Rachel Bronwyn wrote:As shitty as the "LOOK, ATHEISTS LYING AGAIN" chorus is, I'm pretty bored of the "Don't you DARE criticise Ayaan Hirsi Ali - she's a hero" chorus too. She's a person. In lots of respects she's extraordinary. Lots of criticism of her is nonsense. Some of it's pretty valid too.

I know a few very well read atheist ex-muslims who think she's full of shit. Anecdotal I know, but still a sign that all that glitters...

Aggi, read that again, it doesn't say Hirsi Ali went to a christian school but her brother.

I'm a member of a Facebook group called, "Muslims for Progressive Values." They're good people. Unlike most of the "Islamophbe!" shouting crowd (almost none of whom are actual Muslims, I notice), they take seriously the notion that Muslims need to speak out against extremism and violence and they can't just sweep it under the rug as "bad media."

However, the plurality opinion seems to hate, hate, hate everything about her.

HughMcB wrote:

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:As shitty as the "LOOK, ATHEISTS LYING AGAIN" chorus is, I'm pretty bored of the "Don't you DARE criticise Ayaan Hirsi Ali - she's a hero" chorus too. She's a person. In lots of respects she's extraordinary. Lots of criticism of her is nonsense. Some of it's pretty valid too.

I know a few very well read atheist ex-muslims who think she's full of shit. Anecdotal I know, but still a sign that all that glitters...

Oh, for sure. I know lots of well read decent and reasonable Muslims who think she's full of shit. I also know stupid Muslims whose attacks against her are entirely unreasonable. Its easy to dismiss all criticism of her on the basis "They're just mad she criticised their faith" but in truth a lot of objections to her have nothing to do with being offended. Some of what she says is dumb.

Some of what she says is on point too and in many respects she's very impressive. I think a lot of the shit she catches is the proverbial butthurt. The degree to which she's hated is fucking absurd and entirely disproportionate. You don't need to rely on butthurt to criticize her though because you can have some VERY valid objections to her ideas without any relevance to hurt feels. A lot of people who raise those objections are lumped in with the crybabies. That's horseshit.

She's a person with admirable qualities and great ideas. She's not beyond criticism though and she's certainly not beyond being wrong.

Onyx8 wrote:Aggi, read that again, it doesn't say Hirsi Ali went to a christian school but her brother.

I see that. A point though, if her parents were strict Muslims, why did they send her brother to a Christian school.

Look I'm not dismissing her experiences as being all lies, I'm just questioning why the lies were told in the first place. Why the need to lie about coming from a war zone, seeking asylum, when that wasn't the case, and so on? Maybe I just don't understand why people lie.

Yeah, a minor point perhaps. I'm pretty much with Rachel on this one.

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:
She's a person with admirable qualities and great ideas. She's not beyond criticism though and she's certainly not beyond being wrong.

no-one is beyond criticism or beyond being wrong.

Indeed. We're only human I suppose.

Scar wrote:Huh? I wasn't even aware.

You're welcome. Easily remedied, I'd think.

Matthew Shute wrote:

Scar wrote:Huh? I wasn't even aware.

You're welcome. Easily remedied, I'd think.

Yes, I've fixed that reference where I've used it.

HughMcB wrote:I know a few very well read atheist ex-muslims who think she's full of shit.

Communists?

Agrippina wrote:Indeed. We're only human I suppose.

I always wonder why people would say we're only human. If you think about it, there are only two categories: human, and non-human. It is my (probably biased) opinion that the human side is the better one... until we create sufficiently sophisticated AI, that is, and at that point we're screwed.

Jie wrote:

Agrippina wrote:Indeed. We're only human I suppose.

I always wonder why people would say we're only human. If you think about it, there are only two categories: human, and non-human. It is my (probably biased) opinion that the human side is the better one... until we create sufficiently sophisticated AI, that is, and at that point we're screwed.

I don't think humans are superior. We're a rubbish species. Just look at how our supposed cleverness has fucked up the earth.

