Social Justice & its warriors.

Social justice, broadly speaking is the idea that a group of people (society itself) can & will be the judge of any given event.

The SJW, social justice warrior is the one who engages in this sort of activity, promotes it, or thinks that it is a good idea.

On twitter, youtube, facebook this sort of thing can be seen. Groups of people will rally around someone who has been declared the "victim" &, anyone who denies that they are a victim, is automatically the enemy & a proper target of the mob. The mob mentality here is clear, the in group is protected at all costs, conform or die.

You might have read or heard about "virtue signaling" this is when someone says they support a "marginalized group" to display there "virtue", its unclear if this is a tip off if that person is a SJW type or not in my view, but certainty its not a good sign, do we really have to go out of our way to say we support any given group? Also, are not most of these groups well supported by now? Just how long is a group "marginalized" typically this is said to be LGBT(+) but, is that group REALLY oppressed? Sometimes its "colored" people that are marginalized, sometimes its women. Its never men, never white people, never its heterosexuals.

So you are either in the protected group, or you are not, if you are not - then you are a target of the sjw type, and even if you are part of the protected group, you still might be a target should you say something "out of line". Casting doubt on someone claiming abuse, rape, discrimination are all sins that the sjw's will get you for.

You are simply not allowed to say things that might offend people. What might that be? Anything of course. "Hate speech" is a commonly dropped idea - that simply doesn't exist as any sort of coherent speech, hate speech is simply speech that people dislike. Saying anything racist, anti-LGBT, anti (X) whatever (X) might be if (X) is a "marginalized" group - is a sin & is punishable by the mob.

People who are offended by anything will tweet out that they have been emotionally traumatized by the words, and the group of sjw types will then attack that person that did this. With, or without any evidence. Saying sorry is only proof you are guilty, so never, EVER apologize.

Its very much cult or religious in nature, this ideology - its focused on protection of feelings, it props up the "week" as it tries to smash down the "strong" - who is the strong? Whoever is not one of the protected groups of course.

Is it a bad thing? Is it harmful? Oh yes, people have lost there jobs over people complaining online. What madness. Speech online is hampered by the busy-bodies who feel that they must and should report all the "bad speech" to everyone. That others must join in to stamp out this horrible thing that someone said on facebook.

Sadly - companies are spineless and are not standing up for there workers as they should be. Saying that no, we will not fire (X) person as they did not say (Z) during company time. But so afraid of a bad image. Frankly, I'd see any company standing up for its employees as noble.

SJW's also think they are RIGHT and feel justified about doing these things. They are self-righteous people. They think they have a better ethical & moral code then you do.

You might have heard that people get "red pilled" - this happens when they are attacked by the mob, only then do they see, that this idea is a bad one. They must be eaten by the intolerant mob to see just how evil the ideology is.

What can one do? I said before to simply not play the SJW game, but also, be better then them, do not use those hate tactics, do not moral police people. You be a good person. Love, not hate will win out in the end, it has in the past.

Will they eat each other? One can hope. Until then, the war marches on, but only if we let it. Only if we do not stand tall, and be better then they.

Atheism: still not a world view.

What the bleep is a worldview anyway?

Well I guess the net will have to answer that:

Wiki:
A world view or worldview is the fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society encompassing the whole of the individual's or society's knowledge and point of view. A world view can include natural philosophy; fundamental, existential, and normative postulates; or themes, values, emotions, and ethics.

Google:
A particular philosophy of life or conception of the world.

Merriam Webster:
A comprehensive conception or apprehension of the world especially from a specific standpoint.

That should cover it, I suspect some will reject those in favor of there own idea of what a worldview is, as they might have a worldview about the word worldview...

What about the word Atheist?

Wiki:
Atheism is, in the broadest sense, an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. 

Google:
A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

Merriam Webster:
A person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates atheism.

Again, that should do it, but again people can make there own choice about what they think the word should mean or does. These are the most common uses of these words. So, lets just go with them shall we?

Alright so the question that got me to do this is from a twitter question directed at me by my esteemed associate John Buck:

(Tweet)

Plenty of apologists have said that atheism is a world view, and others have said its not. In fact, many apologists complain that atheism does not tell you how to live, what to do, feel, believe, has no ritual, no tradition & so on, well, of course it doesn't. That isn't what it is.

Atheism is, as descriptive word, not a prescriptive word. To some extent so is theist.

Theism also is not a world view. That word only tells us that someone believes in a god. 

Not what god is, how god is, where it is or anything else. Just they think there is at least one, the word theist is a bit more descriptive then atheist, as theist imply an agent-god whereas deist implies only a god that wound up the universe so to speak, and let it roll without further messing about, or a god that made us, but did so without any agency per-say.

Of course for what a deist thinks or for that matter what a theist thinks - you must ask that person. We can not know, nor should we assume that the label that they are using is being used in the common way described by dictionaries. My outline itself might very well be rejected by some theists or deists.

Simply put, nether theist, deist, agnostic, or atheist tells you what they believe in full, only one bit about there belief. What about the word "Christian" or "Muslim" well - that tells us more, and those are world views, at least, if we are using the common understanding of the words being used. We assume we are, and that is of course, that pesky natural language issue popping up: we assume other people are using words the way we understand them... and they might not be! Still, for the sake of this entry, we are assuming common use, so yes, "Christian" is a worldview, but "theist" is not.

But... why not? Isn't "GOD" a big deal? Isn't believing it world-changing? Isn't it so massive that there will be a vast gulf between the theist & atheist?

Maybe.

Yet its still not a worldview. Nether of them are. They can not inform us of the way (X) person see's the world, its simply not up to the task of doing so. 

There are people that think there are faeries (fay folk) - not many of them granted, but a few. Is belief in faeries a world view? No. Its part of one, perhaps, the best I can find on anything that is close to a religion would be "fairy belief" outlined here. In and of itself, "Fairy-believer" (faeist?) is not enough to say much about that person's way of viewing the world.

So no, atheism is not a worldview, but might be part of one, so as well is theisem - its not itself a worldview, but a part of one. 

What about the word skeptic? Is that a world view?

Hum.... it might be!

....but I'm skeptical that it is. ;)