Comments on: A Not So Eloquent Atheist Kerfluffle

Comment by: Jonathan Blake

2007-10-30T16:20:34Z

I just read The Double Edged Passion (via The Situationist) which seems to apply here. The mere suggestion that two people are in different groups can cause us to act negatively toward each other:

…ingroup biases really don’t take much to get started.

Henri Tajfel’s minimal ingroup experiment is famed for illustrating just how little is required. He asked boys to guess how many dots were shown on a speckled slide and subsequently announced they were over- or underestimators. Next the boys distributed points (that were exchangeable for money) amongst each other. They tended to give more to those who were the same â€˜type’ as themselves. They had spent mere minutes as a member of this transparently meaningless ingroup, and yet were already showing favoritism!

Of course the assignment to over- or underestimators was purely random, decided by the flip of a coin.

So the mere act of dividing the world into theists and atheists tempts us to treat each other badly.

Comment by: Cliff

2007-10-30T18:48:12Z

I guess there’s idiots everywhere. I’d try to get away from them, but they is me, too. Hmm?

Comment by: Jonathan Blake

2007-10-31T11:14:19Z

Idiots are people; people are idiots. There is no permanent escape, it seems. I only hope to ameliorate my own stupidity and the stupidity of humanity in general.

Comment by: Jonathan Blake

2007-11-01T11:46:07Z

Here’s a post about how tribalism sucks.

Comment by: Paul Sunstone

2007-11-01T23:30:35Z

I’ve never been comfortable with the atheist label — or most any other label. It seems labels are all too often substituted for understanding.

Comment by: Jonathan Blake

2007-11-02T09:21:17Z

But they’re so dang useful as a jump-start to conversation, as long as we make sure to go beyond the simplistic understanding conferred by labels.

Comment by: Paul Sunstone

2007-11-02T20:00:41Z

That’s true — they are useful as jump starts. I’d forgotten about that, but I’ve used them that way myself at times.

Comment by: Kullervo

2007-11-04T20:34:01Z

Yes, this is how many atheists treat theists. It’s just as stupid as Christian fundamentalism.

Comment by: Seth R.

2007-11-05T20:07:26Z

Thanks for posting this Jonathan. Believe it or not, it makes me feel better about some other run-ins I had – as a believing Mormon (full disclosure) – on some “anti” site or other. Nice to know not all our opponents are buttheads and that some people actually understand what we have to put up with on occasion. Unfortunately, fairness loses out to the agenda on too many occasions.

I appreciate finding more thoughtful critics. Being exposed only to the less thoughtful leaves one rather jaded.

Comment by: Jonathan Blake

2007-11-06T08:38:05Z

Thanks for the encouragement. These days, I’m trying my hardest not to be a team player, if that makes sense.

Comment by: C. L. Hanson

2007-11-16T04:40:38Z

This is a very useful story about how and why to guard against in-group thinking. I have seen a bit of what looks like groupthink in atheist blogspace, and people should be called on it because it’s not constructive. (I discussed it a bit in my passionate secularism.)

I still like to call myself an atheist, though, because I like to be clear and straight-forward about my position. Still, I’d rather not have it be an “us vs. them” thing, and you and Harris are right that that’s hard to avoid…