Missing the point
Over the weekend if have been getting a lot of hits from P.Z. Myers' blog since someone linked to my desecration post in the comment section. The replies I have found to b rather funny in their missing the point. The commenter said to check out this guy who wanted to get even by desecrating a microscope. I guess he and others totally missed that this is a parody site and that I don't think that P.Z. Myers hold's microscopes sacred and of course it was only a photoshop thing anyway. Many seemed to have totally missed this and the point I was actually making is that science can only go so far.
It kind of reminds me of the Richard
Dawkin's rap video where later Dawkins' didn't get the video
and asked his readers whose side the video was on.
A commenter at Vox Popoli blog had a
great bit of satire on this.
1. Video posted around 11:00 PM
2. 1 hour and 44 minutes later, Dawkins implores his more intelligent
readers to help inform him as to whose side the video is on (his side,
or not his side). He then pokes fun at people that think things are
funny that he doesn't understand just in case it turns out to be 'not
on his side.' Comment #151544
3. Dawkins now presumably goes to sleep.
4. Nearly nine hours later, he wakes up and checks the post again. He
sees that his fellow scientific elites like the video, but also don't
understand it. Dawkins tries to get in a little dig on postmodernism,
but just ends up making fun of his posters. Comment #151685
5. Nine and a half hours after posting, Dawkins wonders how his fellow
comrades could laugh at something they don't understand. He then lauds
The Life of Brian as the pinnacle of comedic evolution. Comment #151704
6. A couple minutes after the last post, he gets in another jab at
Postmodernism. Comment #151713
7. Under chastisement for his humbuggery, Dawkins admits that Daniel
Dennett popping his head up from out of nowhere is, in fact, funny.
Comment #151715
8. Nearly ten hours after posting the video, someone postulates that
the humor is derived from the silly dancing bodies (not the satire).
Dawkins seems to accept this theory and thanks the poster for his
intellect. Comment #151723
9. Sixteen hours after first watching the video, Dawkins finally
realizes that it is, in fact, making fun of 'his side.' Dawkins defends
himself again by saying that he didn't understand it. Comment #151849.
10. Seventeen hours after posting, Dawkins attempts to comprehend the
humor by equating similar scenes of incongruousness that Monty Python
has also done. Dawkins has apparently not yet pondered why, if this
were the only thing funny about the video, he did not catch on before
this. Dawkins chalks this up to the video not being funny, and
dismisses the obvious conclusion that his head is too big to see the
satire behind it. Comment #151889
11. The next day, Dawkins chimes in again to defend his Ph.D. status to
a poster who dared question it. Comment #152142
12. Nearly 36 hours after posting, Dawkins discovers what a 'grill' is
and waxes philosophic as to why Sam Harris would have one in the video.
The conclusion he comes up with is that it adds no humor to the video
and should not have been put in. Comment #152168
13. After a full three and a half days after first watching the video,
Dawkins (obviously perturbed at the fact he didn't get that he was the
butt of the joke, when every other non-elite who saw it could tell in
an instant) attempts to equate the video with 'The worst poem ever
written.' He then satisfies himself by settling on the conclusion that
this is the only reason why people might like it. The final analysis is
that it's not only 'not good,' and not even 'pretty bad,' but so
incredibly bad, that it is in fact, good. He gets in a snobbish comment
about the Bible for good measure. Comment #153061
This is not to say that atheist don't get parody since a lot of religious people also can be rather dense when it comes to parody and totally missing the point. Though it is rather ironic for people who describe themselves as brights somehow can totally miss the point and take something much to seriously.
What I do really appreciate after looking at some of the comments made over at P.Z. Myers blog is that I am really happy that blogging didn't exist when I was still an atheist. The advent of blogging developed during the time that I was not yet in the Church, though moving towards it. I am quite glad that all the dumb things I likely would have said and my zero understanding of philosophy is not recorded on a hard drive somewhere for all eternity. I would no doubt have been a troll on religious blogs mocking them for following their hunter-gatherer base religion and flouting my own superiority. As someone who is a hard SF geek and who has followed science from a young age and has always been fascinated by the sciences I can quite understand the attitude of the new atheists and their followers. "There but by the grace of God go I" - yes I am pulling the grace card. I still love the sciences, the only difference is that I have gotten to know their author.
Known as 
"zero understanding of philosophy"
This is the real issue most times. Individuals who have never read anything philosophical, nor taken any fundamental philosophy, nor ever attempted to understand philosophy, are often totally convinced they are experts on philosophy.
It makes dialog almost impossible.
"and the point I was actually making is that science can only go so far."
Whereas catholics can go all the way up to death threats and beyond??
