1. Springer opera court fight fails

Comment #94336 by Squiddity on December 5, 2007 at 10:59 am

To be honest, I think everyone here knew it would fail before it started, including the prosecution - legally speaking, it didn't have a leg to stand on.
This seems to be just an attention grabbing attempt by 'Christian Voice', and it has worked.

2. Rats influenced by the kindness of strangers

Comment #54854 by Squiddity on July 9, 2007 at 6:30 am

gordon: No, because the rats who are passing on the benefit have not received theirs in response to their own actions. This is what makes it 'generalised' reciprocity, rather than 'specialised', which is a much more accepted survival trait.

3. Rats influenced by the kindness of strangers

Comment #54853 by Squiddity on July 9, 2007 at 6:29 am

I would advise people who are interested in this report to read the full paper (http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0050196) and also to read in more depth about generalised reciprocity and what effect this has on evoutionary behaviour and psychology. Robert Wright's 'The Moral Animal' is a very accessible book which covers this quite well.

4. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #20067 by Squiddity on January 31, 2007 at 8:30 am

Heatnzl: There is nothing wrong with emotion per se.
However, there is something wrong with using an appeal to emotion about a subject like this.

It encourages bigotry, jingoism and prejudice, as some people have already fallen prey to in these responses (mdowe's comment above being the best example of prejudice currently) and this is a group of relatively intelligent and thoughtful people - this kind of reporting among the wrong people causes a huge amount of anger and hatred, which only leads to violence.

I amn well in favour of preventing this kind of behaviour and would be in favour of removing all religious behaviour if that were possible.
But you do not acheive this by promoting behaviour that leads to violence as that only creates more violence, as the US are learning (again) in Iraq at the moment.

I found Lord Asriel's comment above useful - don't react to what the people writing the article want you to react to, look into it and form a more rounded view.

5. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #20013 by Squiddity on January 31, 2007 at 4:16 am

Heatnzl : You might want to notice that I said that I disagree with this practice and consider it immoral.
At no point have I supported it in any way.
I too would intervene and try to prevent it, because I think it is unjustifiable.

My problem is with the style and content of the reporting, which is promoting emotional responses rather than reasoned ones.
Emotional responses will not help argue or convince people that this is wrong, they will simply respond with emotional arguments themselves and it degenerates into a shouting match.

6. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #20012 by Squiddity on January 31, 2007 at 4:13 am

StephenD: I did consider the phrase 'Ali Madani's cries became more violent as blood gushed from the wound, covering his small, terrified face.' to be sensationalist.

It is what I would expect from CNN, or even from our own news networks, but it is not what I have come to expect from RichardDawkins.net.
This site is so good at presenting reasoned arguments that I was dissapointed that it proprogated this story in this way and not one that looked at the other effects that Ashura has had such as the thousand years of bloody internecine strike and war and the effects of that rather than focusing on the elements likely to provoke emotion.

Do you agree, based on the responses that people have given so far, that the majority of responses to this article have been emotional rather than reasoned?

7. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #20009 by Squiddity on January 31, 2007 at 4:06 am

faouloki: Yes, I do realise it was reposted from CNN, I said that I did not think it should have been proprograted here.
I rely on this site as providing good quality reasoned arguments as it has done in the past.
I found this argument to be based too much on appeals to emotion, which has had the desired effect from the other responses.
Appeals to emotion are the bread and butter of tabloid journalism, which this site is not.

8. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #19987 by Squiddity on January 31, 2007 at 2:10 am

StephenD - I think you misunderstand my argument - I am not arguing in favour of this behaviour, to assume that is deeply uncharitable on your part.

I am arguing that to present this article with such prejudicial language undermines it's usefulness as an argument against Muslim practice.

The same details, presented with rational argument rather than flowerly and dramatic language, make a much better case to argue that Islam is flawed.

Lastly, please make sure you understand the argument before accusing someone of speaking 'nonsence(sic)', all arguments should be considered charitably before you start using impolite language.

9. [Warning: Graphic] Children's foreheads slashed in Muslim saint's name

Comment #19982 by Squiddity on January 31, 2007 at 1:36 am

This is an argument from prejudicial language and is therefore invalid.

If you accept that the Muslim (Shi'ite) faith is correct and true, then this behaviour is acceptable.
If you do not think it is true, then this behaviour may well not be.
It is not acceptable to me because I do not accept the Muslim faith and my personal morality tells me it is wrong.

However, using it as an example of how those heathen types are so evil plays to our idea of morality and deliberately tries to pluck at our heartstrings by overplaying the graphic and sensationalist elements of the story.
It avoids having to make a valid or reasoned argument by using prejudicial and sensational language.

This is what I would expect from our local mass market tabloid papers - it is not what I expect from this site.
I have come to expect better, I do not think this story, in this form, should have been proprogated here.