Russell Blackford, the guy who was hilariously unable to detect New Atheist incivility (the absurdity of which has been thrown into sharp relief by the current – and utterly predictable – meltdown in the skeptic/atheist community), has apparently detected some incivility on the part of Potty-Mouth Myers (or Paul, as he’s known to his ex-friends).
You do “get” that publicly calling someone a liar is a friendship-breaker and a bridge-burner, right? I don’t see how I’ve done anything to deserve that kind of language. Nor do see how I can go on being friends with you after you’ve said that in public.
Now, it’s always sad to see a beautiful friendship go down the tubes – I’ve noticed there’s been a lot of that lately in New Atheist world (I guess it’s the company they keep) – but there is an interesting point here. You see, “Liar” is an accusation that tends to be thrown around with gay abandon by the New Atheist horde. Here are a few of examples (and no, I’m not going to look for more, not because I can’t find them, but because I can’t be bothered):
Based on Larry Moran’s and Richard Dawkins’s comments, neither of which substantiates your claim, it appears that you, Mr. Stanyard, are a liar, making up stuff as it suits you. I don’t apply that word lightly, but it seems warranted in your case. (Jerry Coyne to Roger Stanyard, on Coyne’s own site)
You are not being scorned for “moderating,” but for lying. And several of us have documented and explained the nature of your dishonesty in some detail. (Said to Karla McLaren)
You deliberately choose to lie and snivel, and think yourself above everyone else. You think you can dictate how others behave and react to things. (Also said to Karla McLaren, by somebody different)
What I mean is that throughout his “critique” he apes authority. What is better, when you have nothing to say and are still being paid for your column-inches? He talks in a superior tone throughout, as though he “really knows, you know”. It’s a con. The man’s a liar. (Said about Terry Eagleton.)
Also conspicuously missing is Nick Matzke’s ability to apply his criticisms to himself. Nick is a proven liar and a person who purposefully spreads unscientific claims about an entire group of people in order to imagine himself superior. (Said on Jerry Coyne’s site)
I trust you’ll forgive me for calling all y’all liars when you describe yourself as promoting science education. (Said to Roger Stanyard, again on Coyne’s site)
And this is just the tip of the iceberg. (So much for New Atheist civility, right? Does anybody actually believe that anymore?)
So the question is does the Polite Professor object to the indiscriminate use of the epithet “liar” (and the accusation of “lying”)? Or is it just when he gets called a liar he gets upset?
Let me guess, it’s okay to call somebody a “liar” if they are a liar, and whenever the accusation is levelled by somebody on my side it is truthful. But it is always false when it is used about somebody on my side (and especially if it is used about me).
Yeah, right.
Finally, this comment by Blackford is absolutely right, and it explains exactly why you shouldn’t accuse somebody of lying without being damned sure they’re knowingly telling a falsehood. In the interests of fairness, I should say I think Blackford is entirely within his rights to be annoyed about what has happened. He shouldn’t have been called a liar. But hey, this sort of thing is just par for the course with Myers, and if you will keep that sort of company…).
Comments are closed.