[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 70 KB, 640x360, sam.harris.ted2010.cnn.640x360.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6462036 No.6462036 [Reply] [Original]

This is not a troll thread, I am seriously asking you: has Sam Harris ever been wrong, and do you know of a more based intellectual alive today?

- Wrote one of the most influential books on atheism (End of Faith)

- Advanced the field of neuroscience

- PhD in philosophy and neuroscience

- Debated and TBH demolished the most prominent Christian debaters like W.L.Craig

- Studied with Tibetan lamas and mastered the most advanced meditation techniques of Dzogchen (known as the "short-cut to enlightenment" in Tibet)

Seriously, is there anything this man cannot do?

>> No.6462044

>>6462036
>has Sam Harris ever been wrong

on just about every account

>> No.6462045

>Seriously, is there anything this man cannot do?

Leave a woman unsatisfied.

>> No.6462052

why am i bumping this trash?

>> No.6462054

>My claim is that there are right and wrong answers to moral questions, just as there are right and wrong answers to questions of physics

>Just as there is no such thing as Christian physics or Muslim Algebra, we will see that there is no such thing as Christian or Muslim morality.

>Despite our perennial bad behavior, our moral progress seems to me unmistakable.

Based Sam Harris

>> No.6462057

>>6462044
But somehow you can't name a single one.

>> No.6462066

>>6462057
this one >>6462054

>> No.6462067
File: 11 KB, 220x304, 220px-Thomas_Babington_Macaulay,_Baron_Macaulay.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6462067

>be Sam Harris
>become embodyment of 19th century whig positivism

>people think this is new

>mfw

>> No.6462068

>>6462036
>claims to be a scientist
>Hasn't published a science paper since before 2006

he was an advisor to a paper in 2011 and that's it

>> No.6462077

He doesn't have a phd in philosophy...

>> No.6462092
File: 512 KB, 1920x1600, Sam Harris 1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6462092

>>6462036

>> No.6462113

He takes classical Christian moralism, claims that all of it is self-understanding, natural (I'm not kidding) and obvious to any normal person.

He disregards empirical historical evidence because muh neuroscience, fails to understand that what he himself was educated in these values, and therefore finds and thus find them obvious, and finally - but this is something all New Atheists should die for - fails to recognize the genuine contribution of Judeo-Christian morals to the Occidental success and its morals.

>> No.6462120

>>6462113
>He disregards empirical historical evidence because muh neuroscience
Example?

>> No.6462121
File: 486 KB, 821x1557, Sam Harris 2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6462121

>> No.6462124

>>6462121
10/10

>> No.6462125

>there are objective answers to moral question, just like there are objective answers to scientific questions

And what are these answers, Sam?

>well, let me give you some of the blendest and traditional ethical codes, as conceived by my ancestors, the Judeo-Christians

>> No.6462131
File: 424 KB, 920x2492, Sam Harris 3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6462131

>>6462036

Has Harris ever read Hume?

>> No.6462134

>>6462131
god damn, these are really on point

>> No.6462176

>>6462036
What is wrong with this guy? Where did these TV/book personalities come from that claim to be "scientists" yet almost exclusively publish poorly-written and laughable social critiques. Its like he's a theory student who's butthurt over religion.

>> No.6462177

>>6462036
Dzogchen won't help him if he clings to wrong views.

>> No.6462183

>>6462054
>>My claim is that there are right and wrong answers to moral questions, just as there are right and wrong answers to questions of physics

What's wrong with this?

>> No.6462187
File: 311 KB, 625x833, enhanced-buzz-17218-1363815921-0.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6462187

>>6462036
he said religion is worse than rape. dude is top fedora tier.

>> No.6462197

>>6462131

Has Dawkins ever really criticized philosophy?

>> No.6462211

>>6462197
Lawrence Krauss has, basically I remember a video where he directly says philosophy is useless and science creates space rocket what does philosophy do?

Lawrence Krauss is the spiritual successor of Dawkins. They love each other.

