Modern Trends: The Truth is in the Comments

February 11th, 2009 in Web Design Worldview

by: Matthew Griffin

The recent explosion of social features on the internet has given us access to a representative slice of culture we've never been able to see before. I've seen this most intimately in the form of blog comments on Mirificam Press, and I think I've come to understand the state of Christian designers better through these interactions. Recently, I stumbled upon a Solon blog called World O' Crap that reminded me of all the comment adventures I've had in the past year or so. The blog post was about an organization called the Nehemiah Institute. And, being a solon blog, World O' Crap was ruthlessly critical of the organization and its Christian worldview test. The article was poorly written and littered with typos but it at least stopped short of calling for the systematic extermination of all Christians (how tolerant). The commenters were not so tolerant. Here's what one of the authors of Blondsense had to say in the comment section (Be advised: I left profanity and hateful speech uncensored in the following examples):

I'm over trying to understand these monobrowed, mouth-breathing, cousin-fucking neanderthals.
Kill 'em all, let the bottomless black void of nothingness sort them out.

I laughed for a second at the complete absurdity of this comment—it's completely over the top. And then I started thinking back on some of the comments I've received here at Mirificam Press. I've always been careful to allow the expression of dissenting views in the comments (some might say to a fault). I think it's important for everyone to see the thinking that goes in to different perspectives. I even allow violent and threatening comments to remain (as does World O' Crap apparently). I think to remove these comments would be to present an altered picture of reality. But most of the really nasty comments I've received have been from anonymous visitors. This wasn't the case with the Blondsense comment. Since Blondsense has several contributors, I'm not sure which one actually posted the comment, but the fact remains that the commenter was proud enough to link back to the blog. And, no, I'm not comforted by the fact that this comment is a historical allusion. It seems that we are entering a time when open hatred and violent speech toward Christians is tolerated by western culture at large. And it may be at least partially our fault.

Some of the greats from Mirificam Press

Posted on: Show and Tell: A Web Designer's Guide to Faith in the Workplace

I'm a former christian who finally saw the light of truth, though not the one you all think. I finally saw through the sham that is derives from religious memes. Please keep your faith to yourself. It is more than annoying to others -- it is insulting. Most evangelic christians don't seem to realize (or don't care) how completely hateful their attitude toward the "unsaved" becomes as they work toward more pious proselytizing activity. Save your "belief talk" for your private life. One day all religious belief will be classified as a mental illness. That will be a great day indeed.

~ posted by: bc on 9/3/08
I think religion in the workplace is terrible. It's bad enough it has polluted our national politics, but to poison our offices with mindless superstition is pure insanity. Keep it in your homes or churches. Not everyone appreciates your stupid mind-washing. We are at work to do a job. Leave the preaching to the corrupt pastors living high on the tithes. PS. The earth is round, creationism is a delusion of the insane, and christ never existed.

~ posted by: rico on 9/7/08

Posted on: Function Vs. Form: Rescuing Design from Insanity

I'm so sorry, I couldn't keep reading after the first paragraph. "...I'll present the Christian worldview of design and briefly map out a practical Christian approach to design."

~ posted by: Cara Pinle on 3/4/08

Of course there are many more that are just inflammatory name-calling. But these in particular show either a violent opposition toward or pre-assumed rejection of anything labeled "Christian". The most telling comments, though, haven't come from the dissenters; they've come from the Christian designers.

Christian Designers Comment Back

The first comment in the list above by the mysterious "bc" is nothing less than a call to round up people of all religions and place them in mental institutions. In any other context we would be outraged. What's suggested is that a horrible injustice be perpetrated on us and our families. What is our response? Well, we apologize of course. The immediate response from a Christian in the comments (other than myself) was to apologize to bc. After all, his attitude of hatred must be the result of some hypocritical Christian who did him wrong, right? The rest of the commenters just ignored him (A legitimate response to some degree). Understand, I'm not bringing this up to bash Christian designers. Rather, I want to encourage fellow Christian designers to see these things for what they are. If we let these kinds of hate mongers bulldoze us, we may wake up one day to reality as the writers of Blondsense have imagined it. And that will be a horrible day indeed.

