Sam Harris simply points out that "spiritual experience and guidance" are not entitled to Religion only. Studying meditation does not mean you are a Buddhist, or have any resemblance of eastern-religion faith. There is a significant difference between "training your mind", learning to concentrate for longer periods, use less energy etc, and devoting yourself to a higher intelligence to do your bidding for you!
Sam Harris is talking about the disgusting nature of 'faith' . Prof. Richard Dawkins is about the realisation of what we are, from an evolutionary point. Christher Hitctens spoke about scociety, and the way that society fails people. GIVE IT UP FOR THE INTELLECTUALS.
We MUST impose our atheism in society as a form of a cure for a disease that has lingered for far too long. Be aggressive with your views just like Religion was aggressive to us throughout the years. We've withstand prosecution, torture, and death, it's time to pay back, not with the same coin, but through critical and logical thinking.
@12Ominous lol once you've misread something there's no back pedaling buddy, shitty try at that too. Imposing does not mean killing christians, you can impose a "law" or "authority" to regulate these nut jobs' interference with government and so on. Save yourself some trouble, don't bring shitty logic and bad reading to an argument.
@tehkoalainsurgency Impose: Force (something unwelcome or unfamiliar) to be accepted or put in place:
How to intend to impose something onto someone? You can't make Religion illegal.
Learn how to articulate properly and you won't look like an idiot. Either way by using the word impose you imply the use of force which isn't acceptable.
@12Ominous let me ask you something, does the government use force to impose taxes on people? you have your definitions twisted, and googling the answer that best suits your ridiculous position isn't going to save you. You can't make religion illegal, I never said that, I said to be aggressive with secular views, through critical thinking and logic. You seem to make up stories in your head about what other people are saying that's a logical fallacy. Once you lose that way, it's over.
What an unbelievably juvenile segment this was. I guess this is the problem of concision in television; something either has to be black or white, because there`s simply not enough time to portray the real thing. It`s an interesting thing when you consider that almost everything is grey and practically nothing is black and white.
The first two minutes is a pathetic botched propaganda hit job against Harris. Taking particular 3-second sound bytes out of context and painting him as offensive, aggressive, incendiary, etc. What a bunch of fucking cock-suckers ABC are.
I no longer label myself as an "atheist" as well. It's an empty label. Sam Harris is just being honest and approaching religion, the atheist label,and morality scientifically and logically, which I think is the right way. He's awesome!
I have read Hitchens, and above all Dawkins' book. Great books. But perhaps Sam is right to some degree. Science books tend to go towards Biology understanding rather then a head-on-take towards morality. But that's not strange in Atheism. Since Atheists don't see Morality as "absolutes" . Morality changes over time in so many ways. Sam is right to bring up the debate, because morality must be kept alive in terms of individualism as well as group wise. This video might look at Sam in a wrong way
@ProdigyBigBoss89 His argument, though, is that there ARE absolute moral values, we just don't necessarily know what they are. And maybe there are differing moral values that are equally beneficial, but they are nonetheless objectively better than others. No relativism.
@Nemesis000000 I guess. Funny thing about that. I like Sam, but tend to agree more with Dawkins and others. I agree that Sam's point (taken from your view) has merit. But I see Relativism and Morality as one if one aims to compare in the same consensus. Both are interchangably, some are less changable then others since they each have a "purpose" in the sense of Darwinian Natural Selection Survivalism. It may be more "random" than Sam's view, but to me it fits more with the facts at hand.
I didn't think the interview was so bad. Sam Harris still rocked. And there really are people who have - wrong-headedly I know - critiqued his masterful book. And that's ok to say.
@Nemesis000000 He spins up a fake controversy while praising Harris in a condescending way with sub-text to the religious. What Sam is saying isn't very controversial for most people with some basic understanding of the subject. It's only a minor debate regarding some of the details he suggests. (as he clearly states are only suggestions.)
The reason I think it's dishonest is because I know Harris (the reporter, not Sam) knows more about this subject than what he is presenting.
@fjoo I don't know what you expect from a news report meant to introduce the guy to people. Obviously they only touch on issues. As for spinning up fake controversy, he did nothing of the kind. He presented the controversy that exists.
