What does /pol/ think of Sam Harris?
I listened to some of his podcast with Omer Aziz about Islam, and fucking hell, I honestly don't know how he manages to keep such restraint.
>>69206499
I don't even know why he bothers with interviews with Omer and people like him. They're not intellectually honest, and frankly, it's a waste of Sam's time. It's like he's slumming by talking with people like Omer.
8/10 breddy gud.
I read his book Letter to a Christian Nation like a decade ago. I like him for the most part. Compared to the Hitch and Dawkins, he is the sleepy Ben Carson to their Trump. He makes a lot of good points in his interviews, but since he doesn't have a fancy English accent and smarmy, cynical attitude, he never got as much attention. I'm not sure how he feels about it now, but the fact he speaks so highly of Buddhism and seems to believe in this vague deism/spiritualism always made me dislike him a little bit.
>>69207137
>speaks so highly of Buddhism and seems to believe in this vague deism/spiritualism
Wut. He speaks highly of Buddhist meditative practices, not the religion as such
I haven't listened to his podcast in months. I'll try this one with Omer Aziz.
he is tha mvp
>>69207350
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLKNvBdUtZY
>muh spirituality
>muh buddha muh jesus
>muh consciousness muh meditation
>>69207415
Guarantee pic related will be you within the first 10 minutes of listening to that mouthy cunt.
>>69207137
>English accent and smarmy, cynical attitude
Such is Britain in a nutshell. It's so omnipresent you stop noticing it.
>>69207615
it's okay, I'm guessing he's some Islamic shill or apologist? I'm through the intro now. I've watched Sam Harris debate tons of people like that.
>>69207542
>Sam Harris
>Everything metaphysical is bullshit! It is all a LIE!
>HEY GUYS, CHECK OUT THIS MAGICAL METAPHYSICAL WITCHDOCTOR STUFF! IT IS SO AWESOME!
>What? No! Of course I am not trying to promote the metaphysical! It is just that....we need to REDEFINE the words "metaphysical" or "spiritual".... errrr... I mean....REHABILITATE THEM!
Harris dick-rider here AMA. Read/own all the books.
>>69206738
He does these to show that he can prove his points first-hand, one on one, while maintaining the high ground so his composure is unassailable. MSM critics these days love to attack your tone instead of your content, he takes that weapon away. God-tier self control, must be all the meditation.
>>69207137
I don't think the Carson comparison holds. He gets some really sick burns on people, but they're cold and delivered more or less deadpan, like a dry ice burn.
>>69207137
>since he doesn't have a fancy English accent and smarmy, cynical attitude, he never got as much attention.
I always preferred Sam's writing style to Hitch's. It reminds me of Bertrand Russell's: clean, concise, precise. Unnecessary words are omitted, and "fancy" language - too often used for it's own sake - is not bothered with. He is always readily understood.
Hitch was funny when speaking extemporaneously, but his writing was grandiloquent and prolix. Shit, really. Dunno why people praise it.
>>69206499
link to podcasts?
>>69207828
He just bombards Harris with loads of points that dont really mean anything while repeatedly calling him deluded, it's not really a conversation /debate at all.
He also writes for Salon if you want me to make it clearer, haha
>>69208087
His website. I'm listening to the one OP mentioned here https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-best-podcast-ever
I guess Sam is going to start cussing in this one?
>>69207915
It's like listening to Joe Rogan. Totally embarrassing and cringey. I understand meditation has psychological benefit, but it's just self-reflection. Trying to 'reclaim' words like spirituality is just wishy washy new age bullshit.
>>69207984
Obviously Carson is crazy, which Harris isn't. It's not a perfect, 1:1 comparison. But my point was Harris is much more subdued and Dawkins and Hitchens were far more melodramatic and in-your-face. Dawkins saying "Science is interesting and if you don't like it, you can fuck off." and Hitchens writing about how Mother Theresa was a sadistic sociopath and posing nude for his book or whatever that shoot was for. Very flagrant characters. Not that it's a bad thing, that's just their style. Just like Trump.
