Don't make me hurt you again
Mark Shea has an interesting post up related to the logical fallacy and sin of ad hominem arguments, and how we quite often in an internet flame war treat the other side as not a human being, but as an object. I know I do this quite often; my intent in arguing online is often not for the person I'm arguing against (as I know I'll never convert anybody anyway) but rather so that lurkers (in old usenet slang, a lurker is somebody reading a flame war but not participating themselves) get both sides of the argument fleshed out as completely as possible.
To do this, I often take the role of the crazy boy against the bully. NEVER take one of my arguments online personally- they aren't intended for you alone; they are intended to make others think. If by some miracle I make you think as well, then fine and dandy, but that's not my purpose.
That, in combination with the need for more time to do what I need to do and the lack of odd spam in eastern pictographic character sets as of late, is the reason I have now turned off moderation. This means I won't be answering topics as quickly- but perhaps, just perhaps, I'll be answering them a bit more sanely. Or insanely, as the case may be.
To do this, I often take the role of the crazy boy against the bully. NEVER take one of my arguments online personally- they aren't intended for you alone; they are intended to make others think. If by some miracle I make you think as well, then fine and dandy, but that's not my purpose.
That, in combination with the need for more time to do what I need to do and the lack of odd spam in eastern pictographic character sets as of late, is the reason I have now turned off moderation. This means I won't be answering topics as quickly- but perhaps, just perhaps, I'll be answering them a bit more sanely. Or insanely, as the case may be.
Comments
As an atheist trolling Christian blogs, I am familiar with and sometimes guilty of this fallacy. But, overall, I enjoy the exchange of ideas and am learning a lot about the shades of gray between Catholicism and atheism. I am inclined to believe that you can't throw the baby out with the bath water. Catholic morality makes Catholics live good lives and that is the baby. The bath water is the judgmental attitude they display toward those who don't live their lives in accordance with the Catholic way.
The Church is a Hospital for Sinners, not a Disneyland with luxury spa for Saints.
I don't know any actual good Catholics- the New Evangelization needs to start in the pew next to us, not in the wider world.
THAT process needs to start in the homilies and in the pew and in the laity, NOT externally to the Church. Once our behavior matches our values, THEN we won't need to evangelize at all- the old song "for they will know we are Christians by our love" will be plenty.
By an odd coincidence, today's CatholicTV vortex was on this very issue. I don't agree with Voris that the Bishops alone caused this mess, and I almost never agree with Michael Voris on hardly anything at all (especially his hatred of social justice- he very much is a RadTrad and even has dealings with the anti-Semite Radical Traditionalists) but I did find it interesting that I was listening to this literalist fundamental Catholic roasting of the Bishops while typing this.
Talk about an irrational point of view! Sometimes I wonder if RadTrads can think any more than Westboro Baptists.
But he is right in one thing- the *actions* are not matching the *words* quite often in Catholicism, and how can we preach a consistent world view without that? How can say Cardinal Dolan keep up his lawsuit on the HHS mandate while conveniently overlooking the Archcare labor union contract?
If the union pushes for free contraception in their healthcare packages or coverage for same sex partners, etc., do you really expect that to be a bone of contention when trying to avoid a strike?