Agrippina wrote:

Jie wrote:

Agrippina wrote:Indeed. We're only human I suppose.

I always wonder why people would say we're only human. If you think about it, there are only two categories: human, and non-human. It is my (probably biased) opinion that the human side is the better one... until we create sufficiently sophisticated AI, that is, and at that point we're screwed.

I don't think humans are superior. We're a rubbish species. Just look at how our supposed cleverness has fucked up the earth.

I think rubbish is a bit harsh. We are certainly capable of dreadful things, but we are capable of pretty good things too!

Agrippina wrote:
I don't think humans are superior. We're a rubbish species. Just look at how our supposed cleverness has fucked up the earth.

We're not fucking it up for LIFE, though, we're fucking it up for the sorts of life we're biased in favor of. Namely our sort. This makes us no more or less admirable than any other species which surpasses carrying capacity- and that's all of them. One of the premises of evolution is that all species reproduce in excess of what the environment can support. So it really isn't fair to bash on our species for doing what all of them do. Granted, we've been smart enough to alter our environment so it can support more humans in the short term with possibly dire long-term consequences, but not a lot of other species could pull that sort of thing off. We should get kudos.

Please keep in mind that the first great pollution event resulted from overpopulation of photosynthesizers during the Archean Era and gave us the atmosphere we have now. It was a shit move for archaebacteria, but a rather fortunate turn of events for Eukarya.

Meta:
Your anti-human bias only works from a reference frame which is biased in favor of humans specifically or eukaryotes generally. Which is sort of fucked up if you think about it.

Nebogipfel wrote:

Agrippina wrote:

Jie wrote:

Agrippina wrote:Indeed. We're only human I suppose.

I always wonder why people would say we're only human. If you think about it, there are only two categories: human, and non-human. It is my (probably biased) opinion that the human side is the better one... until we create sufficiently sophisticated AI, that is, and at that point we're screwed.

I don't think humans are superior. We're a rubbish species. Just look at how our supposed cleverness has fucked up the earth.

I think rubbish is a bit harsh. We are certainly capable of dreadful things, but we are capable of pretty good things too!

Yes, but the ones capable of good things are in the minority. Most humans don't deserve the prize they won at the end of the sperm race. (Don't mind me, I'm feeling a little jaded with humankind at the moment).

ScholasticSpastic wrote:

Agrippina wrote:
I don't think humans are superior. We're a rubbish species. Just look at how our supposed cleverness has fucked up the earth.

We're not fucking it up for LIFE, though, we're fucking it up for the sorts of life we're biased in favor of. Namely our sort. This makes us no more or less admirable than any other species which surpasses carrying capacity- and that's all of them. One of the premises of evolution is that all species reproduce in excess of what the environment can support. So it really isn't fair to bash on our species for doing what all of them do. Granted, we've been smart enough to alter our environment so it can support more humans in the short term with possibly dire long-term consequences, but not a lot of other species could pull that sort of thing off. We should get kudos.

I suppose I shouldn't talk to my siblings, or read political news, maybe I'll feel more positive if I did.

Please keep in mind that the first great pollution event resulted from overpopulation of photosynthesizers during the Archean Era and gave us the atmosphere we have now. It was a shit move for archaebacteria, but a rather fortunate turn of events for Eukarya.

Meta:
Your anti-human bias only works from a reference frame which is biased in favor of humans specifically or eukaryotes generally. Which is sort of fucked up if you think about it.

Argh! I'm just a little pissed off with humankind at the moment. It will pass.

The problem with heroes is not in having them but imaging that they transcend their humanness in the way the rest of us do not. Hence the oft quoted line about never meeting them. But the fault with that however lies with the ones doing the hero worshipping rather than the heroes themselves. I have unbelievable admiration for my own but even though they were truly exceptional beings they were ordinary mortals as well. And Ayaan Hirsi Ali is no different in that respect. Nor is anyone else

Too true. I don't really see anyone as a hero. I just like to think that people who don't follow religion, also don't deliberately tell lies.

I'm pretty sure atheists have no monopoly on honesty.