>>69208043
brb. googling "grandiloquent and prolix"
>>69208043
well i learned 3 new words with this post, thanks i guess.
>>69206499
My coincidence detector is telling me he's a jew.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/coincidence-detector/hldnghbakgkgeocjllocmpobpppkfepo?authuser=1
>>69206499
He has the proper anti-mudslime way of argument, as in staying composed and calm, and knowing every small detail, since muzzies on tv look for the opprtunity to just scream
>>69208389
thanks for this
>>69207984
>He does these to show that he can prove his points first-hand, one on one, while maintaining the high ground
The thing is, he didn't even post his debate with Omer, because (according to his podcast) he felt that it was not constructive and just a waste of everyone's time. So it appears that he does do these interviews with an expectation that they will produce new intellectual insights. But again, if that is the case, why sit down with Omer in the first place? I'd rather he speak with an unknown professor on his own show than to appear as a guest on shows hosted by dimwits.
>>69208523
He posted it now. and I think Sam is just human, and he thought it went so off the rails that he didn't want to release it as content with his name on it
>>69208187
ok. thankyou.
>>69208523
Yeah not every interaction is going to be fruitful. Some of them are for use later, some of them are for the sake of the audiences. I'm not him so I couldn't explain every appearance or every bit he puts out, but the theme of his appearances seem to be consistent.
>>69208267
>MFW Sam Harris
>>69209286
He's not the worst atheist/anti-religion author out there. He makes a lot of good points, you just have to tune out when he gets into meditation or spirituality or new age-y stuff. His books are solid though.
Based as fuck, not redpilled enough. Thinks muslim savagery is explained by ideology, I believe it to be genetical.
>>69209633
You say hereditary or genetic. Genetical isn't a word, suomi friend.
>>69209286
>reposting the same picture
figured that out ourselves, bud.
>>69206499
Gigantic pseudo-intellectual with essentially no contributions to any respectable academia.
>>69209556
He isn't new agey, though, because his thoughts on spiritualism have a material, biological basis; he wouldn't research the topic otherwise. That's his original thought on the matter: although all religion is bunk, it is the result of a inherent human need to achieve different, "higher" states of mind to achieve "grace" or peacefulness. These experiences can be measured empirically (what they call psychometrics - a fascinating field) and, to the extent to which they yield personal or social benefits, they are worth practicing and studying. But it's got nothing to do with God or spirits or "third eyes", except in the most metaphorical sense. As with ethics, there's potentially an underlying science with this.
>>69209556
I sort of know why he uses terms and shit like, same with Joe Rogan. There aren't really any decent ways to describe how psychedelics have affected your mind positively or negatively for that matter, without sounding like a new agey faggot. It kind of leaves me just not talking about my experiences with them as much because unless you've tried them, it's just gonna sound like gay bullshit
>>69206499
>I honestly don't know how he manages to keep such restraint.
because intellectuals - true intellectuals (he's a neurosurgeon) - know that barbarians cannot compete on the platforms of logic and reason, thus always try to drag every debate into an emotive scrap
the reason why the West are so discombobulated by "terrorism", despite the millennia and a half of precedent, is because they futilely try to combat barbarism with more barbarism -- a battle that cannot be won against a nihilist opponent (i.e., ultimately any hardcore godtard), for obvious end game reasons
unless you resolve to wipe every, last godtard off of the face of the Earth (not possible, given their tentacles reach), you can only strive to expose them for the myriad shortcomings of their ideology and thereby awaken those still susceptible to being 'saved' (i.e., their brains kick-started)
>>69206499
Very interesting podcasts indeed, that one with Omer surely was a sore, and that other one with Mariam, but its really a great pleasure to have him.
10/10.
Also, his books are pretty based,
The Moral Landscape needs a bit polishing if it ever wants to be taken seriously in the realm of scientific morality, but his work is by far the most well packaged atheism book I've read.
>>69209970
This is a decent summary of what Harris talks about in Waking Up.
