Hitler Zombie Religion Skepticism/critical thinking

The Zombie Courtier’s reply

After having pontificated a bit longer than perhaps I should have about why Richard Dawkins’ treatment of the execution of Saddam Hussein as a missed opportunity for psychological or historical research was so misguided, I thought it might be time to take a more pro-Dawkins tilt. After all, even though the majority of my posts about Richard Dawkins have been critical, on balance I do admire the man; it’s just that he has a maddening penchant for using historical analogies that make me want to tear my hair out.

A while back, PZ posted something that he called The Courtier’s Reply. In essence The Courtier’s Reply (and, PZ argues and Dawkins seems to agree, much of the criticism of Dawkins with regard to religion consists of variants of The Courtier’s Reply) is that Dawkins is a rude upstart who doesn’t understand the finer points of theology and thus doesn’t have the necessary background to attack religion in general. In other words, goes The Courtier’s Reply, what Dawkins is actually attacking is a rude and crude version of religion, while the Courtier understands the real thing.

The Courtier’s Reply is a pretty good parody, but it could be better–much better. And what better way to improve it than to add zombies? Zombies, after all, may be just as put off by the anti-zombie books written by Max Brooks, such as The Zombie Survival Guide (which I’ve read and found hilarious) and World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War (which I got for Christmas but haven’t yet had the opportunity to read).

There could indeed be zombies out there who could produce what we might properly call The Courtier Zombie’s Reply, and I’ve actually found one, via an incoming link:

Azombism has lately been enjoying a certain vogue. Spurred on by the success of anti-zombie books such as those by Max Brooks, militant azombists have become emboldened and are increasing their attacks against the very practice of zombism itself. However, in doing so, they reveal their profound and willful ignorance of the deeper nuances of the undead lifestyle.

Heh. Sound familiar? There’s more:

These “new azombists” simply argue against the worst examples of our brain-eating fellow zombies. What they fail to recognise while attacking these fundamentalist zombies is that many zombies practise more complex and subtle forms of zombism. I, personally, have never eaten a brain, nor have many of my zombie friends, yet brain-eating is one of the main complaints of the azombists.

“Worst examples”? Hey, a certain undead Führer is not pleased by that remark. And, as always, he’s very, very hungry. He may have to pay a certain courtier a visit, even if that courtier never did use an over-the-top Hitler analogy. Still, this Courtier Zombie has a point:

Their counter-argument is that moderate zombies like myself still spread the zombie parasite, providing “cover” for the fundamentalist brain-eater zombies and creating new zombies who might in the future lean towards brain-eating. This is absurd! I myself have been known to occasionally glower with disapprobation when one of my fellow zombies finds a stray feral human and cracks open her brain case. Others claim is that the simple act of bringing humans into our fold is a form of “indoctrination” or “human abuse” since the zombie bite is, of course, 100% effective when administered and completely irreversible. Can we help it? We simply have found a philosophy that gives our lives great meaning, namely the slaking of our implacable hunger for human flesh.

The Courtier Zombie then goes on to wax rhapsodic about the finer points of zombism, particularly the great zombie philosopher Petrosjko (whose attempts to discuss philosophy and architecture with his fellow zombies and even with his human prey somehow just didn’t work out that well), and how militant azombists just don’t understand.

All of this just goes to show that almost anything can be improved by the addition of zombies(or is it adding dinosaurs?), unless, of course, you happen to be on the receiving end of their tender ministrations or have not had your olfactory bulb burned out so that you don’t notice the smell of rotting flesh.

Either way, nothing against PZ, but I like the Zombie Courtier’s Reply better than the Courtier’s Reply, for what I consider to be obvious reasons.


Looks like I’m not ready enough, should there ever be a zombie outbreak. Looks like I need to reread The Zombie Survival Guide.

One week

You scored 50 Survival!

yup, thats all that ill give you, you know enough, but unless you hook up with people more apt to survive

My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and gender:

free online datingfree online dating
You scored higher than 99% on Survival

Link: The Zombie Survival Guide Test written by dadeathwing on OkCupid Free Online Dating, home of the The Dating Persona Test

By Orac

Orac is the nom de blog of a humble surgeon/scientist who has an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone, somewhere might actually give a rodent's posterior about his copious verbal meanderings, but just barely small enough to admit to himself that few probably will. That surgeon is otherwise known as David Gorski.

That this particular surgeon has chosen his nom de blog based on a rather cranky and arrogant computer shaped like a clear box of blinking lights that he originally encountered when he became a fan of a 35 year old British SF television show whose special effects were renowned for their BBC/Doctor Who-style low budget look, but whose stories nonetheless resulted in some of the best, most innovative science fiction ever televised, should tell you nearly all that you need to know about Orac. (That, and the length of the preceding sentence.)

DISCLAIMER:: The various written meanderings here are the opinions of Orac and Orac alone, written on his own time. They should never be construed as representing the opinions of any other person or entity, especially Orac's cancer center, department of surgery, medical school, or university. Also note that Orac is nonpartisan; he is more than willing to criticize the statements of anyone, regardless of of political leanings, if that anyone advocates pseudoscience or quackery. Finally, medical commentary is not to be construed in any way as medical advice.

To contact Orac: [email protected]

Comments are closed.


Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading