Five Myths About Christmas (answered?)

[packsaddle]

Eagledad, I'm not sure what you mean by that. If I told you that I never intend disrespect, how do you respond?

 

An example: There is a story about a great flood. In my "crassly redacted" version (thanks qwazse, I liked that too) long ago when the animals could still speak, there was a disagreement and in response the crayfish burrowed so deeply into the soil that the water rose and flooded everything. It is written in a well-known book (ok, maybe not so well-known to some). But it was part of the cultural heritage for a group of people, at least until I left home in the 1960s, and for all I know it still is.

 

Now, I say this is a myth. Is there anyone in these forums who disagrees with me?

Anyone who disagrees, please explain how this is NOT a myth and if not, what is it?

Otherwise, how does the concept of respect apply to my use of the term 'myth' for this story?

 

Tampa Turtle, it's ok to just admit you don't know something. I do it all the time (see above).

 

Also, am I detecting just a smidgeon of political correctness present in the forums?

[Beavah]

"If not how can I tell the difference between respect and disrespect when calling something a myth?"

That question (still unanswered) was to Tampa Turtle. But you didn't answer it either, Beavah.

 

Yah, I did. Yeh just weren't listening.

 

If you use the term "myth" with respect to other people's deeply held cultural/religious stories, that is disrepectful. Eagledad's explanation is on the mark, eh? You're usin' the term for yourself, not for them. It is perceived as a statement of arrogance and derision. "Your tale is a myth, and I am above that." Most notably, yeh don't call your own tales (dark energy? really?) "myths."

 

Yep, only God and your conscience can speak to what your intent really is, but even kindhearted old furry critters are apt to perceive your intent as arrogance and derision.

 

Same with some other pseudo-academic terms. You'll occasionally hear people talk about the "cult of Mary" in referrin' to Catholics or Orthodox Christians, and pretend that they mean 'cult' in an academic sense as a group of common believers. Balderdash. The term is chosen deliberately to be dismissive and derogatory, and yeh can tell because they don't apply it to their own groups.

 

Beavah

 

[Beavah]

So to follow on, there is a story about da nature of the universe. The universe is expanding, and so in order to explain this expansion there is a tale about "dark energy" which no one has ever seen or experienced, but which accounts for 95% of the energy of the universe, works against gravity so as to cause the galaxies to speed apart. Even the originator of this tale isn't at all convinced by this tale. In fact, yeh could just as easily substitute "Dark Bunnies" for "dark energy", except that da word 'energy' has more mythological significance within this community.

 

But if yeh call it a "myth", yeh get Merlyn's knee-jerk reaction, eh? It's not a myth! You don't know anything about it! It's a hypothesis. Myth is what we call other people's explanatory stories when we want to dismiss them, not what we call our own explanatory stories when we believe that elements of them might be true.

 

Treat others' stories that might be true with the same respect that yeh treat your own, and do 'em the courtesy of using their own terms rather than substituting other terms that imply theirs aren't worthy.

 

Beavah

 

[Trevorum]

Beav is attempting to dabble in Anthropology and cultural relativism, which is good. He even gets some of it right.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Beavah, when you run your computer on goat entrails and base your medical treatments on your aura, you will start putting your money where your mouth is. So far, you're equivocating like the looniest crystal gazer.

[packsaddle]

Beavah, did you get 'stung' by a physicist when you were little? If you want to call dark energy a myth, me, I don't see the disrespect in that. How can there be disrespect, if it doesn't exist? There's nothing there to disrespect! You are attaching the term to an idea, not a person...or a group of people.

Besides, if Merlyn holds dark energy as a "deeply held cultural/religious story" I'd have to say that on that basis he passes muster with 'respect' to the DRP.

Look you can call my thoughts and beliefs anything you want. 'Respect' is not something I'd worry about in response. On the other hand, if you went around telling people that I am a myth...now THAT would make me proud.

Besides, if I wanted to pay disrespect to something, I would summon something far stronger than calling it a 'myth'.

 

So, was Father Reginald Foster disrespecting Christianity when he informed us that all those things (like the Christmas story and that "hell thing") were just "nice stories"?

 

What I am getting from you and others is that I'm not allowed to use the term, 'myth'. Period. If I apply the term to my own deeply held beliefs, is that also disrespectful?

Are you saying that the term 'myth', applied to the idea that crayfish caused a great flood...is disrespectful? Your answer so far is: YES.

You have got to be kidding!

 

What about the deeply held belief that young women must be subjected to genital mutilation? It seems to be fine to openly oppose this practice. But it would be disrespectful to attach the term 'myth' to beliefs associated with it? After all we wouldn't want to confer disrespect to that barbaric practice, would we? Good Grief!

