly wonder whether you or male or female and explicitly decided that it really didn't matter, a crush was a crush.
And anyway while the theory you crush on her in some greater or lesser and some more or less admitted way is consistent with all your supposedly decisive facts offered to the contrary, it is all irrelevant. The relevance is what you were actually saying, which was
through which you directly identified yourself with:
who PZ intended to "thump up a bit".
So, we have boys on PZ's natural (but I guess, if we want to get all snitty and technical about a joke, sexist) assumption who he is apparently identifying as flirting with his daughter. Why else tease them that he wants to thump them? No one has either real or teasing inclinations to thump people for merely praising their kid. People either really or just playfully are inclined to thump people for wanting to have sex with their kid. So, when you identify with those calling her cute and lovely in a way that risks getting you thumped, you're playing with the whole, "I'm willing to make a flirtatious little remark here that slips my own attraction to her and risks me getting thumped."
I'm not saying you said you were in love and plotting to date Skatje. I'm saying you came off like she was at least attracting you enough that you would make an awkward compliment that lumps yourself in with boys after a dad's daughter.
This is all coming out of your own little remark, which was then reinforced and intensified by your the over the top and ridiculous that "Of several hundred people I've known in life, she's in the top 10 or 20 of the ones I'd want to spend time around."
Now that's some seriously shameless public fawning over someone by your own admission is just a "new-ish" friend who you still evaluate by reference to her father. It's kind of ridiculous, actually.
I mean of ALL the people you've EVER known this supposedly underwhelming and disappointing "spawn" (what an unpleasant word) of a blogger you're a long time fan of is one of the people you've ever known who you most want to be around. Yeah, inferences that this has something to do with the fame of her father or an awkwardly expressed crush on her (or an awkwardly expressed crush on her as a proxy for her father) are just me being incredibly presumptuous with my reading into things. I'm just crazy.
Anyway, I'm not going to argue with you anymore. You're right I know next to nothing about you. But if you don't want to be interpreted as thinking and feeling certain things, I'd really watch my words a whole lot more closely.
Er, no, whether or not I agreed with Skatje, I just saw someone with lots of symptoms of having had interactions with the daughter of someone he or she admired and making a mess of trying to show off this acquaintance by resorting to putting said daughter down in public. It was weak and disloyal and I was inclined to speak up.
And while I was here I figured I had might as well offer my two cents about my own general impressions of Skatje's Reddit remarks (my first exposure to her thought process) and their somewhat over the top hostile response around here. Since I was quite pleased that her grounds for critique and suspicion of the atheist movement were based on exactly what I see as its weakness (not its problems with religion but its cavalier dismissals of philosophical questions), I thought I should speak up in solidarity with that basic point and say that, whatever the unclarity of her actual positions, I think she has the right basic concerns.
But that was all quite separate from the issue of whether or not you were treating someone you were calling a friend badly. They were in totally different categories. As you said, you partially defended her on those points. That's not what either she or I attacked you for.
Posted by: Rorschach
|
August 8, 2010 9:49 AM
This thread has degenerated in a quite unexpected direction.Ah well, maybe not really unexpected.Reasonably crazy nonetheless.
Posted by: Cosmic Snark
|
August 8, 2010 10:22 AM
This thread reminds me of frog dissection day in eighth grade biology class.
I realize Skatje is an adult now but I do not understand the impetus behind PZ's serving up of his own daughter in a formaldehyde jar and distribution of X-acto knives to all the participants here. Especially as seeing this is not the first time and he knew what would happen.
Normally I really like Pharyngula, and it has been an important resource for me during my journey out of the primitive mind-sludge that is Christianity, but this thread is a big exception.
I know most of you will disagree with me on this, and that's OK. Different opinions are what make the world go 'round and keep things interesting.
Posted by: Camels With Hammers
|
August 8, 2010 11:16 AM
Or maybe he's just proud of her and thought since what she was doing related to him and his blog, his readers might take an interest in seeing what she was publicly saying, regardless of whether or not she was robotically supporting him or controversially criticizing him. It need be no more than that at work here. I hardly think he is immature enough to scheme to use his blog to have his daughter attacked.
Quite the contrary, I think he is good natured, open-minded, and supportive enough of a father to not only promote his daughter's free thinking both in private and in public by even drawing attention to a place where she is talking about him and his ideas critically.
Sounds like fine fathering to me.
Posted by: Algernon, elle sans chapeau
|
August 8, 2010 11:20 AM
It's fucking obnoxious.
Posted by: azumahazuki
|
August 8, 2010 11:59 AM
Last time, Camels: Yes, odd as it sounds, one can express admiration for another person's qualities, physical or mental, without wanting in their pants or even liking them very much.
