Really? I can’t say I’ve noticed many cheap shots at conservatives that weren’t downvoted—unless you count cheap shot at stupid positions that happen to be mostly held among conservatives, like religion. But even cheap shots at religion here seem rarer than on other atheist forums.
Isn’t the point of this site to espouse the process of thinking rationally? to support and encourage others in coming to their own conclusions about the where the map lies over the territory? Indeed, if rationality is reliable at all in improving one’s accurate perspective of the world, much of the community will come to the same conclusions—and of course others will I’m sure appreciate the availability of some guiding logic that may assist in them in learning to think more rationally. However, shouldn’t others be left to their process and not forced to accept a conclusion they have yet to reach themselves, lest they be deemed irrational?
It just seems like pointless signalling hypocritical to the principles of the site itself to thrust a bottom line out there and say, “This is rational and not agreeing to this is irrational—whatever gets you here, I don’t care, but make sure you do!”
As a summary metaphor: In maths, you can reach right answer using incorrect methods, yet it will be a singular feat.
My bad, I kept meaning to include a disclaimer notifying you that I wasn’t so much responding to your comment as I was saying something that I thought needed saying after having read your comment.
This was the impetus:
… stupid positions that happen to be mostly held among conservatives, like religion.
Even though you qualified that statement as a meta example of a cheap shot while noting that cheap shots aren’t to be tolerated, I still thought it needing saying.
Really? I can’t say I’ve noticed many cheap shots at conservatives that weren’t downvoted—unless you count cheap shot at stupid positions that happen to be mostly held among conservatives, like religion. But even cheap shots at religion here seem rarer than on other atheist forums.
I remember reading several posts from the sequences that contained shots at Bush, some of them cheap.
Isn’t the point of this site to espouse the process of thinking rationally? to support and encourage others in coming to their own conclusions about the where the map lies over the territory? Indeed, if rationality is reliable at all in improving one’s accurate perspective of the world, much of the community will come to the same conclusions—and of course others will I’m sure appreciate the availability of some guiding logic that may assist in them in learning to think more rationally. However, shouldn’t others be left to their process and not forced to accept a conclusion they have yet to reach themselves, lest they be deemed irrational?
It just seems like pointless signalling hypocritical to the principles of the site itself to thrust a bottom line out there and say, “This is rational and not agreeing to this is irrational—whatever gets you here, I don’t care, but make sure you do!”
As a summary metaphor:
In maths, you can reach right answer using incorrect methods, yet it will be a singular feat.
Sorry, did you accidentally reply to the wrong comment? (or is there some link I’m not seeing?)
My bad, I kept meaning to include a disclaimer notifying you that I wasn’t so much responding to your comment as I was saying something that I thought needed saying after having read your comment.
This was the impetus:
Even though you qualified that statement as a meta example of a cheap shot while noting that cheap shots aren’t to be tolerated, I still thought it needing saying.