 

What you are advocating is abolition of use of the term, lest some kind of disrespect be paid to some belief, somewhere. I just don't buy this brand of PC. Sorry.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

First, Merlyn LeRoy is a wizard from Fractured Fairy Tales; there isn't a regular wizard character. And you failed to point out that it's a pun name on Mervyn LeRoy, a film producer/director (Little Caesar, The Wizard of Oz, etc). Rocky and Bullwinkle had a lot of jokes in it that only adults would get.

 

I'm not an actor, I'm a computer programmer. I've done (unpaid) radio work, and I've written for and performed with members of the Firesign Theatre.

 

I don't see how you conclude I'm a "main poster" on atheist nexus, I've posted about 7 things back in 2009.

 

Everyone probably already knew this. I'm just a bit slow on the uptake.

 

Well, yes. I couldn't join the BSA if I wanted to, since I'm an atheist. I did, however, force the BSA to stop issuing charters to public schools and other government agencies. If you started reading from my first post, you would have seen my first post was on how public schools can't charter packs or troops.

[fred8033]

Merlyn - I should apologize. About an hour ago, I emailed the site admin requesting my posts to be deleted. I should not have called you out by name. It's wrong. My apologies. I hope the admin has a chance to delete my two posts.

 

...

 

"I don't see how you conclude I'm a "main poster" on atheist nexus, I've posted about 7 things back in 2009. "

 

Your right. I didn't realize that when I googled to the site. I thought it was your site. I didn't realize it was more like a MySpace or Facebook for atheists.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

Fred's previous post has been deleted (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

[Beavah]

If you want to call dark energy a myth, me, I don't see the disrespect in that.

 

The point is da folks in that community don't call it a myth, eh?

 

Besides, if I wanted to pay disrespect to something, I would summon something far stronger than calling it a 'myth'.

 

Unless yeh wanted to simply slight or denigrate it, eh? Some things we oppose, others we just ridicule or dismiss.

 

What I am getting from you and others is that I'm not allowed to use the term, 'myth'. Period. If I apply the term to my own deeply held beliefs, is that also disrespectful?

 

You're allowed to say anything yeh want about your own beliefs, as is the Reverend Foster. Just as a black fellow is allowed to call another black fellow a stupid nigger. But if yeh want to be respectful of others, then yeh behave in a more circumspect fashion, mindful of the connotations of your choice of words, particularly as someone who is not a member of a particular group.

 

Are you saying that the term 'myth', applied to the idea that crayfish caused a great flood...is disrespectful?

 

Certainly, if there is a community that genuinely believes that a crayfish caused the great flood (though I doubt that there is). And yeh know it as well as I. The straw man you're settin' up assumes that everyone must agree with you, that the story is quaint or ridiculous. And that's what yeh mean when yeh use the term "myth" about aspects of Christianity, eh? That yeh find it quaint or ridiculous. Nobody is goin' to stop you from saying such things. It's your right. It's just disrespectful and discourteous.

 

What about the deeply held belief that young women must be subjected to genital mutilation?

 

What about it? As I said, yeh can choose to denigrate a belief as wrong-headed or barbaric, and the people who believe such things as fools and villains and violators of human rights who should be subject to da Inquisition and forcibly repressed. That's a choice. Sometimes, it may be justified.

 

Just recognize that that's what you're doin', eh? You're calling other people fools and villains, and suggesting that their belief should be discounted, no longer taught, or forcibly repressed. I reckon that counts as discourteous .

 

If that's not what yeh mean or intend, don't use the term.

 

Nuthin' in the least "PC" about it. Like all feedback, yeh can take what I or Tampa Turtle says, or yeh can leave it. But yeh did ask.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[Beavah]

Beav is attempting to dabble in Anthropology and cultural relativism, which is good.

 

Nah, I'm an absolutist just like Merlyn, eh? I don't reckon yeh can be a Christian (or a scientist) without that. Yeh have to be willing to recognize that some notions are just wrong.

 

Doesn't mean yeh can't do it politely and respectfully. Also doesn't mean that yeh can't take some time to appreciate where another belief is comin' from, portray it honestly, and consider what might be valid within it.

 

So Merlyn, da point yeh keep missing is that I'm just fine with sayin' auras and goat entrails aren't authentic science. But I'd also say that neopaganism isn't authentic religion. You make science self-consistent by removing things that some call "science" from what you deem is authentic, real science. In da same way, religion is self-consistent if yeh remove things that some call "religion" from what yeh deem is authentic, real religion.