>> No.6462220

>>6462036
>is there anything this man cannot do?

Not be a total cunt

>> No.6462222

>>6462197

https://twitter.com/richarddawkins/status/433519270102708224

Funny thing is, Augustine proposed a version of Evolution before any scientist ever did.

>> No.6462226

>>6462197
"Philosophers' historic failure to anticipate Darwin is a severe indictment of philosophy."

>> No.6462229

>>6462226
WTF does that even mean?

>> No.6462232

>>6462229
Means he really loves darwin

>> No.6462233

>>6462222
Augustine may have been a turncoat and a huge dick, but I'll still take him over Dick Dorkins and his merry band of edgelords any day.

>> No.6462250

>>6462229

So philosophy is stupid because it didn't beat science to the punch in an empirical discovery? Maybe science is just applied empiricism, thus a branch of philosophy.

>> No.6462273

If Sam Harris and G.W.F. Hegel battled, who would've won?

>> No.6462286

>>6462222
>Augustine proposed a version of Evolution
Don't forget Empedocles as well

www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmdA4geRo_w

>> No.6462287

>>6462183
>>6462183
Because it's impossible to have a logos based on nothing. It's either a metaphysical or it doesn't exist. See the fall of the natural law school for more insight on why Harris is a moron.

>> No.6462377

>>6462036
>Seriously, is there anything this man cannot do?
Yes, form a coherent argument.

>> No.6462426

>>6462036
>atheism
Even the mere mention of that word in a serious context make me Ayn-Rand-tier butthurt.

>> No.6462520

I remember reading some article where he defended torture.

All of his arguments were along the lines of "what if the guy is like, REALLY evil, and threatens blow up a kindergarten, while laughing maniacally"

He also has a tendency of completely disregarding any historical factors in his interpretatations, i.e. "if Islam is so good, why is there war in Iraq"

>> No.6462545

>>6462520

I think his argument was that torture is effective and is morally justified it it helps to prevent something with greater net harm/suffering than the torturing itself.

>> No.6462553

>>6462545
>hurr durr implying you can quantify morality
"units of suffering", ha, ha, utilitarianism is a joke

>> No.6462554

I like Sam Harris for trying a new approach. Well not entirely new, but for trying to combine neuroscience, psychology (both in their infancy) with philosophy. You're a dumb cunt to think any 'thinker' is the end. All we can do is progress, try and fail, create, combine and argue. And Sam Harris has done this, so he has my respect.

>> No.6462561

>>6462545
man that's some lazy rhetoric. Glad I've never heard of him. He would have lost a fucking informal debate at the high school and/or college I went to.

>> No.6462571

>>6462561
Never heard of Sam Harris? How is that even possible? Do you live on Mars? He's the most widely known philosopher alive today.

>> No.6462589

>>6462571
Most known philosopher? Hardly. What agenda are you pushing?

>> No.6462594

>>6462589
He's like the Hume of our time. Or maybe the Aristotle of our time. The agenda I'm pushing is called "science". Enlightenment ideals... secular humanism.

>> No.6462606

>>6462553

I think measures it in deathcount or something. Bombing of a school full of children who die > momentary torture of one guy

>> No.6462607

>>6462594
>The agenda I'm pushing is called "science".
Welp, this is the end. I haven't enjoyed this ride.

>> No.6462615

>>6462594
>still believing in enlightenment discourse

it's like we're living in the 30's

>> No.6462618

Sam Harris does not know the meaning of the word 'context'. He also knows nothing about history.

>> No.6462619

>>6462615

What's the better alternative?

>> No.6462627

>>6462571
Never heard of him. Not sure what to tell you. I have a degree from an Ivy League school. He wasn't covered in the curriculum and I have zero interests in atheists? I don't know what to tell you...I haven't bothered to read the Fountainhead either, sue me.

>> No.6462632

>>6462619
the development that started with the scientific revolution and intensified during the enlightnment culinated in 20th century fascism as well as the Stalin terror. the best alternative is to search for other common goals for humanity than the pursuit of some vaguely defined "progress" or "growth"

>> No.6462753

Harris is not actually a problem, seriously /lit/ needs to stop hating him.

