This has been an interesting week for me.( Collapse )
Two concepts that are tricky to resolve: the concept of the genetic fallacy, and conversational calls of privilege.
- The Genetic Fallacy is the notion that arguments should generally be resolved regardless of who makes them; regardless of the race, sex, religion, etc, arguments stand on their own
- The Conversational Call of Privilege is a call for people to reexamine the positionality inherent in their position, with a hint that it may be self-serving and put an unfair burden on others
This weekend will largely be swallowed by Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism. Hoping I'll meet yet more members of the secular community here.
A bit of news that might be interesting, perhaps:( Collapse )
Finally, I offer a (perhaps strange) reconsideration on the topic of military chaplains. After some reflection on some of the arguments for and against them, I am no longer of the opinion that they should not exist. My reasoning is based on the enclosed nature of life in the military; like only a few other jobs, there are few opportunities to reliably leave an active post of duty, and given that, a failure to provide adequate opportunities for self-expression of one's philosophy (religious or not) is excessively damaging to the effective practice of freedom of conscience that exists in outside life. This is not precedent-setting for the kinds of leeway we must/should give in general society so much as a recognition that unusual allowances can be made to equalise with self-actualisation opportunities present in broader-society, and that these allowances might override a general strong commitment to secularism in some instances and to some degree. I don't have any specific ideas as to what the acceptable bounds are of the field this opens up, I just am willing to accept it as a field. We would probably provide the same thing to astronauts on a long-term manned space mission, for the same reasons.