  • 15 Comments
  • 3657 Views

Comments

Posted By: Jason Cochran on 02/11/09

Another great post, as usual. :) All I can say is that everyone is wrong and nobody is right. Creationists and Darwinians can both learn something from each other. What would this world be without God? What would this world be without the scientist? Look at this blog, for example. It would not exist without both world views. God + Internet = "Mirificam Press". You can't have a back without a front; white without black; light without dark. You wouldn't know yourself as a Christian if there weren't any non-Christians. You actually owe part of your success to those that hate you. A thing is defined by its opposite. That aside, it bores me to tears to read comments from ignore-ant people. They choose to hide behind their simplified internet usernames. If they truly wanted to prove a point, they could also leave their full mailing address and home or mobile phone number. That way the conversation is not so one-sided. Instead of: "Christianity sucks! Fuck all the Jews! God never existed! Christ was a momma's boy!" Should be: "While I don't recognize your god or religion, I do believe that...., but I do appreciate your opinion. Philosophy does belong in every aspect of ones life." Those that hate others truly only hate themselves. Blogs, and other mediums, are just an outlet for their daddys not paying them enough attention as a child. Besides, words themselves are only abstract thoughts. Like the mind, thoughts/words don't "exist" in any tangible form. "Sticks and stones..." Keep up the great work Matt! Keep it real! Fuck the haters! :)

Posted By: Edgar on 02/11/09

Hi Matt, Sorry to read that. We've have gotten a couple of "go to hell" requests. You're right that we need to start speaking up, and debating the atheists more. a lot of us are shielded from their attacks by the way we live our lives. We need to break out of our bubble and go out there. Our churches also need to stop their entertainment based approach and put some apologetics back in the curriculum. Not to replace the "mass" or service, but in addition. We should spend at least 3 hours at church. The service, and a couple of hours of apologetics and community.

Posted By: Matthew Grffin on 02/11/09

Thanks for the comment, Jason (profane as it may be). I appreciate your support but I also have to stand in opposition to you dualistic view of existence. While it's true that antithesis is a big part of how we understand things, it's not necessary for the existence of a thing. This goes back to the questions Plato and Aristotle wrestled with regarding negative theology: the practice of defining things by what they are not. They came to the conclusion that things have an essence in and of themselves--that a thing can be a thing without its antithesis. This view is similar to that of Christianity and gives us hope that evil will one day be extinct. Dualism allows for no such hope.

Posted By: Matthew Grffin on 02/11/09

Thanks, Edgar. I couldn't agree more.

Posted By: Jason Cochran on 02/11/09

Non-Dualistic actually. Backs and Fronts are one in the same yet different. In the same way that you are a distinct being, but you can't be separated from your environment. Our minds like to box everything into this box or that box; even though in reality all things are one. Our minds create the duality. My philosophy is very Non-Dualistic. Gee, who thought disagreements could be so much fun! :)

Posted By: Matthew Grffin on 02/11/09

@ Jason - I think the main problem I see with your view is how it handles evil. If good is the front and evil is the back (yin yang), then good requires evil for its existence. This is truly a hopeless state for anyone attempting to battle evil, since as we battle evil we are actually battling good as well.

Posted By: Jason Cochran on 02/13/09

"Battling Evil", or any ideological battle for that matter, is a fundamental flaw of the ego. This is like saying "We are going to CONQUER Space."; the WAR on Drugs/Poverty/Ignorance/etc. Space cannot be "conquered." The same for "evil." The real battle should be for NOT putting labels on things or concepts that cannot be put into a box or cannot be dissected cleanly by the mind. "Evil" is a concept. "Evil" (and "Good" for that matter) doesn't exist outside the human mind. I know that as a Christian, you might have a hard time swallowing that since you have been given the Divine Law by God which gives your Moral license (that wasn't meant as a put-down). If you took a poll asking "What is Evil?" and everyone on this planet responded you wouldn't get the same answer twice. You might get similar answers, but since "Evil" is a concept the mind is free to do what it wants with it. I prefer to use the terms Skillful/Unskillful instead of Good/Evil. This is why all of the great teachers, including Jesus, taught in the negative tense. They taught "DON'T do this, etc. etc." That way the mind has less freedom to create concepts. Anyways, back to the good/evil (yin/yang) idea. In concept, Good requires Evil and Evil requires Good. Yes, that is correct. For instance, you wouldn't know that you have a good career now if you hadn't been working for Panacore way back when. A thing or concept MUST ALWAYS be compared to its opposite for there to be any knowing gained by the mind of what it is. Let's say that you have a magnetic rod with negative and positive poles at their respective ends. Now suppose you wanted to get rid of one of the poles and so you cut it in half. What do you have? Another magnet with positive and negative poles. You can't have one pole without the other. They are connected no matter how far down you try to slice the magnet; you will never ever be able to slice off one pole from the other. =====================================How long has the good/evil "battle" been going on exactly? Eternity? Hopeless indeed. So what would the point be in fighting it? Just to prove to God that you are worth his love? Why would you need to prove anything to an all-knowing God? Wouldn't he/she/it already know what you contained in your soul? I think another fundamental flaw is that God has been personified to have human characteristics. Anger, guilt, love, compassion, greed.... what would a God need with such worthless emotions? Thanks again for the conversation Matt.

