I think, speaking as an atheist, that would be an awfully boring world to live in.
He was training for BvS around that time if I remember correctly, probably roid rage.
Whatever you think of Harris's views, he's never going to be particularly important when it comes to the question of reforming Islam (which seems to be what you're hoping for). There have been and are plenty of Muslims arguing from within the Islamic scholarly and discursive tradition who are involved in the ongoing process of critique and reform. An outsider like Harris might persuade the odd Muslim that their faith is essentially bollox, but that's the most he can hope for.
Only if you treat religion as something like Santa Claus, a children's story that doesn't cause any harm.
That is true. I wasn't speaking of Harris' influence in the Muslim world nor do I believe he will persuade anyone to leave their religion. But I do see him (and others) as important in the "Western discourse" as criticism of Islam is often shouted down for aforementioned reasons.
Well, it can be more than a children's story without causing harm.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Lazy people will applaud this.
I'm sure this anonymous hipster welcomes the support you are showing his twitter feed.
Ok well you are not adding anything constructive to this thread, so either do so, or else you are outta here.
I’ve already mentioned how he discarded other papers on the same issue which were contrary to what he was proposing on his podcast with Murray. The idea is just dumb af.
Ok fair enough. No worries.
And the scary part to me, is not the theory in itself, but how these ideas go mainstream because of someone like him. It makes it ok for his fans or followers to quote this kind of crap as truth or valid arguments. When in reality they are half truths and lopsided statements.
That's a perfectly fair and valid criticism of Harris, and one where his entire schtick falls a bit flat. He is basically an ethnic Jew, turned uber-Athiest who is attempting to comprehensively debunk religion in general from the outside looking in. I do think he makes some valid points in that we should all be promoting the conditions whereby people of all religions have the ability to critique and improve their own ideas from within, without fear of persecution.
Ideally, I can agree with that. But we live in a post-Trump/brexit world. I think it is equally important to criticise ideas such as these, before it is too late and people start peddling half truths as valid arguments against racial/religious minorities.
True....agree with that.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Is that Peterson ? (his voice I mean).
I know! It's quite an unfortunate voice he has. But, it is.
I'm going to have to investigate Peterson a bit. Keep hearing about him in these debates.
Another of those who Dave Rubin likes to have on his show. Very popular with those concerned about what they see as the negative effects of feminism and trans rights. As far as I can tell he and Sam Harris seem to have a complicated relationship.
I don't know what to make of Rubin either. Can't tell if he's left, slightly right, or just straddling the fence to appear objective.
I think he's clearly 'libertarian'. Low taxes for the rich and let the gays marry, etc... He says a lot of contradictory nonsense, to be honest, but I think the overall theme is clear.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
LOL. I'm sure the bit about Robinson sat oddly with everyone across the pond.
The left left him
This would be nice had you supplemented the pew poll with other polls such as Gallup which have different findings and paint a different picture. This has been done many times but ignored. These things have been offered by many including progressives and those with liberal values and those in the atheism plus movement, when they do they get termed "regressive left".
I don't think the reason that these things are discussed so little is the narrative you described but a fear of some people will make of it simply given out of what they made of it in the past.
I watched half of that. Harris is so incredibly naive it’s torture to hear him speak. You’d think a man who has, undoubtedly, a considerable capacity for rational thought would be more aware of the flaws in his narrative. He still has a few doors to open in his world view before he becomes someone worth spending time listening to.
Harris' kryptonite is actually Brand talking about love and compassion. Thought he was the first person I've seen somewhat dismantle Harris' usual schtick with non-argumentative observations that all of the usual new atheist critics weren't able to.
Could you tell me where that is in the interview, please? Can't be arsed to sit through the whole thing.
Its Brand's general sentiment toward Harris throughout the entire interview. There are also numerous instances where Brand attempts to paint Harris as cynical and angry (check the 1:00:00 mark for one of many times he did it) that really sort of keeps Harris on the moral back foot throughout much of the interview. When he's debating new atheist critic types, Harris can unleash his usual fact based schtick on them. With Brand, he is being forced to account for his own humanity (or possible lack there of) of his ideas, which makes him (Harris) a bit uncomfortable imo.
Very interesting. A lot of Harris' facts are based on statistical research which is in many cases agenda-driven to start with. I do like your assessment of the "tactic" Brand used here, so I'm gonna watch it.
Also, listen to the exchange at 21 minutes in. Very interesting.
That's it. I've heard enough from Harris, he is so out of touch and so uninformed that it's painful to watch. Kudos to Brand though, good stuff from him.
I was surprised by how good an account of himself Russel Brand gave.