@Nemesis000000 oh, and lol, "what you expect from a news reporter".. Objective news would be nice. This is neither news nor objective. - You get the news you deserve then I suppose. ;p
Especially this reporter who have been involved in the debate for a while, and has even said he is biased.
@fjoo A news report, not reporter. And, specifically, one meant to introduce a person and a topic to viewers. You are being incredibly silly right now. I am a huge Sam Harris fan and there was not a thing unfair about this. No, it was not a very comprehensive analysis of the issues. So fucking what.
@Nemesis000000 It is a silly discussion, but that's fine.
I don't care if things are superficial, that's also fine. Not everyone cares equally about all things. It's the spinning in "news" that annoys me. Perhaps I only see it because I "know" the reporter, but the tone of this piece is not neutral. He is either trying to spin it to make it as edible as possible to the religious crowd, or at the worst sticking it to SH because of their disagreement.
I am an atheist too, not bothered in the slightest by Sam's statements. i think he is just being open minded. I am very intrigued by his direction for his next book.
@mesafalcon881 Yup. The title of this video should be: "Hi, we totally misrepresent Sam Harris' points of view, reasoning, insights and intellectual discourse in this video. Oh, and also what other people think of him. Enjoy!"
@mesafalcon881 It's called an impartial perspective idiot. The fact that you have 15 thumbs up suggests none of the problems humanity has will ever be eradicated even on the slim chance Religion is completely removed from society. Stupidity is not isolated to the Religious, evidently.
Oh come on, posting a video saying "I like Superman" would fuel a debate on youtube. Next thing you know a bunch of fans would post comments saying that Marvel is better than DC and Batman can kick Superman's ass any day with kryptonite... And thus begins the flame war!
@Stairc I completely disagree. You are assuming that people like to argue just for the sake of arguing! How dare you make such ridiculous......oh hang on.....maybe i should just thumbs up. ;0)
His "ferocious" attacks on religion. Nothing about Sam Harris' rhetoric is ferocious. He calmly and plainly lays out his point. Being critical doesn't mean you're being fierce or cruel.
Terrible, terrible journalism; creating a controversy when in fact there is none and proceed to build from that imaginary controversy a 6 minute piece barely sufficient to compliment a TV dinner. Harris is just an intelligent man who advocates reasoned logic to approach subjective issues that can only be described controversial through the lens of a theocratic or dogmatic ruled society. Think it is news to us in Europe what this man is saying? Puh-lease..
I LOVE SAM HARRIS!!!!!!! He's hot, he's smart, eloquent, gentle and very much respected.....this journalist, Dan Harris- obviously no relationship (because Dan is a douse bag) got it 100% WRONG. Sam Harris is awesome.
Maybe ABC should consider using cartoon characters like Mickey Mouse to interview their more serious guests, such a tactic may give ABC a little more gravity than Dan Harris seems capable of providing.
This is pure sensationalism and "narrative construction" (i.e. fiction). Although many will disagree with Harris on one point or another (I certainly have criticized his obsession with Islam), few have any real vitriol towards him in the atheist community. There's a difference between disagreement and hate, a difference these journalists either don't understand, or are voluntarily ignoring.
@jadagod Actually, Sam makes the point that this is not actually true. It's more than this. It's peak mental experience that can often only be achieved by years of contemplation and meditation, perhaps isolated in a cave.
@jadagod Meh...I suspect that most atheists-- indeed, most people-- know what Harris means by having "spiritual experiences." At least, I like to think so.
this kind of jounalism is the product of the media that only thinks to entertain its dumb, short memory viewers and by doing so totally devaluing intellectual arguments, viewers and guests.
Wow this is horrible journalism. They could've started out by stating the way Sam starts out a speech -- that he apologizes for offending anyone and that he is NOT being deliberately provocative. But, instead, they make it look like that's his goal. Which means they couldn't be more wrong. Nightline, you are terrible.
I really don't understand why Nightline is trying to kick Harris in a corner by saying both sides don't like him.. I'm sure any atheist would be proud of someone actually stepping up to the deluded and trying to make them see reality as it is. Harris is doing an amazing job & I hope I keep seeing him trying to get the truth out to people
Christopher Hitchens is at least as provocative, and doesn't use a secret address or anything like that. So I'm not sure Harris has to, or does, worry about his personal safety more than anyone else.
oh please. he's so right about being called an 'atheist'. i'm not able to swallow the tag 'atheist'... if you like it, use it.
this is crap journalism. as if there is some club of us that call ourselves 'atheists'. and the generalizations he's making about 'scientists' etc... etc... so lame. this is a hack job. selectively picking footage. this is angering. such hack crap!!!