From Harris' site:
Dear Reader—
I have been waiting for more than a decade to write Waking Up. Long before I saw any reason to criticize religion (The End of Faith, Letter to a Christian Nation), or to connect moral and scientific truths (The Moral Landscape, Free Will, Lying), I was interested in the nature of human consciousness and the possibility of “spiritual” experience. In Waking Up, I do my best to show that a certain form of spirituality is integral to understanding the nature of our minds.
There is no discrete self or ego living like a minotaur in the labyrinth of the brain. And the feeling that there is—the sense of being perched somewhere behind your eyes, looking out at a world that is separate from yourself—can be altered or entirely extinguished. Although such experiences of “self-transcendence” are generally thought about in religious terms, there is nothing, in principle, irrational about them. From both a scientific and a philosophical point of view, they represent a clearer understanding of the way things are.
My hope is that Waking Up will help readers see the nature of their own minds in a new light. A rational approach to spirituality seems to be what is missing from secularism and from the lives of most of the people I meet. The purpose of this book is to offer readers a clear view of the problem, along with some tools to help them solve it for themselves.
I sincerely hope you find it useful.
>>69210211
>nihilist opponent
>nihilist
>>69208477
You're welcome.
>>69208523
>But again, if that is the case, why sit down with Omer in the first place?
Because the only way to win is to confront your opponents; no matter how ill-informed they may be.
>>69210211
>>/r/autism
>>69206499
Shmuel Horowitz is just another conservitard crank yanker.
he pets your prejudices and you suck his cock.
>>69211009
Not an argument
>>69210696
Yeah, but it's beneath him.
People used to ask Dawkins why he didn't date some people, especially the lunatic fringe, and he replied that doing so would give their views more credibility than they deserve. They would gain something, just by being on the same bill as Dawkins, but he stood to gain nothing.
More importantly, the lunatic fringe types are those who are equivalent to those who advocate the "stork theory of human reproduction". Would it behoove biologists and reproduction experts to bother to show up to refute such advocates? It ridiculous beyond belief. And that is precisely how Dawkins views most theists. Their level of understanding of the subject matter is imbecilic. They're not worth debating
Sam Harris is a idiot who lack reasoning. After his book "moral landscapes" I assumed that his flawed logic (like deriving 'ought' from 'is') was because he had no background at all in moral philosophy, but apparently he has a BA in philosophy. How they can award a BA in philosophy to someone who does not even get things that likely was covered in his "introduction to philosophy 101" is beyond me. He is a typical fedora, enlightened by his own 'intelligence' , but still manage to not catch his lack of reasoning. And he has philosophy friends as well who must have told him, one of his friends Dr. Churchland was embarrassed when she was asked by Sam Harris in a interview and just said that he probably should have spent more time on the book. He is not a good thinker
>>69210627
Yes, exactly. Fascinating stuff. Seeing that you've read all of his work, I'd much rather see an interview between him and you than with Omer.
>>69212341
>How they can award a BA in philosophy to someone who does not even get things that likely was covered in his "introduction to philosophy 101" is beyond me.
He did "get it"; Hume is not hard to grasp. What he is doing now is refuting it. If you didn't realise that, you don't know his work.
>>69212544
is-ought is such a weak argument I don't understand how it's still taught as a current theory.
>/pol/
>å bunch of positivists.
You literally can't make this bluepill'd shit up.
>>69213798
Not an argument
>>69213798
>å bunch of positivists.
>You literally can't make this bluepill'd shit up.
If positivism is wrong, what is right?
Poor man's Hitch.
Friendly reminder than Sam Harris is an apologist for terrorism (state terrorism by America).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SewlKDMFR4
Listen carefully.
he's the new Shapiro
runner-up for the folks on the market for a pet jew
they'll sing him praises til the day he bites them in the face
>>69209742
Link to your published articles?
That's what I thought. Go back to first year social science.
>>69215448
Is an argument.
Bet you can't even define positivism.
Take a seat over there and let the big boys talk.
>american education.
>muh intellectual honesty
>muh obfuscating the point
>muh slimed
>muh "ok-"
Sameme Harris is a fucking hack
