PZ listened to all of that conversation between Stefan Molyneux and Peter Boghossian. I managed only about twenty minutes, because it’s so gross and also so tedious, and I plan to go back to it, but PZ did it in one gulp. He took some notes – not a transcript, because he was doing other work at the time, which is the only way listening to the whole thing could be tolerable – not a transcript but just some notes.
Curiously, Boghossian is having a conversation with Molyneux, who is notorious for his misogynist remarks. Not just the mild, unthinking sexism that so many Atheist Thinky Leaders engage in, but outright contempt for women. This is the guy who claims that women are the root of all evil, becauseWomen have to be held accountable for choosing assholes.They have sex with assholes and have little baby assholes, none of which is the father’s fault, but entirely due to women’s evil choices.
You might be wondering who these “they” are — they refer to “them” constantly through the video. But there’s only one place where anyone is mentioned by name.
5:00 (PB) PZ Myers, Rebecca Watson, Ophelia Benson, and Greta Christina.
Interesting. We’re the enemy, and they get to make clumsy elisions, accusing “them” of making bomb threats, death threats, and shouting down people with bullhorns. But the only people they name don’t do any of that. Drawing lazy equivalences is just something philosophers do, I guess.
Well they have to, they’re fighting for justice. No wait, I thought we were the social justice warriors. So they’re fighting for…doing nothing? Is that it?
Seriously though, one reason I could take only 20 minutes or so was how empty the conversation was. It really was just a lot of very familiar banalities tossed back and forth, with a lot of repetition. It wasn’t impressive.
Also, where did this idea that being totally free of any ideological framework is a virtue come from? It’s not. It’s a lie. It’s part of the rhetorical strategy of declaring that I have an accurate representation of the world, you have an ideology.
17:10 (PB) they can’t even present the evidence in a rational way
18:30 (PB) these cultures of being offended
19:00 (SM) Thought-crime!
20:10 (PB) This fringe have hijacked a narrative…these cultures of offense; they conflate disagreement with harassment.
Christ, this is annoying. Of course we present rational arguments, with evidence. When we say that Sam Harris said something sexist, we quote the words he said in context. We make these arguments over and over, and these wackos with an authoritarian ideology simply shut down at the thought that we’d disagree with an Atheist Thinky Leader.
We might be offended — Molyneux in particular is an expert at saying grossly offensive things — but what’s at the heart of what we say is principled disagreement.
Yes but…offended…Stephen Fry…so fucking what…beep beep boop