Posted By: isral on 02/13/09

Our job is not to prevent those who disagree with us from voicing their opinions. our job is to answer kindly, to answer why we believe the way we do in a calm, civil manner. turning the other cheek means not responding to an offense, but, rather, responding civily to any who may uncivil.

Posted By: Matthew Grffin on 02/13/09

@Jason -- It would take me way too long to dissect everything in your comment so I'll just make a couple of points. I think the question you have to ask about your worldview (also the title of Francis Schaeffer's famous book) is how should we then live? Can you actually live out your worldview? What does your view mean for how we should actually react to these "arbitrary categories" of good and evil.(hypothetically) When you get caught sleeping around on your wife, try this line on her from your above comment: "'Evil' (and 'Good' for that matter) doesn't exist outside the human mind." I don't think she'll buy it. I don't think she'll find any comfort in it whatsoever. And I would argue that a world where it would bring her comfort would be hell. It's a good thing that she can confidently call your actions "evil". Lastly, I'd just like to dispel the myth that Jesus ever taught like the dualistic teachers of the east--using only negative commands. I thought about putting some quotes from Christ here but decided it's not even worth the time. Even a cursory reading of the gospels reveals that Christ uses both positive and negative commands and that he takes a stong position on the existence of evil and good.

Posted By: Jason Cochran on 02/13/09

See things as they ARE and not as they SHOULD be. That is my worldview. When you strip away your expectations of a perfect world there is no need for mental abstractions such as "Evil". My worldview allows me to live in peace without trying to endlessly fight the "external" world. I believe that each and everyone of us is the Universe in its entirety. Everything you can see and touch is YOU. If you are me and I am you, then what is point in fighting? It is pointless. The only thing I dare to fight is the ego; the unawakened mind.

Posted By: Matthew Griffin on 02/13/09

@Jason - I agree with your assessment. You are at peace with the way things are. I am not at peace with the way things are. I truly believe things can get better. I will continue to work to be a better father--the father I should be; a better husband--the husband I should be; a better Christian--the Christian I should be. I will never be fully satisfied in these areas during this life. I will struggle and strain toward the goal until I breathe my last.

Posted By: Ben on 04/03/09

Matt, I read this post when you first published it. Regarding the message I agree. I feed a need to comment, though on the "profane" as you said - both in the first comment and in the "cousin-" quote. On one hand, that helps drive your point, but I feel as if I were walking through a beautiful field when reading your blog (like the Windows desktop background - green grass, etc) and then stepped in a cow-pie in this post -- barefoot! Perhaps it could be handled with [censored] or "$&@^!@#$%^" etc.

Posted By: Ben on 04/03/09

Maybe this means we are doing a good job? "And you will be hated by all for My name's sake." - Luke 21:17

Posted By: Ben on 04/03/09

@Jason - Re: "F--- the haters". Remember to have your own heart right: "But I say to you who hear: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you..." - Luke 6:27+

Posted By: Matthew Grffin on 04/03/09

Ben, good comments. I like your analogy in the first one and, actually, I'm glad to hear it. That's exactly the effect I wanted to achieve. I understand the importance of purity but I think the contrast in this case is helpful in bringing to the forefront the drastic nature of this trend. Hope you understand, I don't plan on making it a habit.

Post Your Comment

Comments are closed.