Does anyone know what paper sam harris is talking about at 8:20?
That paper seems to vindicate something that i have long such seen, that is, white guilt is more heavily laden in white-left leaning people than white right-leaning people. As such, white left-leaning people will sometimes act in a way that actively discriminates against other white people.
I *love* how sam harris refutes jonathan at 6:24 when jonathan suggests that the happiest people are right-wing conservatists
there are just so many confounding variables and sam cuts right to it by killing his argument by stating that denmark, an essentially atheistic culture, is rated the happiest
that's what years of education in philosophy can do for you: perfect your reasoning skills so you think rationally and intelligently
@nVei06: Empiricism is dead. The funeral was ages ago. Didn't you get your invitation?
Also, your use of the word random is where you're derailing yourself. You can get past this block in your reasoning by boning up on what truly constitutes randomness. You'll quickly discover that there is NOTHING random about humanity's existence, nor their shared system of ethics commonly referred to as 'morals.'
so who shall dictate the doctrines of morals in the embrace of randomness? we are cold atoms and cells only imagineing any value. the cold desicion of the council of Godlessness is valid. where does sam want to lead his people? to hands of evil overlords who an brazen and zealous in the coldness of their decisions? his crusade to extract the humanity from the human being is naive and vulgar crusade. that is our enemy. the enemy of Jesus is the enemy of man.
@nVei06 Unfortunately I saw this post of yours too and now realize you are driven by what seems to be a defense of Jesus. It's too bad that's kept you so unhappy on this topic. If you really think Sam wants to lead human beings to evil overlords than you're just another catholic whose mind is in the gutter of sin and fear, assuming the worst in all that they see. Excuse me, I've got an appointment with an evil overlord...
he cannot hold the ball. if humanity is a random occurance, you have to say, that all moral substance is random too. of course. what we think is moral is even just a random notion without any real validation. we think it's better to have clothes and eat soy instead of eat our slow moving babies. you have to embrace societies untility, and understand that it is that which makes up ones moral codex.
@nVei06 You said if humanity is a random occurrence than all moral substance is random too. You should stop and realize the non sequitur at the base of your argument.
this guys isn't completely as dense as he seemed before. the sad thing is, we really don't have a new generation of intellectuals. we have a group that was crafted by design and intention, while everyone else was contemplating peace benevolence and the passing of time in leisure. we had a group of unscrupulous people looking to have socialist dogmatic dictatorship. here we see everything slip by. he talks about the progress of man and the value of morals in a synthetic experience.
Sam Harris likes to hear himself speak and Patricia Churchlan another Academic Elitist. Notice their reaction at 5:40-5:60. The commentary deserves no special attention. Agree or disagree. They showed their proprensities to acknowledge their pure rightness with themselves.
I don't ordinarily make such trivial comments, but I get the distinct impression that attractive dark haired woman at the beginning of the video is attracted to Sam.
Very astute observation. I think it might be her unblinking stare, head cocked sideways and fidgeting hands.
She is Nita Farahany, a very beautiful and smart woman who is into quite diverse fields. She looks at how our biology and genetics is related to criminal behaviour.
If you're interested, she also speaks at this conference and I could post it here for discussion.
Sam Harris is at his best when he is defending himself against really intelligent peers and he really has to work for it. This is a great video of him.
It was a relative statement. I mean whatever you think about Haidt, and I agree with you for the most part, he is more intelligent and more of a peer than... say.... his debate against Wolpe!
I think Harris shines when he defends positions against his peers. His talk about the word atheism is a great example where instead of just going up and saying what everyone would agree with... he instead mixed it up a little. Agree with him or not, he shines in these scenarios
in the interest of supposedly free and open and objective debate -- why is Haidt's response cut short at the end of the video?
derwinc 2 weeks ago
Government should not be involved in social policy at all.
KenMacMillan 1 year ago
Does anyone know what paper sam harris is talking about at 8:20?
That paper seems to vindicate something that i have long such seen, that is, white guilt is more heavily laden in white-left leaning people than white right-leaning people. As such, white left-leaning people will sometimes act in a way that actively discriminates against other white people.
dweeper1020 1 year ago
I *love* how sam harris refutes jonathan at 6:24 when jonathan suggests that the happiest people are right-wing conservatists
there are just so many confounding variables and sam cuts right to it by killing his argument by stating that denmark, an essentially atheistic culture, is rated the happiest
that's what years of education in philosophy can do for you: perfect your reasoning skills so you think rationally and intelligently
love sam harris ... too bad he's straight ... ;)
dweeper1020 1 year ago
@nVei06: Empiricism is dead. The funeral was ages ago. Didn't you get your invitation?
