No edit summary |
|||
| (44 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Imperial nudity is openly on display, in taverns women discuss the emperor |
+ | Imperial nudity is openly on display, in taverns women discuss the emperor discourteously. Less uncouth women snigger quietly behind their handkerchiefs. Many women compare imperial attractiveness with the manliness of their husbands and boyfriends. Indeed later we know those women will be cuddling their partners while making comments like, "You look better than the naked emperor, darling." |
| − | Then a courtier gets involved and refuses to admit anything is wrong. That |
+ | Then a courtier gets involved and refuses to admit anything is wrong. That is '''The Courtier's Reply''', a sequel to "The Emperor's New Clothes". <ref>'''The Courtier's Reply''' by [[PZ Myers]] imagines how the famous story, by Hans Christian Andersen could continue. A few people outside western countries may not know the story so for anyone who would like to read it or refresh their memory here are links. |
*[http://www.andersen.sdu.dk/vaerk/hersholt/TheEmperorsNewClothes_e.html The Emperor's New Clothes] English translation of Andersen's story |
*[http://www.andersen.sdu.dk/vaerk/hersholt/TheEmperorsNewClothes_e.html The Emperor's New Clothes] English translation of Andersen's story |
||
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPC8eGh5a8o DANNY KAYE - 'The Kings New Clothes'] This is a really funny song |
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPC8eGh5a8o DANNY KAYE - 'The Kings New Clothes'] This is a really funny song |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==The courtier== |
==The courtier== |
||
| + | {{Main}}[[The Courtier]] |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| + | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | #The courtier tells us impudent upstarts need to spend years studying the way Parisian fashion houses add that undefinable ''"je ne sais quois"'' <ref>[http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/je_ne_sais_quoi je ne sais quois];[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Je%20ne%20sais%20quoi je ne sais quois]</ref> that makes their designs so special and so European. Afterer that those impertinent characters should spend further years studying the well-defined way fashion companies in the United States add American know how that makes their designs so impeccably stylish. |
||
| + | |||
| − | ##''We puzzle over this since we can't see any evidence the emperor is wearing stylish clothes, rather we see no clothes at all. What are all those women staring at?'' |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | #The courtier continues that critics clearly haven't studied erudite comparisons between the costumes of European emperors and those worn by emperors in China, Japan and other nations. Further faultfinders are clearly ignorant about the history of imperial costumery and cannot can make informed comparisons between the clothing of the emperor and the costumery of emperors in Ancient Rome and Byzantium. Moreover brazen cynics cannot compare imperial clothing with that of Ancient Egyptian Pharaohs, Ancient Mesopotamian rulers, Latin American rulers before the European arrival etc. etc. etc. |
||
| − | ##''How in the name of the Most Holy [[IPU]] & [[FSM]] is all this relevant. Would women giggled at all those other emperors in elaborate costumes the way they giggle at our naked emperor?'' |
||
| − | #Unless all subjects connected with clothes and fashion are studied in detail nobody has the right to criticise the naked emperor. How can those extremely disrespectful ignoramuses imagine they know enough to tell whether the emperor is wearing tasteful, fashionable clothes or no clothes at all? It's clear critics don't know the first thing about clothing design or fashion! The list of what needs to be learnt can easily be extended without limit and it's all irrelevant. |
||
==Parallel== |
==Parallel== |
||
| − | There is a parallel with the way Christians too often avoid answering the arguments that [[Richard Dawkins]] and other [[new atheist]]s give and instead insist that [[atheist]]s haven't read enough [[Sophisticated theology]]. We note [[Muslim]]s also to it. <ref>[http://duplicitous46xyprimate.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/sophisticated-courtiers-reply.html Sophisticated Courtier's Reply]</ref> |
+ | There is a parallel with the way Christians too often avoid answering the arguments that [[Richard Dawkins]] and other [[new atheist]]s give and instead insist that [[atheist]]s haven't read enough [[Sophisticated theology]]. We note [[Islam|Muslim]]s also to it. <ref>[http://duplicitous46xyprimate.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/sophisticated-courtiers-reply.html Sophisticated Courtier's Reply]</ref> |
| − | Similarly some Christians try to argue, atheists shouldn't |
+ | Similarly some Christians try to argue, atheists shouldn't criticise [[Christianity]] without studying what [[w:c:pharyngula:Sophisticated theologians|Sophisticated theologians]] write in detail. Then if we read theology they still complain. We haven't read enough or we read the wrong stuff, or we haven't read it in the uncritical frame of mind Christians prefer. There's always a new criticism. |
