What really gets me, though, are the self-righteous assholes. These are the people who think they have the Truth, or that their morality is the Morality, that their god is the God. What is funny but also infuriating is how often these people claim they aren't ideological dogmatists. They go through the motions and the courtesies, saying they're open for debate, re-evaluation of beliefs, or whatever - but they really aren't. Or, they paint the picture of them not necessarily having knowledge, but of belonging to the club that has this knowledge.
Yes, truly, when you have links on your page to a great big fancy list of logical fallacies (because that's how philosophical discussion works - nuh-uh that's a fallacy...got'eem!), then you must be part of the super-duper intelligent crowd. You must really know things, things "other people" don't!
This insincere ego-inflating behavior is irritating to me, if only because I know other people are going to fall for it (like I did when I was younger - the cringe, man, the cringe!). They're gonna see that because a website has a domain name of, say, "RationalWiki", and because it's neat and orderly and has a lot of super-duper articles about how to be rational, oftentimes with that charming, amusing mocking tone, then it must actually be a rational place where rational people talk about rational things! (I'm using RW as a random example only because it's a popular website that commonly displays this behavior - another perfect example is LessWrong, which is a misnomer since they get a lot of things wrong).
Okay kids, here's a quick lesson for y'all: don't trust anyone who explicitly calls themselves rational. Ditto for those who say they "care about the Truth" or "are open for clear discussion" - no shit, Sherlock, that's a given assumption when we discuss things like philosophy. You don't need to "assure me" that you are one of the few who actually care about "getting to the heart of things". Don't bullshit me. Stop lying and poisoning the well to protect yourself with a veil of self-righteousness.
Another piece of advice: don't take the word of people who confidently talk about things they aren't authorities of. For instance, when a pop-scientist with triumphist, phallic energy harks on and on about the imminent revolution of science that will answer ethical questions, disprove the existence of God, foreclose the humanities and/or finally lead us to a utopian society, maybe don't just take his (it's almost always a man, isn't it??) word for it. Trust me (actually, don't trust me - do your own goddamn research), this guy is probably a talking head with nothing but an ax to grind, an agenda to push. Just because he's a scientist doesn't mean he's qualified to talk about anything and everything.
Ooo, here's another juicy lesson: don't listen to someone who doesn't differentiate between right action and moral goodness. When an ideologue asserts, for example, that such-and-such action is morally forbidden, a transcendental Thou Shalt Not, and sees disagreement as evidence of moral corruption and nothing more, you know this person is full of shit. Doing the Right Thing™ is not at all equivalent to being a good person. A good person does what they think is right because they think it is the right thing to do, and because they desire to do the right thing. If you do the right thing for ulterior, selfish reasons, or because you begrudgingly acknowledge the obligation, you're not a good person. You're just a scumbag who managed to mimic the behavior of good people.
Blaming people for moral disobedience without giving them a fair chance at changing their behavior or even hearing what you have to say is some Grade A USDA-Certified Organic Bullshit. It's a common method of separating the me from the everyone else:
"I'm moral - it's everyone else who is bad, evil, wicked people!"
-some dumb keyboard crusader on the internet
There's hardly anything more satisfying than believing, or at least portraying, oneself as part of a minority that believe something most people take for granted is wrong, atrocious even (re: Nietzschean ressentiment). It's the pride of a person with little else to support their self-esteem. Granted, the minority might actually be right - I for one consider myself an antinatalist, and that's hardly a popular opinion, let alone an opinion that is even known to exist. But I don't go around acting like a fucking asshole to everyone who disagrees, even fellow antinatalists who have slightly different views on things. (I'm still a little touchy about a few "discussions" I had with some not-so-nice antinatalists 😒).
Maybe, just maybe, if you spend more time arguing and shouting and bullying and being a general reprobate, you might just want to re-evaluate your aspirations in life. Maybe you're doing more harm than good. (Or maybe you don't actually care about whatever it is you're arguing for, so long as it gives you something to do with your life and makes you feel important or something. Just from my half-assed estimate I'd say a majority of v/bloggers are this way). Do you honestly think this is how real, progressive discussion gets done - with yelling and swearing and general douchebaggery? And don't give me that bullshit "I have to take out the trash on the internet" righteous excuse, because no, you don't have to. You don't have to assume those who disagree with you are human waste, incapable of thinking or unworthy of basic respect. Get your head out of your ass and start acting like a mature human being.
One last piece of advice for the youngins: be skeptical of people who are overly-dependent on singular contemporary "authorities". Seriously, if I have to read one more dumb piece that worships public figures like Harris, Peterson, Chomsky or deGrasse Tyson I'm gonna blow a fucking gasket. Chomsky at least knows what he's talking about, but his acolytes are pathetic. Stop making him seem like the second-coming of Christ. The meaning behind contemporary is that which exists at the present - meaning, that it's at the very edge of time and hasn't been around long enough to accumulate criticism or acknowledgement. It's hilariously sad that people actually think someone like Jordan Peterson is some next-level philosopher that will go down in history as one of the greatest minds who ever lived. Wait ten years. I bet you he'll be forgotten, or remembered only by some stupid controversy that got him kicked out of public opinion.
But most importantly:
Thanks to the internet, we now have even more effective means of spreading bullshit. Cheers everyone, even the haters. Stop taking yourself so seriously, think for yourself and don't be a dick to those who are just trying to get by.