Another Pattern Observed, Indeed: Anti Intellectual Censorship At Vox Popoli
Posted in Blogosphere on | 5 minutes | 22 Comments →
This post is a request for Vox Day (or anybody) to explain how one can reliably discern the condition of another Christian’s heart. I can’t, and when I asked Vox how he can, Spacebunny returned to her customary pattern of deleting my comments for no good reason. Here’s the story: Vox wrote a post titled Another Pattern Observed in which he not-so-temperately attacked Christian leader John Piper as “an intemperate attacker of other Christian leaders,” accusing Piper of an “insincere apology” over his use of the phrase “kicks some ass” at a particular evangelical convention. I and other commenters felt Vox may have been too quick to grab the tar and feathers, so I asked Vox how he could possibly know that Piper’s apology was insincere. I mean I get that he’s a “superintelligence” and all, but can Vox Day really know the condition of Piper’s heart?
Vox quoted the following snippet of Piper’s statement,
I am sitting here trying to figure out why I say things like that every now and then. I think it is a mixture of (sinful) audience titillation and (holy) scorn against my own flesh and against the devil, along with the desire to make the battle with Satan and my flesh feel gutsy and real and not middle-class pious. (John Piper)
…and then responded,
Yes, that’s probably it. You’re just too damn holy for your own good. Perhaps, I suggest merely as a possibility, he behaves thusly because he is not Elect, but rather a vessel ordained for destruction.
I don’t know about you, but Vox’s response just gave me a “yuck” feeling. First off, who cares? Are they running out of stuff to write about over there? And second, as I asked, how can Vox reliably discern the condition of another man’s heart, from two paragraphs on the internet at that? Who is Vox to judge? It seemed to me that Vox might be filtering Piper’s words through his own distrust, e.g. hearing something that might not be there. There’s a reason the Bible cautions our use of judgment. Vox and I had a two-comment progression (which Spacebunny deleted), after which I left the following comments to Jamsco and Vox, which Spacebunny also promptly deleted):
Jamsco,
It sure looks to me like you are judging a man’s heart here, Vox.
It sure does, and it’s sure funny to watch Vox wriggle and squirm trying to deny the undeniable. I agree: it seems to me that Vox is judging another Christian’s heart here.
Vox,
Yes, it was insincere.
Oh please. Who made you God? You don’t know that. None of us do. Look, I see your point about “frustrated actors and musicians” in the church and whatnot, but that doesn’t give you the right to go around accusing other Christians of insincerity when you can’t possibly know whether Piper was sincere or not. Since I suspect you’ll fail to appreciate the irony of denouncing Piper as an “intemperate attacker of other Christian leaders” while you not-so-temperately attack Piper, a Christian leader, I guess this is where it ends—unless of course you can give us something besides “because Vox Day the superintelligence and award winning meanie says so” to justify your accusation of insincerity.
As for your own damage control attempts,
We’re all tempted. We all fail. We all sin. We all say things we later regret saying. But only an ass would ever think to declare that he does so because he’s too damn holy! I find it astonishing that you, or anyone else, for that matter, would fall for that.
So true, but, hearing what you want to hear at all, Vox? He didn’t say “I’m too damn holy,” he said he’s too full of holy scorn, and unless you’re already committed to the conclusion that Piper is insincere, why can’t those words be interpreted as tacit concession of a failure to check one’s religiosity?
Seriously. You don’t know whether Piper was sincere or not, and you should just admit it instead of rushing to the shelf to grab your tar and feathers.
As you might imagine, that comment prompted some irrelevant remarks from Spacebunny, which I addressed before bowing off the thread:
Spacebunny,
Yes, 5-year-olds are often able to detect sincerity and/or the lack thereof. Of course, that’s irrelevant unless you can show me a 5-year-old that can detect sincerity and/or the lack thereof from a mere two paragraphs on the internet.
As for your other question, I treat statements from politicians the same as any other: begin in the null position (unless there’s reason not to) and don’t deviate to belief or skepticism without good reason.
