I was a little late to the party vis-à-vis the "Tim Minchin is absofuckinglutely brilliant" bandwagon, but better late than never, as the cliché goes, and even though I hate clichés almost as much as run-on sentences, here I find myself using both in an attempt to bend my personal OCD-ish rules for the purpose of expressing emotively as well as rationally that if you haven't familiarized yourself with Tim's work, then you're really missing out. [1]
A little over a week ago I posted a link on my Twitter profile to a Q&A with Tim Minchin (which I found on The A-Unicornist's Facebook page - thanks Mike!). I want to share a portion of Tim's comments that resonate with me. I hope you find this as enlightening as I do:
I don’t particularly like being described as a sceptic or a skeptic (sic). Even though I admit that by definition I am one. I don’t know why I don’t like it. I don’t like being called a musical comedian either, so it’s more an aversion to pigeons and their holes. If I have a specific issue with skepticism (sic) as a “movement”, perhaps it is its tendency to shy away from religion. I find it intellectually absurd to claim to be a sceptic and to turn a blind eye to the area of irrationality which is most widespread and has arguably the greatest ramifications. Scepticism’s remit should be, in my opinion, to fight against magical thinking where such thinking causes harm. To me it is morally wrong to challenge the beliefs of others when there is no moral issue with their belief; irrationality should only be challenged to a degree equivalent to its potential to do damage. And surely religion’s potential to cause damage is high. (Even though I think the majority of religious belief, although incorrect, is benign and even perhaps positive ... the problem being the minority nevertheless represents a fuck-load of bad.) [2]
Maybe this is why I get along better with Wiccans than Christians (in general, of course. A few of my closest friends are Christians.): Wiccans do their own thing and are pretty tolerant of everyone. The Wiccan Rede in its shortened version says, "An Ye Harm None, Do What Ye Will," which is really just another way of stating the Golden Rule (which many Christians take as neither golden nor much of a rule), which is really another way of stating the basic moral axiom of many who refer to themselves as either atheist or agnostic: "Don't be an asshole."
We who value logic and reason, who understand the importance of basing one's beliefs on evidence and objective investigation, often feel tempted to challenge beliefs for the sake of challenging beliefs. I'm all for promoting critical thinking, but I'm also a fan of choosing one's battles wisely. Traditionally, the witches get burned at the stake by the Christians, not the other way around. I'd much rather challenge the ideology of the folks with the torches - i.e., I'd rather "fight against magical thinking where such thinking causes harm" - than that of peaceful folks who would prefer to just be left alone and, well, not burned.
I will tell anyone, regardless of that person's particular religious predilections, that if she wants to convince me that her beliefs are correct, she had better provide good (logical and evidence-based) reasons to believe. I will tell her this with respect, and hopefully our conversation will end peacefully. I don't care what this person believes. I promote critical thinking, but I'm not an evangelist. I'm not trying to convert anyone. Live in peace and don't be a roadblock to progress, and I have no problem with you. Religion per se isn't my enemy; dangerous irrationality is. (Focus on the Family, I'm looking at you. Just sayin).
Dead-Logic.com
NOTES:
1. Is this actually a run-on sentence? It's late and I'm taking pain meds, so I can't quite tell for sure.
2. Q&A: Tim Minchin (New Humanist.org.uk)