His approach to morality is novel and actually really interesting, it's not the be all and end all but it's important.

>> No.6462766

>>6462632
Yeah, I don't think you can draw a direct corollary between 'enlightenment ideals' and the gulags tbh.

>> No.6462787

>>6462619
Thomism

>> No.6462792
File: 143 KB, 1000x1000, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6462792

>>6462273
Based Hegel

>> No.6462804

>>6462077
But a PhD is a Doctor of Philosophy :^)

>> No.6462806

>>6462036
i want Reddit to go.
I dream of a /lit/ without all fedora pseudo-philosophy.

>> No.6462808

>>6462113
>empirical historical evidence
pointing towards....?

>> No.6462813

>>6462806
>I dream of a /lit/ without all fedora pseudo-philosophy.
That exists and it's called /pol/
You have threads like "How was mass today, /pol/" and people discuss their Sunday service and how Catholic church is too progressive and it should be more traditional and more like in the Middle Ages, bring back Latin masses!

>> No.6462814

>>6462036
He's an atheist, but he does worship one god: The God of Empire. So there's that.

>> No.6462815

>>6462113
He literally thinks he can out-Kant Kant lel

>> No.6462817

>>6462211
I saw Krauss debate a Zizek-loving post-structuralist once.

It was like watching a pregnant cow fighting an emu.

>> No.6462818

>>6462813
>apostatic church

eugh literally tare tier

>> No.6462825

>>6462817
>It was like watching a pregnant cow fighting an emu.
toplel mate
have a link?

>> No.6462829

>>6462825
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g5qsMW3bt8

>> No.6462833

>>6462113
/thread

But seriously, New atheists really are worthless fucks.
I'm not an expert of the American/Analytic context (far from it), but these guys just make me cringe like a bitch.
Don't get me wrong, Continentals also have their subtier shitty mediatic worthless pieces of fucks (French "New Philosophers", not to quote), but the total lack of reflecitons from the likes of Krauss and Harris about the Occidental culture in the name of "DA SCIENZ", and their pretentiousness (seriously, these guys seek to be science's messiahs) are just baffling.

>> No.6462882

>>6462813
Or we could just, you know...
Discuss real philosophy ? Real literature ?

If you want to discuss why Atheism (what you like) is right, and Religion (what you dislike) isn't, you belong to /pol/.
In the end, one side may be right and the other wrong. Woohoo. Big deal.
That's what I dislike about those guys. They behave like they are at war with the religion, and completely disregards everything that touches it.
That's just a sterile attitude. And, in the domain of thought, sterility is the worse.

>> No.6462909

>>6462882
+1

>> No.6462916

>I don't like him because he's popular with the Reddit crowd

That's basically this entire thread but you guys don't want to admit it.

>> No.6462922

>>6462829
Another guy here, I'm watching this and thinking "Holy fuck an Irish version of Zizek".

>Obscene Jokes
>Cinema references
>Has trouble speaking
>Gesticulates alot

>> No.6462927

>>6462054

>My claim is that there are right and wrong answers to moral questions, just as there are right and wrong answers to questions of physics

hahahhahaha holy shit, science actually makes morons have a word on everything

>> No.6462938

>>6462131
Based but ignored Hume

>> No.6462963

Are we being raided?

>> No.6463032

>>6462922
I enjoy his books. Pop theology that draws on continentals (Kierkegaard/Nietzsche/Derrida as well as Zizek and by extension Hegel and Lacan) as opposed to most pop theology which just rehashes the Platonic Augustine/Aquinas line. Concise and digestible for people unfamiliar with the tradition he's working from.

His speaking gets pretty convoluted and ambiguous. He's better when he's telling stories.

>> No.6463040

>>6462226
Kek except darwin read schopenhauer and was profoundly influenced

>> No.6463276

>>6462829
Jesus christ, I could only make it 3 mins into Krauss' bit...