 

The mechanism is da same, eh? There's nuthin' special about science or theology as intellectual pursuits. They're both human endeavors. Da self-consistency comes from excluding others with different beliefs.

 

But would I call Hindu tales of multiple deities "myths"? Nah. Not unless I intended to be disrespectful.

 

Beavah

 

[packsaddle]

You think it is respectful to claim that some group's deeply held belief system is not "authentic religion"? But to refer to those same beliefs as myths is disrespectful?

You make no sense at all.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Beavah writes:

So Merlyn, da point yeh keep missing is that I'm just fine with sayin' auras and goat entrails aren't authentic science.

 

But your problem is, you've got no justification to deny those who say auras and goat entrails ARE authentic science. To you, "science" appears to be a label anyone can slap on anything.

[drmbear]

Hey Beav, I'm a Unitarian Universalist... there's not much that I would consider just plain wrong. I'm more likely to say..."you know, there may be something of value in that idea...tell me more!"

[Scoutfish]

I'd say Bigfoot , the idea that Elvis is still alive, aliens in silver catsuits flying over the US and "new and Improved" are myths. I have no doubt about it at all.

 

But there are tose who believe those things to be just as true as I thnk them to be myths.

 

 

I do not feel disrespected because they view my opinions as myth.

I do not feel disrespected (if) Merlyn views my religious views as myths.

 

Truth of the matter is, to him, they are just as much myths as little green men in foil catsuits from sector 7-123a are to me.

 

So...now what?

 

Thing heris this Beavah...You seem to hold people as rude and arrogant and disrespectful if they do not agree with or bow down enthusiastically to your ideals or beliefs. Yet you show that same disdain and disregard for their beliefs and views with equal fevor.

 

I am deeply secure in my religious beliefs, but I also recognive that I cannot physically give the slightest proof of my beliefs other than that others think the same way as I do, or that what I believe is backed up in a book full of "He said it so it must be true" writting.

 

So, I give Merlyn equal status and respect to follow his own beliefs and to view my beliefs in the same way as I view his. If I declare him to be disrespectful because of his opinions of my views ( as far as a myth is concerned)....the catch 22 is that I also have to declare myself just as disrecpectful by having that opinuion of his.

 

 

 

 

[Beavah]

But your problem is, you've got no justification to deny those who say auras and goat entrails ARE authentic science.

 

Not my problem to defend da integrity of science. That belongs to packsaddle and his ilk. I expect he decides on his own justification for telling someone that something isn't "real" science, but that his thinking is shared more or less by others in that community. Or maybe there's an official creed I don't know about.

 

My only point is that if yeh let a community of human beings decide what does and doesn't constitute authentic [insert phrase here], then they will create a belief system that is more or less self-consistent. It has nothing at all to do with it being "science", or "religion", or "linguistics", or "English Literature". It has to do with the ability of da community to exclude those who they do not feel are authentic practitioners. If yeh don't allow 'em to exclude others, then what yeh see won't be self-consistent. If it's religion, you'll get different numbers of gods, different character of gods, etc. If it's science, you'll get auras and crystals and Pons and Fleischman cold fusion.

 

I'm a Unitarian Universalist... there's not much that I would consider just plain wrong.

 

Yah, but then I'm not sure all UUA's consider themselves Christian, eh? And it seems to me that there are at least a few things that come across as dogmatic, like da UUA views on "tolerance".

 

There's nuthin' at all wrong with being respectful, and asking people what they believe and how they understand something. There's nuthin' wrong with looking for bits and pieces that are interesting or valid in other beliefs. A good western scientist will listen to a witch doctor out of human respect, and may well examine the herbal remedies being used to see if something valuable is present. But that doesn't mean that the same scientist won't be patiently firm about rejecting the validity of voodoo. A Christian may well listen to an imam out of human respect, and may well read the Koran and examine what truths may be found within Muhammed's teachings. But that doesn't mean the same Christian won't be patiently firm about rejecting the validity of other tenets of Islam, like polygamy. He or she would argue quite naturally that such a tenet is not the authentic Word of God, not "authentic religion" if you will. And that could lead to an interesting and productive argument or mutual sharing.

 

But what packsaddle can't seem to wrap his head around is that if yeh called Islam a "myth", that wouldn't lead to a good argument or productive sharing. That's just arrogant and dismissive. Rather than questioning the validity of a tenet, it is an attack on the whole belief, the whole person. It says, in essence, "everything about you and your beliefs is quaint and silly." That position may be honest, of course, but expressing it in public is uncouth and disrespectful. And I think in most cases, that is the real intent.

 

Beavah