MarkkuKoponen,
Haha, cl is back, and right where he left off. I don’t expect this state of affairs to last long, though.
Of course it won’t. That’s what anti-intellectualism is all about: censoring reasonable dissent for no good reason. I mean, c’mon: I left three comments calling into question Vox’s rush to condemn Piper as insincere. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending Piper, I’m questioning Vox. And I’m not the only one. Oh, and by the way, I’ve been “back” for quite some time. I left about a comment a month, always supportive, and they were never deleted. Of course now that I’ve challenged Vox again, the pattern repeats: Spacebunny comes to his rescue.
Go ahead and delete this Spacebunny, It’s my last comment on this thread. If anybody wants my opinion they can come find me.
Vox,
I’ve openly challenged you to make your case at my blog, where speech is truly free.
Why does Spacebunny need to come to Vox’s rescue like this? Why can’t she just let us talk out our differences in a productive manner?
Crude
says...Yeah, on your reading, ‘too full of holy scorn’ does sound like it can be read as ‘acting too self-righteous’ rather than ‘my scorn is just so holy and I’m full of it’.
cl
says...Crude! Long time no read. I’ve been lurking at your blog. Commenting is problematic so I don’t.
Glad you’re back.
Crude
says...Yeah, I vet everything to keep the place from becoming an annoying craphole. It’s not everyone’s thing.
Been checking out your site, you were just plain gone for a while (‘Back up soon’? I think not!) Glad to see you’ve got it going again.
cl
says...Yeah, I know… I honestly only meant to be down like 3-4 weeks as opposed to 3-4 months. I wrote a few scant posts between, but I didn’t post any of them until I put this blog up. I’m motivated again though, and that’s key. I hope some of these atheists take up the debate challenge.
Mr. Nightstick
says...Vox is an interesting character and it’s clear that he is playing one via his site. He engages in frame control and once you see that it’s hard to take him totally seriously. Given his intelligence he should be far more accomplished than he actually is. I think his problem is that he lacks the ability to overcome boredom. He is the king of going halfway and that is why true greatness eludes him plus he seems oblivious to his own short comings in a way that prevents him from self improvement.
But criticisms aside, I feel that he has been a huge blessing to me and I try to look past his shortcomings and for the most part, he does excellent work.
Mr. Nightstick
says...Btw, I am so glad you are back. I was worried that you had gotten too discouraged by the riff raff and burnt out.
Kwon Mega
says...The implications are sad.
cl
says...Mr. Nightstick,
Thanks for introducing me to that term, frame control. I don’t think there’s anything “wrong” or negative about it, per se. In fact the first thing that came to mind was the many brilliant ways in which Jesus controlled the Pharisees’ frames (cf. “whose picture is on the coin?”).
Truth be told, I did get discouraged and burnt out on the Vox’s, Taylor’s and Spacebunny’s. I’m a writer, not an apologist, and constant writing about (a)theism gets old. I mean, after you’ve been banned from all the major atheist blogs and then the “Christian” blogs don’t treat you much better, what’s left? Why, real life, of course.
But, now I’m back, and I’m just as glad. That whole “season for everything” bit.
Kwon Mega,
Yeah, I saw that, too. At least PZ presumably deletes his own comments instead of having his wife do the dirty work! In all seriousness, though, I wonder how Vox justifies scolding PZ for refusing to engage on the one hand, then authorizing the deletion of engaging comments on the other? I bet it doesn’t even occur to him. I wonder if PZ considers Vox an “anklebiter?”
It doesn’t make sense, unless of course one drops the assumption that Vox, Taylor, Spacebunny et al. are well-meaning Christians trying their best to emulate Jesus.
Markku Koponen
says...No, because I, for one, was another one. Arguably the most vocal one too. Yet under no point was I under a threat of getting banned. Strange, that.
You don’t get driven away because you aren’t adequately supportive, but because you don’t know how to behave in an Italian barbershop. And Vox Popoli is an Italian barbershop on steroids.
Perhaps you just have never been friends with that type of men. Perhaps it even explains how you get yourself banned from pretty much everywhere.