| + | |||
| + | If they really had evidence for [[God]] they'd tell us where to find that evidence instead of complaining that we don't read enough irrelevant theology wouldn't they?. <ref>[http://realevang.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/defending-the-courtiers-at-intellectual-conservative/ Defending the Courtiers at Intellectual Conservative]</ref> |
||
==Religion is unsound== |
==Religion is unsound== |
||
| − | Those who support Christianity sometimes recognise there's no sound reason to believe in [[Jesus]] but would rather ordinary people don't find that out. After all teaching Christian humility is a good way to stop subordinates questioning when those in authority become corrupted by power. |
+ | Those who support Christianity sometimes recognise there's no sound reason to believe in [[Jesus]] but would rather ordinary people don't find that out. After all teaching [[Christian humility]] is a good way to stop subordinates questioning when those in authority become corrupted by power. |
| − | {{cquote|Personally, I suspect that perhaps the Emperor might not be fully clothed — how else to explain the apparent sloth of the staff at the palace laundry — but, well, everyone else does seem to go on about his clothes, and this Dawkins fellow is such a rude upstart who lacks the wit of my elegant circumlocutions, that, while unable to deal with the substance of his accusations, I should at least chide him for his very bad form.|||(Myers)}} |
+ | {{cquote|Personally, I suspect that perhaps the Emperor might not be fully clothed — how else to explain the apparent sloth of the staff at the palace laundry — but, well, everyone else does seem to go on about his clothes, and this Dawkins fellow is such a rude upstart who lacks the wit of my elegant circumlocutions, that, while unable to deal with the substance of his accusations, I should at least chide him for his very bad form.|||([[PZ Myers]])}} |
Christians and their supporters often see they can't answer arguments showing belief in God isn't reasonable. Then their next tactic can be to complain that attacking Christianity is somehow improper. Christians feel free to criticise atheism in impolite ways but ''we'' shouldn't exercise free speech. |
Christians and their supporters often see they can't answer arguments showing belief in God isn't reasonable. Then their next tactic can be to complain that attacking Christianity is somehow improper. Christians feel free to criticise atheism in impolite ways but ''we'' shouldn't exercise free speech. |
||
| + | The [[Religious Right]] and [[Christian Fundamentalism|Christian Fundamentalists]] generally [[Suffering religion causes|do a great deal of harm]], we think we should be able point out all the problems. |
||
| − | Well, if [[Liberal Christianity|moderate Christians]] could prevent the harm done by the [[Religious Right]] and [[Christian Fundamentalism|Christian Fundamentalists]] generally many of us certainly would attack Christianity less. |
||
| − | |||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
| − | <big> |
+ | <big><span style="color:darkred;">[[The Courtier's Reply]] ''When can one use The Courtier's Reply? Find that out and more.</span></big> |
==External links== |
==External links== |
||
| − | <big>"<span style="color:darkred;">[[w:c:pharyngula:The Courtier's Reply|Courtier's Reply]]" quotes Myers in full |
+ | <big>"<span style="color:darkred;">[[w:c:pharyngula:The Courtier's Reply|Courtier's Reply]]" from [[Pharyngula Wiki]] quotes Myers in full. It’s really funny and well worth reading. </span></big><ref>Incidentally Myers isn't the only atheist who compares religious faith to the naked emperor of Andersen. Galileo Unchained uses the same comparison, see |
[http://galileounchained.com/2011/10/08/faith-shows-the-emperor-has-no-clothes/ Faith Shows the Emperor has No Clothes]. </ref> |
[http://galileounchained.com/2011/10/08/faith-shows-the-emperor-has-no-clothes/ Faith Shows the Emperor has No Clothes]. </ref> |
||
| + | |||
| + | ===Videos=== |
||
| + | *[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcolo2uUSaM The Courtier's Reply by PZ Myers] Hillarious video illustrating The Courtier's Reply, strongly recommended |
||
==Footnotes== |
==Footnotes== |
||
| Line 44: | Line 46: | ||
*[http://preliatorcausa.blogspot.com/2011/05/pz-myers-defends-courtiers-reply.html PZ Myers defends the Courtier’s Reply] |
*[http://preliatorcausa.blogspot.com/2011/05/pz-myers-defends-courtiers-reply.html PZ Myers defends the Courtier’s Reply] |
||
[[Category:Logical fallacies]] |
[[Category:Logical fallacies]] |
||
| + | [[Category:Christianity]] |
||
| + | [[Category:Religion]] |
||
Latest revision as of 00:27, 31 March 2018
Imperial nudity is openly on display, in taverns women discuss the emperor discourteously. Less uncouth women snigger quietly behind their handkerchiefs. Many women compare imperial attractiveness with the manliness of their husbands and boyfriends. Indeed later we know those women will be cuddling their partners while making comments like, "You look better than the naked emperor, darling."
