OK. I’m officially sick of it. The very moment folks started calling themselves “members of the reality-based community,” it made me want to wretch on my Pumas. Why not be honest and call yourself a proud member of the “you’re either stupid or evil if you don’t agree with me community?” I understand the supposed contrast with “faith-based” and the ironic embrace of its derisively intended non-opposite. But come on, really. I think we all understand and appreciate what a hard-headed empiricist you are by not attending Sunday school. Your epistemic virtue bowls us over. But just maybe it’s time for new blog slogans, people. Why not try something along “my scat smells like honey-based” or “self-congatulation-based” lines?
Will Wilkinson
The Sweet Release of Reason
It makes significantly more sense in light of the actual etymology, namely this quote from a administration aide:
“The aide said that guys like me were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” … “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”"
It’s still self-righteous bullshit, but I think that, in the context of that quote, it might be the lesser of two santimony’s.
Thanks, Will. I’ve seen the quote, too, but I’ve been thinking the exact same thing.
Somehow I had missed the connection to “faith based” and just caught the arrogance. Here’s a philosophical thought for you…if people of faith are right (about whatever they are supposedly wrong about), then wouldn’t that make people without faith out of touch with reality?
How many people claim to be “reality based” in reference to the above quote, and how many claim to be “reality based” having never heard of the above quote (and thinking their opposite is “faith based”)? I think “faith-based initiatives” is a far more well known standard.
Joe, I guess it just depends what circles you hang out in. Absolutely every liberal blog-reader knows about the aide’s comments, due to their scandalous implications regarding the Bush administration’s epistemic practices. Really, it was THE big story a couple of months back. If you haven’t come across the quote before, then you clearly don’t read liberal blogs, and thus aren’t in much of a position to be speculating about what is or isn’t “well known” to their audiences.
The origin of it as used on liberal blogs is very obviously–and was explicitly explained to be when people started adding it as a tagline–from the quotation, not by analogy to “faith-based.” But it does wear a bit thin.
Maybe the split should be “Reality-based” and “Feith-based”. Carefully considered actions vs. random, costly and ineffective actions thought up by “the stupidest fucking guy on the face of the earth.”
I think this would sum up the current difference between Democrats and Republicans nicely.
Why not be honest and call yourself a proud member of the “you’re either stupid or evil if you don’t agree with me community?”
Good idea. I’ll change my template.
Monky: Now, now. Howard Dean isn’t the stupidest man on earth, though he may well do an excellent job of aiding the destruction of the Democrat party with his random, costly, and ineffective actions as DNC Chair.
As for the aide quote, yeah, that sure is where it’s from. It’s amusing, though, that an anonymous aide’s quote is taken as Gospel (pun intended) as to the actual beliefs and actions of the Administration.
I guess there’s nothing as seductive as being told exactly what you already believe, regardless of any counter-evidence, is there?
Hehe, Sigvald, as a Republican I enjoy the antics of the Demos, too. It doesn’t it matter to me who runs their show and the entertainment factor is pure profit.
On the Republican side, the clowns are far less funny. They are turning the Bush presidency into one of *those* administrations, the ones historians point out as pardigms of corruption and incompetence. The kind that bring down empires…
Pingback: Pejmanesque
It makes significantly more sense in light of the actual etymology, namely this quote from a administration aide:
“The aide said that guys like me were “in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” … “That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”"
It’s still self-righteous bullshit, but I think that, in the context of that quote, it might be the lesser of two santimony’s.
Thanks, Will. I’ve seen the quote, too, but I’ve been thinking the exact same thing.
Somehow I had missed the connection to “faith based” and just caught the arrogance. Here’s a philosophical thought for you…if people of faith are right (about whatever they are supposedly wrong about), then wouldn’t that make people without faith out of touch with reality?
How many people claim to be “reality based” in reference to the above quote, and how many claim to be “reality based” having never heard of the above quote (and thinking their opposite is “faith based”)? I think “faith-based initiatives” is a far more well known standard.
Joe, I guess it just depends what circles you hang out in. Absolutely every liberal blog-reader knows about the aide’s comments, due to their scandalous implications regarding the Bush administration’s epistemic practices. Really, it was THE big story a couple of months back. If you haven’t come across the quote before, then you clearly don’t read liberal blogs, and thus aren’t in much of a position to be speculating about what is or isn’t “well known” to their audiences.
The origin of it as used on liberal blogs is very obviously–and was explicitly explained to be when people started adding it as a tagline–from the quotation, not by analogy to “faith-based.” But it does wear a bit thin.
Maybe the split should be “Reality-based” and “Feith-based”. Carefully considered actions vs. random, costly and ineffective actions thought up by “the stupidest fucking guy on the face of the earth.”
I think this would sum up the current difference between Democrats and Republicans nicely.
Why not be honest and call yourself a proud member of the “you’re either stupid or evil if you don’t agree with me community?”
Good idea. I’ll change my template.
Monky: Now, now. Howard Dean isn’t the stupidest man on earth, though he may well do an excellent job of aiding the destruction of the Democrat party with his random, costly, and ineffective actions as DNC Chair.
As for the aide quote, yeah, that sure is where it’s from. It’s amusing, though, that an anonymous aide’s quote is taken as Gospel (pun intended) as to the actual beliefs and actions of the Administration.
I guess there’s nothing as seductive as being told exactly what you already believe, regardless of any counter-evidence, is there?
Hehe, Sigvald, as a Republican I enjoy the antics of the Demos, too. It doesn’t it matter to me who runs their show and the entertainment factor is pure profit.
On the Republican side, the clowns are far less funny. They are turning the Bush presidency into one of *those* administrations, the ones historians point out as pardigms of corruption and incompetence. The kind that bring down empires…
9p2746xbou This is so true! 9p2746xbou
9p2746xbou This is so true! 9p2746xbou
4uexp2zvqh Well said 4uexp2zvqh http://sko.xs07.info
4uexp2zvqh Well said 4uexp2zvqh http://sko.xs07.info