Dominic Saltarelli
says...Italian barbershop. Love it.
cl
says...I get myself banned from atheist blogs because I ask them to actually make their claims and 99.99999% of the time they can’t, so instead of actually admit that atheism doesn’t hold water under serious scrutiny, they ban me. That’s easy to understand, cut-and-dry, and by no means an isolated phenomenon.
Ah, yes… I KNEW it! All I have to do is go back over there, assent to foul, bigoted speech, and ask for a haircut! Damn, Markku, why didn’t you tell me that months ago?
Unfortunately, I couldn’t find an appropriate racial slur for you in the racial slur database, so I’m definitely not fit to get my hair cut yet.
cl
says...Hey Dominic, just out of curiosity… did you receive an email from me yesterday, about the debate? I’ve never actually sent a group email from TWIM, and I’m getting the feeling it didn’t work.
Can you confirm? It’d be the same email address I used last time.
Crude
says...Man, in Vox’s favor, he’s an ass – but he at his worst is still a cut above most atheist blogs around. He’s even more respectful. (I wonder if Coyne still throws a Jebus into every. Single. Post.)
I find it hard to believe the Christian blogs really come down hard on you. Where else did you get the boot? Because frankly I’m an ***hole, and I rarely get kicked off. Did stay away from Triablogue for a while, since they hate Catholics there in a crazy-ass way.
Markku Koponen
says...Nope, that’s what the kid figured too, and that’s precisely why there was comedy value in his cluelessness. The unwritten rules of social interactions are absorbed from the environment. If you don’t learn them, or if the environment is lacking, you end up pissing everyone off and not understanding why.
Such a thing can happen because of Asperger’s syndrome, but it can also happen by only knowing a certain type of people.
Pay attention to how Dominic reacted to the video. He knows how the dance goes, as we can also tell from his behavior over there.
cl
says...Markku,
Apparently you missed the sarcasm, and that’s precisely why I find comedy value in your cluelessness!
Wow, really? That’s some arcane knowledge there, Markku. Did you channel that from Calvin? I never even thought about that one!
Hmmm…. I’ll give this one a “serious” response. I followed “the rules” to a tee over there. And don’t be sloppy: I didn’t piss “everyone” off, I pissed a subset off, and that’s the way it’s been at every single blog I’ve ever participated on: there are lovers, and there are haters. That’s just life.
Spacebunny ONLY deletes my posts whenever I criticize Vox. If I simply show up under the radar and support Vox or challenge an atheist that needs to get spanked–as I did about once a month since the PZ debate–nobody says a word. Strange, that? I mean, correlation isn’t causation, but I need an explanation. You heard the woman: she only deletes comments with Vox’s “express permission.” Well, do the math: Vox apparently approves of my supporting comments, else we have to explain his incredibly lucky streak of missing them only. The point is, those comments persist.
Well, I don’t have Asperger’s syndrome, and I kick it with all sorts of people, so I think we can rule those out and search for a simpler explanation. What could possibly explain the selective censorship? Is Vox scared? Do I threaten his surly manhood or something? I wouldn’t want him to threaten to beat me up, or hit me with that sword. Oh no’s!
Please, I’m pretty sure I was dancing with Dominic long before you were a twinkle in his eye. BTW, we (as in you and I) are dancing right now, in my ballroom, and you apparently don’t even know it.
Matt DeStefano
says...This is the funniest thing on the internet I’ve read all day. I can’t believe anyone, let alone someone who professes to follow Jesus Christ, would ever consider this misogynistic, xenophobic, megalomaniac as even remotely respectful.
cl
says...Matt,
Hehehehe… I was wondering when you were going to jump on this thread.
Part of me feels like I need to take a vocal stance against certain behavior at Vox Popoli. After all, onlookers need to know that not all Christians endorse Vox’s opinions and/or the hateful speech / anti-intellectualism that typically ensues from a select few over there.
OTOH, the other part of me feels like mere mention of Vox Popoli simply shines more light where less might be better.