The whole point initially was to point out catholic ludicrousness, and their fanatical and quite scary overreaction to a university students posession of a bit of bread.
Of course your thing was satirical, and of course it was photoshopped - but the fact you felt you needed to do it seems to imply you don't recognise or care for the context in which the original "desecration" happened.
Why were your commenters suggesting that PZ should be sacked? Don't you think that shows up a little bit of a persecution-complex that you all need to get over? This is the 21st century after all, men in dresses muttering in Latin don't hold sway in every corner of the globe anymore.
Voltare44,
Grass straw arguments get you know nowhere.
Remember that the atheistic teachings of Karl Marx caused the most deaths in the 20th century than all other previous 19 centuries combined.
Good luck in the here and now.
I'm preparing for eternity.
In Jesus, Mary, & Joseph,
Tito
Actually, I'm a little late for this debate, so I'd like to hear more from Voltare44 so he/she could clarify a few things.
"Whereas catholics can go all the way up to death threats and beyond??"
I'm assuming this was some nut on PZ's board. It doesn't seem to fit the tone here and it certainly doesn't fit with true Church teaching.
"The whole point initially was to point out catholic ludicrousness, and their fanatical and quite scary overreaction to a university students posession of a bit of bread."
Your use of the word "overreaction" is telling. I'd be interested in hearing you explain your understanding of Catholic teachings on The Eucharist. It might help me understand why you think Catholics are overreacting.
"Why were your commenters suggesting that PZ should be sacked? Don't you think that shows up a little bit of a persecution-complex that you all need to get over?"
No, actually. You see, when Kevin Smith makes a movie like Dogma which satirizes the Church, some Catholics may protest it and ask people not to support it, but they would never claim Smith didn't have the right to make it. (Jersey Girl is a different story.) Smith made his attack using art and ideas, he didn't steal something a religion holds sacred (even if he personally thought holding it sacred was moronic) and destroy it. PZ's desecration of the Eucharist crosses the line between debate and persecution and a mature, intelligent person should recognize that. PZ's inability to do so brings into question his fitness to teach.
Votare44, I'm truly interested in hearing what you have to say on these things and hope you respond. I'd appreciate a little less of the hostility your previous comments contain, but I'm a big boy, so insult away if you have to :)
This is the 21st century after all, men in dresses muttering in Latin don't hold sway in every corner of the globe anymore.
Wow!!! You mean men-in-dresses-muttering-in-Latin actually did, at one time, rule the entire globe???
This is a very big revelation, friends! Very, very big.
History Has Been Re-Written! Now all we need to do is pinpoint when, exactly, the globe was ruled by those Latin-muttering men. Voltare44?
I still love the sciences, the only difference is that I have gotten to know their author.
This reminded me of almost-inverse of "I've got no problem with Jesus, it's his followers I can't stand."
Calling for the prof to be fired is apropos, actually. It happens frequently when professors reveal off-campus behavior that reflects badly on their institution. At the very least, it should alert his employers that they need to discretely monitor his classes to see if his shenanigans carry over to the classroom.
I am currently taking a history class and have been appalled that I've paid for several hours of talk about the professor's love life, jokes about Asian women preferring Caucasian men, and other unrelated "lessons". I have never experienced such an obvious abuse of tenure, but my classmates say they've had math professors who "lecture" about nationalized health care, foreign language grammar lessons that veer into tirades against the Bush administration, etc.
Okay... I had not seen the video before... It is a new favorite. Did anyone else notice that Dawkins’ clock (ala Flavor-Flav) was set at 4 min ‘til midnight? Hahahahahahahaha… subtle!
"Voltare44" is really pretty enlightened... witness the self-parody of misspelling his own name. As if he knows nothing about philosophy!
Or maybe it's a *really* obscure joke and he's approaching his 44th birthday.
Yo... he's the Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
he's smarter than you he's got a science degree!
The Dick to the Dawk to the PhD,
he's still smarter than you he studied biology!
That's awesome. Thanks for posting that again. I've been meaning to watch it again during all this PZ Mess. Word.
This is a parody site, so I should consider the post above to be a parody... of what, exactly? Someone who is annoyed that his parody was misinterpreted? The meta-parody is intense.
PZ is such an odd little fellow. When I finally read what he did to desecrate a consecrated host, I was surprised by his lack of imagination. He's such an infant! All he want is attention. In a different universe, he'd be one of those guys who runs naked onto a baseball diamond during an MLB game.
This is a parody site
Yes, but not exclusively a parody site. Got anything else?
"he's smarter than you, he's got a PhD" now, how am I supposed to stop myself from singing it everywhere? it's genius! and quite catchy