Then a courtier gets involved and refuses to admit anything is wrong. That is The Courtier's Reply, a sequel to "The Emperor's New Clothes". [1]
The courtier
See the main article on this topic:The Courtier
The courtier insists nobody should dare suggest his imperial majesty is undressed without first studying fashion design, tailoring and other similarly sophisticated subjects in detail.
How is fashion and tailoring relevant to recognising that the emperor is naked? The courtier doesn't get round to explaining all that.
Parallel
There is a parallel with the way Christians too often avoid answering the arguments that Richard Dawkins and other new atheists give and instead insist that atheists haven't read enough Sophisticated theology. We note Muslims also to it. [2] Similarly some Christians try to argue, atheists shouldn't criticise Christianity without studying what Sophisticated theologians write in detail. Then if we read theology they still complain. We haven't read enough or we read the wrong stuff, or we haven't read it in the uncritical frame of mind Christians prefer. There's always a new criticism.
If they really had evidence for God they'd tell us where to find that evidence instead of complaining that we don't read enough irrelevant theology wouldn't they?. [3]
Religion is unsound
Those who support Christianity sometimes recognise there's no sound reason to believe in Jesus but would rather ordinary people don't find that out. After all teaching Christian humility is a good way to stop subordinates questioning when those in authority become corrupted by power.
—(PZ Myers)
| “ | Personally, I suspect that perhaps the Emperor might not be fully clothed — how else to explain the apparent sloth of the staff at the palace laundry — but, well, everyone else does seem to go on about his clothes, and this Dawkins fellow is such a rude upstart who lacks the wit of my elegant circumlocutions, that, while unable to deal with the substance of his accusations, I should at least chide him for his very bad form. | ” |
Christians and their supporters often see they can't answer arguments showing belief in God isn't reasonable. Then their next tactic can be to complain that attacking Christianity is somehow improper. Christians feel free to criticise atheism in impolite ways but we shouldn't exercise free speech. The Religious Right and Christian Fundamentalists generally do a great deal of harm, we think we should be able point out all the problems.
See also
The Courtier's Reply When can one use The Courtier's Reply? Find that out and more.
External links
"Courtier's Reply" from Pharyngula Wiki quotes Myers in full. It’s really funny and well worth reading. [4]
Videos
- The Courtier's Reply by PZ Myers Hillarious video illustrating The Courtier's Reply, strongly recommended
Footnotes
- ↑ The Courtier's Reply by PZ Myers imagines how the famous story, by Hans Christian Andersen could continue. A few people outside western countries may not know the story so for anyone who would like to read it or refresh their memory here are links.
- The Emperor's New Clothes English translation of Andersen's story
- DANNY KAYE - 'The Kings New Clothes' This is a really funny song
- ↑ Sophisticated Courtier's Reply
- ↑ Defending the Courtiers at Intellectual Conservative
- ↑ Incidentally Myers isn't the only atheist who compares religious faith to the naked emperor of Andersen. Galileo Unchained uses the same comparison, see Faith Shows the Emperor has No Clothes.