Also, your use of the word random is where you're derailing yourself. You can get past this block in your reasoning by boning up on what truly constitutes randomness. You'll quickly discover that there is NOTHING random about humanity's existence, nor their shared system of ethics commonly referred to as 'morals.'
TimothyRiches 1 year ago
so who shall dictate the doctrines of morals in the embrace of randomness? we are cold atoms and cells only imagineing any value. the cold desicion of the council of Godlessness is valid. where does sam want to lead his people? to hands of evil overlords who an brazen and zealous in the coldness of their decisions? his crusade to extract the humanity from the human being is naive and vulgar crusade. that is our enemy. the enemy of Jesus is the enemy of man.
nVei06 2 years ago
@nVei06 Unfortunately I saw this post of yours too and now realize you are driven by what seems to be a defense of Jesus. It's too bad that's kept you so unhappy on this topic. If you really think Sam wants to lead human beings to evil overlords than you're just another catholic whose mind is in the gutter of sin and fear, assuming the worst in all that they see. Excuse me, I've got an appointment with an evil overlord...
jaggerlags 1 year ago
he cannot hold the ball. if humanity is a random occurance, you have to say, that all moral substance is random too. of course. what we think is moral is even just a random notion without any real validation. we think it's better to have clothes and eat soy instead of eat our slow moving babies. you have to embrace societies untility, and understand that it is that which makes up ones moral codex.
nVei06 2 years ago
@nVei06 You said if humanity is a random occurrence than all moral substance is random too. You should stop and realize the non sequitur at the base of your argument.
jaggerlags 1 year ago
this guys isn't completely as dense as he seemed before. the sad thing is, we really don't have a new generation of intellectuals. we have a group that was crafted by design and intention, while everyone else was contemplating peace benevolence and the passing of time in leisure. we had a group of unscrupulous people looking to have socialist dogmatic dictatorship. here we see everything slip by. he talks about the progress of man and the value of morals in a synthetic experience.
nVei06 2 years ago
Sam Harris likes to hear himself speak and Patricia Churchlan another Academic Elitist. Notice their reaction at 5:40-5:60. The commentary deserves no special attention. Agree or disagree. They showed their proprensities to acknowledge their pure rightness with themselves.
servomode 2 years ago
is this an event where "regular" people can walk in or all these all sort of experts?
johnnyvi 2 years ago
Harris wasn't ready for Haidt to actually invoke empirical evidence.
Unnoticed37 2 years ago
everyone always goes after sam in these things hahaha.
Foulacy 2 years ago 3
Maybe they are so happy just because they own guns.
MetaMorphy 3 years ago
Hi dude...
Thanks for uploading...
adwaith2neo 3 years ago
You're welcome.
riversonthemoon 3 years ago
I don't ordinarily make such trivial comments, but I get the distinct impression that attractive dark haired woman at the beginning of the video is attracted to Sam.
polymath7 3 years ago 4
LOL.
Very astute observation. I think it might be her unblinking stare, head cocked sideways and fidgeting hands.
She is Nita Farahany, a very beautiful and smart woman who is into quite diverse fields. She looks at how our biology and genetics is related to criminal behaviour.
If you're interested, she also speaks at this conference and I could post it here for discussion.
riversonthemoon 3 years ago
Please do, I am indeed interested.
I have, as it happens, a marked fondness for smart and beautiful women -more or less in that order.
I'd have replied much sooner, but I've only just discovered your response in returning to this video.
polymath7 3 years ago
No problem. It will be up later tonight. (by which I mean this morning in the States)
Anything for my subscribers.
Well, almost anything.
:)
riversonthemoon 3 years ago
Sam Harris is at his best when he is defending himself against really intelligent peers and he really has to work for it. This is a great video of him.
irishmauddib 3 years ago 2
I wouldn't exactly consider such a feckless invertebrate as Johnathan Haidt Sam Harris' peer.
It seems obvious to me that Sam dismantles him with no discernible mental exertion and comes away entirely unscathed.
polymath7 3 years ago 2
It was a relative statement. I mean whatever you think about Haidt, and I agree with you for the most part, he is more intelligent and more of a peer than... say.... his debate against Wolpe!
I think Harris shines when he defends positions against his peers. His talk about the word atheism is a great example where instead of just going up and saying what everyone would agree with... he instead mixed it up a little. Agree with him or not, he shines in these scenarios
irishmauddib 3 years ago