Is he right /pol/?
Pseudo-intellectual that thinks understanding neuro-science makes him competent as a philosopher. He really should have just read some PHIL textbooks before writing his books because he is clearly ignorant of the introductory discussions that have already been had in the subjects he writes about (lying, for example).
He does not represent the opinions of the people he criticizes fairly, often bordering on straw-manning them so that they can fit into his neat, simple, consequentialist framework that he asserts is correct. This is coming from a consequentialist.
>>77068659
>He does not represent the opinions of the people he criticizes fairly, often bordering on straw-manning them
Such as
>>77068659
The criticism applies to The Moral Landscape. That's one book in his oeuvre, and a tiny part of his career.
>>77066974
He needs to do more "Night At The Museum" movies.
No, he's just right of left.
Wtf is wrong with Pol. He is a filthy jew. Muslims > Jews / fags, but I repeat myself.
>>77068947
kek
>>77069077
Nice try akhmed.
>>77068659
His undergraduate degree is in philosophy.
>>77068659
Oh, and:
>He does not represent the opinions of the people he criticizes fairly, often bordering on straw-manning them
The irony is so rich.
>>77068659
>Pseudo-intellectual
?
>>77069077
t. Abu Salem al-Qurashi
He has some admirable qualities. He seems seriously open-minded about understanding the full range of human mental experience, he doesn't discount religious or drug experience but rather puts them all on the same footing.
He also takes extreme pains to justify everything he claims but it runs the risk of a certain lifelessness. It's like he's constantly effacing his own personality and feelings to try to be as much a logic robot as possible.
But recently he said Hillary would be better than Trump so I don't think he quite gets it because he can't find a logical train there exactly
>>77066974
No he's a lying kike.
>Watch Sam Harris vids on loop
>Become (((enlightened)))
>Shitpost.
MUH ATHEISM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENtlW-LEqu8
>>77068947
He also still needs to wipe the cum off his ear
neocon hack riding the atheism fad to push his agenda
>>77070930
What's his agenda?
>>77069966
https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/neuroscientist-sam-harris/
>>77066974
>((()))
>>77066974
Fedora: The Man
Read his book 'The End of Faith'
What a load of shit lol
>>77069309
>>77070163
Oh we got this shit going again I see.
I'm still pissed that this cocksucker ripped Crick off and wrote a book about how free will doesn't exist because of chemical reactions. He's a tepid pool of shit who is only popular because people agree with his mundane attack on religion.
Oh whaaat? God isn't-- what god's not real? Way to go buddy, welcome to the 10th grade
>>77070930
What kind of agenda would a Neoconservative push?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdDo1A7EsyM
He supported Hillary even before the primaries had started
>>77066974
On religion yes. His political stances are pretty cancer though.
On Islam, yes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxkq5bHe_fA
>>77071131
Welcome to nu-/pol/
>>77068659
Why are you canadians so fucking retarded?
>>77066974
His stuff on religion and spirituality is good, but his work ethics is just
>I like to define morality a certain way but if you want a reason why, that's outside of the scope of this conversation
I mean, he talked for four hours on a podcast with a philosopher and a psychologist and never really gave a reason why we should adopt his brand of consequentialism.
Overall, he's pretty reasonable for a left-wing guy, and I usually like to hear his take on things. It's great that he's taking on Islam.
>>77070464
It's a naked self-preservation tactic. If he doesn't make as much noise as possible about Trump, even though he has nothing new or interesting to say about the man, maybe he'll preserve what's left of his standing in the social circles he operates in.
>>77070464
He also takes extreme pains to justify everything he claims but it runs the risk of a certain lifelessness.
I have a similar opinion. He really tries to bring nuance to his discussion but sometimes feels flat. I mean, for fuck's sake he held a contest and rewarded $2000 to the person who could best rebut "The Moral Landscape." He's not intellectually dishonest. I find it hard to bee too critical when his opponents are such sacks of shit and misrepresent everything he says, especially regressive leftists. At least his exchange with Chomsky was more evidence how off the rails that old man has become.
Reductionism is idiotic and ignores interactions between small mechanisms
>>77071679
WHat do you mean?
Good stuff on islam.