As to "in the top ten or twenty," that just means I've known a LOT of idiots. Compared to, say, one particularly bitchy girl in junior year of high school or my Calc II professor, I would rather hang out with her, among other reasons because I suspect our politics are more closely aligned.
I evaluate her by COMPARISON to her family, but also to her friends and by her own actions and speech in #pharyngula. If anything, reading the reddit was a pleasant surprise, as she displayed depths I didn't know she had. The above still stands though: I still feel she doesn't think some things through far enough. But hell, neither did I at 19, and she's gone into much further depth than I did at that age, which is impressive.
So yes, Camel, it WAS incredibly presumptuous of you. I don't suffer fools well, so that comment is along the lines of "finally, someone about my age I have a reasonable chance of not hating." But by all means, do continue your psychic detective work. Speaking of fools.
Aside, "spawn" is the word for octopus kids right? I'd seen other people using it here to refer to PZ offspring.
Posted by: c.s.delozier
|
August 8, 2010 12:26 PM
I'd be a little creeped out by PZ's fanbois too. Most of them are the typical computer monitor complexioned, unkempt appearance having, desk jockeying, awkwardly socializing rejects from the beta-male category. You know, if we're judging by appearances.
Mentally you're all fit 'n fiddlin', you push your cranial weight around aptly on a medium which is most conducive to forming and debating ideas. And if it wasn't for that, I wouldn't want to give you the time of day in public if we ever met as strangers. It's not so much the appearance, although that plays a role, but it's the brash, insistent, overeager and inappropriate comments or compliments prevalent in a male dominated, mostly hierarchical structure, and how you guys - rather than the proud freethinker - become the narcissistic mental bullies infatuated with your own thoughts to the exclusion of others, foregoing rational discussion for a type of one-upmanship.
Rarely listening, quick to enrage upon the fact that there are people who are smart and who also disagree with you... what should this tell you about yourselves other than you are insecure? Maybe your cherished mind isn't at it's peak, maybe you got something wrong - nah, it's obviously the naivety of someone else!
And if you think for a second I'm talking about you then I probably am. Unless you're paranoid, then I'm definitely talking about you.
Posted by: Algernon, elle sans chapeau
|
August 8, 2010 12:59 PM
Because you've seen them, right?
Actually I just though somebody farted.
Posted by: Kristjan Wager
|
August 8, 2010 2:02 PM
c.s.delozier, is there a point to your nonsense, or are you just blathering incoherently?
Posted by: Alice Bluegown
|
August 9, 2010 3:37 AM
@ c.s.delozier - congratulations, you posted something that made even less sense than any of Dog's whimsical efforts...
Posted by: Rorschach
|
August 9, 2010 3:50 AM
And this is an argument for what how ?
Posted by: John Morales
|
August 9, 2010 4:49 AM
... male dominated, mostly hierarchical structure ...
LOL.
Posted by: c.s.delozier
|
August 9, 2010 6:01 AM
I see nothing but hand-waving. My point is that you are not likable people. As smart as you are, it's to a fault. You're mental 'tough-guys', your clique is hierarchical based on everything I've seen. For instance, an unfamiliar name gets largely ignored unless they misspoke somehow, then everyone rushes to correct them in the most pseudo-erudite way. Usually the in-crowd will nominate a winner based on how passively-aggressive they approached the poster.
It's just a sad exercise. I think that PZ is awesome, but his fanboys are crap, and his comment section reflects this.
Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas
|
August 9, 2010 6:07 AM
Oh, go stick your head in a pig.*
Is that pseudo-erudite enough for you?
(*Not to be taken literally. I don't endorse cruelty to pigs.)
Posted by: Rorschach
|
August 9, 2010 6:17 AM
Oh.A tone troll.Could have said that at the beginning.
You will find that people here pay a lot of attention to exactly what is being said.Hence the praise for people like Etha Williams or Dymara within 2 or 3 comments in the past.And obviously, everyone here including the regulars was once "an unfamiliar name".Your argument is bullcrap.
Posted by: Alice Bluegown
|
August 9, 2010 6:44 AM
Probably a collective flipping of the bird - we do that.
Didn't you just call us "unkempt...awkwardly socializing rejects..."? Does that approach get you many dates?
Oooh, I'm in a clique! Never been in a clique before - do we get badges?
"Fanboys", heh - I think maybe you should LURK MOAR (as the cool kids allegedly say)
Posted by: dugong
|
August 9, 2010 5:46 PM
Snore. How drama llama this thread has become.
Posted by: D.N.
|
August 13, 2010 8:10 PM
Skatje from Reddit,
Wow PZ... your own flesh and blood tries to equate your non-forced birth position with having a "less value for babies" kinda sounds like a low blow to me. Eh pretty typical of pro-liers er i mean pro-lifers.