Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I listened to a good 30-40 minutes of this one. I enjoy when he talks about AI, meditation, consciousness, atheism, Islam, etc. I've listened to dozens of his podcasts and other talks.
I don't necessarily disagree with some of his critiques of Trump.
I tune out when some of his more statist / collectivist tendencies come out.
He's said some truly brilliant things and several somewhat dumb things today.
He is really good when he contrasts various beliefs and their real-world implications. But I do think he exaggerates a bit, overemphasizes things of relatively-minor significance, has a difficult time mentally separating political-motivations from religious-motivations, and tends to assume that religion is the primary motivation for almost all inter-tribal strife.
I also think he is far too much faith in humanitarianism. Which is not actually a concrete set of ideas or policies, but a constantly-evolving set of theories based on the social-sciences, which are themselves constantly-evolving.
I found it interesting that Sam Harris went for a PhD in neuroscience after having gained fame as a writer about religion. I have always marveled at the human capacity of belief and wonder if science can one day unlock this mystery.
He is really good when he contrasts various beliefs and their real-world implications. But I do think he exaggerates a bit, overemphasizes things of relatively-minor significance, has a difficult time mentally separating political-motivations from religious-motivations, and tends to assume that religion is the primary motivation for almost all inter-tribal strife.
I also think he is far too much faith in humanitarianism. Which is not actually a concrete set of ideas or policies, but a constantly-evolving set of theories based on the social-sciences, which are themselves constantly-evolving.
I'm watching that vid in chunks, it's three hours, I'm about halfway through and at times the interaction between the two has been where they are saying opposite things and can't come to an agreement. I lean toward more of what Sam is saying, but he is downplaying the geo-political/tribal elements more in favor a bit of the religious side, but he makes some compelling arguments for that. I think Islam is more cancerous and is a bit "war" driven and as he notes, it's in the scriptures more succinctly to use violence than Christianity and it's get murky.
But come on, JC wasn't a warlord advocating cutting off heads and taking child brides and sex slaves the way Muhammad did, but whatever I don't have a dog in the fight either way. As I find myself more in the agnostic camp if I had to check a box off.
I just find his style and the way he presents arguments to be effective. Don't agree with everything, but I find him fascinating nonetheless.
I lean toward more of what Sam is saying, but he is downplaying the geo-political/tribal elements more in favor a bit of the religious side, but he makes some compelling arguments for that. I think Islam is more cancerous and is a bit "war" driven and as he notes, it's in the scriptures more succinctly to use violence than Christianity and it's get murky.
I've watched the video probably four times.
I agree with like 90% of what Sam Harris is saying, but where I disagree with him is mostly from, as you said, that he downplays the geopolitical causes of terrorism, which exploits religion, but isn't necessarily caused by religion.
I also think he is wrong when he assumes that the Muslims want to kill all the Jews. As Cenk says, the Muslims didn't do that when they had the chance.
I thought Sam Harris was pretty soft on Christianity overall, but there was one part that stands out to me, which I had never even thought of, it starts at ~125:30, when he talks about the Christian belief in hell.
I agree with like 90% of what Sam Harris is saying, but where I disagree with him is mostly from, as you said, that he downplays the geopolitical causes of terrorism, which exploits religion, but isn't necessarily caused by religion.
I also think he is wrong when he assumes that the Muslims want to kill all the Jews. As Cenk says, the Muslims didn't do that when they had the chance.
I thought Sam Harris was pretty soft on Christianity overall, but there was one part that stands out to me, which I had never even thought of, it starts at ~125:30, when he talks about the Christian belief in hell.
It's hard to label Sam Harris. Apparently he's a liberal and most likely because of the atheist part, I can only assume. I don't know all of the stuff he's said. I'm in the process of checking out some of his books. I find that if he is indeed a liberal, he's a true text book liberal. Which I don't have a problem wtih. Liberalisms as it's known today seems to be skewed and has morphed into the weird far leftist progressive thing. Not sure the exact boundaries but if you look up the text book definition of liberalism it's good stuff.
This garbage we have today with the safe spaces, the therapy dogs, the shut downing of free speech of others if they say things that make them uncomfortable which is ironic as the very definition of free speech is a liberalism hallmark.
The micro aggressions and "we don't keep score" mentality IDK, I could go on but all of that nonsense seems to be attached to the what is called liberalism today. The politically correct atmosphere is nothing that I knew growing up. There seems to be a certain mentality with liberals today in that there seems to be an element of not taking responsibility for your lot in life. That life somehow owes you and it's always some reason why you weren't successful in life. I mean I don't get it at times. Personal responsibility appears to be lacking and that is one of the reasons why I shun the label of Liberal even though I've got some views that would scare the hell out of a conservative and I got some view that would disturb a Liberal. It's hard to really put people in boxes anymore as things shift and terms shift and IDK, it seems to be fluid at times, at least to me.
He is a big fish in the small pond of publicly anti religious. Upon the death of the better talk show guest Christopher Hitchens he became the best speaker to the masses for their position. Like Hitchens he thinks it foolish to claim that all religions belief is the same and not to look into the specific theological differences
I enjoy listening to him although I don't agree with him 100% of the time. He has Islam on the brain..not that I completely disagree with him, but it seems like he sees Islamo-nuttism as the cause and reason for EVERYTHING in the world today...in some lectures he seems to think it's the main reason Trump won..others it seems he thinks it's SJW's. Usually when I hear people say stuff like this I think they are talk radio dupes who've had their head filled with this stuff, but he's too smart for it. Unless you are on a college campus, and a very liberal one, you have little dealing with SJW's....it's usually white guys who've gotten pissed of watching too many internet videos who are nuts about SJW's..they've had almost no interaction with these kind of people in their lives but feel threatened by videos of them talking about triggers and 3rd wave feminism.
While I don't think he's "alt right", a lot of alt right a-holes get way too excited when he has similar views to them on a few subjects.
In some lectures he seems to think it's the main reason Trump won..others it seems he thinks it's SJW's.
Well I think the two actually go together. Bill Maher complains incessantly about political-correctness, and how the SJW's turn a blind-eye to Islam, and will attack you, and try to shut you down, if you dare to criticize Islam(usually calling you racist, xenophobic, etc).
Quote:
Originally Posted by dman72
Unless you are on a college campus, and a very liberal one, you have little dealing with SJW's....it's usually white guys who've gotten pissed of watching too many internet videos who are nuts about SJW's..they've had almost no interaction with these kind of people in their lives but feel threatened by videos of them talking about triggers and 3rd wave feminism.
I would agree that the vast-majority of people have no direct interaction with SJW's. But that doesn't mean that the policies SJW's have pushed for, don't affect their lives. And SJW's certainly get plenty of exposure on television. Especially the Antifa, and anarchists, who have tried in various places to shut down the country, and even to physically attack those who disagree with them.
But I think most-importantly, SJW's represent ideas which are absolutely terrifying for many conservatives, and at the same time, it increasingly seems like the country is heading in that direction.
Rightly or wrongly, SJW's have come to represent social and moral-decay.
I doubt Harris just happens to be anything. He arrives at his positions after long thought and careful consideration. Tell me, why aren't all liberals anti-Islamism?
You know him? Wow - that's cool.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