I’m torn. I need advise!
We each have unique experiences and hardly anybody is “all X” or “all Y” if you know what I mean. I’ve seen Vox act respectfully at times, not so much at others. So it is with myself, and I imagine that holds for any human being. We have ups and downs. That’s just how it is.
crude,
Though I’ve seen him act respectfully, it’s hard for me to view Vox as respectful (on the average). The guy slandered me as “a dishonest little prick” for no other reason than that I disagreed with him on something so stupid I can’t even remember what it was now. Sure, Peter and Paul disagreed, but Vox took it to a whole ‘nother level. Where in Scripture can one find support for that move? It’s not like I’m out here preaching some other form of salvation.
I’ve been “banned” from 2 Christian blogs (I use scare quotes because the ban at Vox Popoli isn’t “official” or whatever). I can’t remember the name of the other one, but I will post it if I do. To contrast, I’ve been banned from at least 6 or 7 atheist blogs, including Daylight Atheism, Evangelical Realism, Debunking Christianity, Spanish Inquisitor, Lady Atheist, Greta Christina, and I think a few others I missing at the moment.
I expect that from atheists. After all, most people don’t like a strong challenge, especially about things near and dear to their heart. People can either handle intensity or they can’t.
Markku Koponen
says...I don’t think I’ve seen as universal dislike over there as you are having except in perhaps one or two cases before.
I remember seeing a “CL” in capital letters a few times, and remember wondering if it was you. I thought probably not, since you wrote your name in lowercase back then. But it wasn’t important, even if I had banning privileges. However, in that thread, it was obvious that it was you. And normally it’s once banned, always banned.
Matt DeStefano
says...cl,
Of course those labels aren’t meant to serve as absolutes, but it’s not exactly a far cry from the vast majority of posts I’ve seen come from Vox’s house.
You’ve got more patience than I, cl, so it’s really up to you to pick which battles you want to engage in. If Vox is going to censor all nay-sayers, I would imagine it’s not the hill you want to die on. Despite many frothing-at-the-mouth atheists and theists, I think the majority just want to have a rational discussion. Perhaps some are too far gone.
Markku Koponen
says...By the way, when you put my (real) name on the front door of your ballroom, of course I’m going to show up. But don’t you worry, I’ll leave you to prance about in it soon enough.
Markku Koponen
says...But sure, your trash talk there is somewhat entertaining. I’ve seen more inept stuff out there. However, the main reason for what happened back then was that you came across as whiny.
Crude
says...This is the funniest thing on the internet I’ve read all day. I can’t believe anyone, let alone someone who professes to follow Jesus Christ, would ever consider this misogynistic, xenophobic, megalomaniac as even remotely respectful.
I didn’t say Vox was respectful, full stop. I said he was more respectful than a certain class of blog runner, and gave an example. I stand by that. Admittedly, that’s a pretty low (but common) bar to jump.
Despite many frothing-at-the-mouth atheists and theists, I think the majority just want to have a rational discussion.
Oh, and you suggested I’m the one not being realistic? ;)
Let’s put aside that the ‘majority’ is the lowest common denominator, and the LCD is rarely interested in rational anything. Hell, most intellectuals nowadays are only interested in rational discussion as a way to advance their aims and win more people to their cause, not because discussion and debate are just s’darn swell.
The entire Cult of Gnu is founded upon (among other things) the claim that ‘rational discussion’ with theists is not possible, because theists and theism are not rational, period. If the theist happens to be an extremely accomplished scientist, they chalk this up to ‘compartmentalization’. Hence you have Dawkins talking about destroying Christianity and mentioning how the goal is to ostracize and generally shame theists, right down to the ‘barely an internet pissant’ level of Loftus who flat out says his goal is conversion, and if a non-rational method gets the results he wants, so be it.
Not all atheists are like this. But to view theism as a rational position, or as a position deserving of rational investigation and consideration, is to cease to be a gnu on the spot. Welcome to ‘accommodationist’-land, or similar (Atheism 2.0?).