@fuck192ass ok fire marshall bill. Maybe you live somewhere in the world where it is very nice and wet and humid, but for those of us that live somewhere dry, fire only needs one thing, a spark. You do not need a breeze to carry fire (although it helps) or to start one. You sound well educated but you must not have spent much time outdoors, it takes almost NOTHING to start a fire in the wilderness, especially on a dry day.
@fuck192ass He does not dismiss naturalistic fallacy, rather tries to make everyone understand and sometimes is drawn out in his explanation. He knows people are stupid or religion wouldn't be so popular. Also, what was with the metaphor about the man throwing out a cigarette? NONE of those conditions are necessary for a fire, just the cigarette and something to burn (brush/bush/tree/sticks/twigs/leaves). You are using a straw man argument yourself, Mr. holier than thou
@fuck192ass As for me, I refuse to indulge someone who clearly has to much time on their hands and nothing better to do with it than to sit behind a computer, watch videos feat. people he disagrees with, and reply to every person whose ideas don't coincide with his.
@fuck192ass no attacks from authority, etc. He possesses one of the sharpest, most logical minds. You write as though you expect me to solve a riddle. If you want to have a proper intellectual debate with someone, leave behind any vague and vaporous statements such as "His case against religion mistakes one causal factor among many as the sole source of historical violence," and cite clear examples of what the fuck it is exactly that you are saying.
@fuck192ass How exactly is it obvious that my first statement-about your religiosity-is not true. I don't know you, I'm not inside your mind. There is no evidence to suggest to me that you indeed are not religious. It's a good thing that Harris doesn't speak in nuances. He's forthright about what he believes, he's not a politician. Also, if you bother to read The Moral Landscape, you will find that it is anything but 'fallacy-ridden". There are no ad hominem attacks...
@fuck192ass Only someone of deeply held religious faith would think Sam's 'train of thought' illogical. But yes, it is an us v. them situation. Us=rational people, them=irrational people.
No, scientists turned discussions of morality over to philosophers, who apply reason to questions of morality. As for his comments about scientists not focusing on questions like "how to raise children" I'm a bit surprised him saying this because it's called developmental psychology.
it's fairly simple as i see it, all thought is inherently a neurological process, even tapping out this response is the product of synapses firing off as a result of external stimuli, ergo... anything we think, reason, is entirely in the domain of science.
science informs moral decisions, it doesn't dictate them. it tells us what will happen if we do things a certain way. it is then up to us to decide what to do with that information. THAT decision is the moral dilemma - and I use the term "moral" colloquially. It all comes down to desires, motivation, and practicality. There is no actual intrinsic "right" or "wrong".
@bossmonkeykj I agree. Morality is based on the collective understanding and acceptable behaviors of the culture. However, I think the point that Sam tries to convy is that the culture should be based on science and facts. Thus the morality of the culture is based on the culture of truth and science, rather than religion and irrational thinking.
@whitefire1997 Well, to me he seems to take a more aggressive position than that. That morality is directly dictated by science. Check out this debate to see what I'm talking about: h t t p : / / w w w . y o u t u b e .com/watch?v=5ScMJEVoj-s
Lawrence Krauss is in that debate, and he has it right. I forget if it was in that debate but he says mentions two evolutionary moral impulses (self-interest and clan-interest which is also indirectly selfish) that I liked.
@bossmonkeykj Yes I remember this from my psych and soc classes in high school :) Those two impulses are instinctual by human nature. Preservation of self transposes into preservation of tribe as humans instinctually are pack animals. The one thing that never changes in human nature. I still think that, in my opinion, morality would benefit from a reduction of religions influence in the majority and an increase in overall critical and intellectual moral development. I do enjoy the discussions.
stupid journalism. From the intro right through the whole commentary going along with the video report. The ABC folks had already made up their mind and attempting to spoonfeed that to us. No wonder I quit watching such shows. I will let sam speak for himself and judge him based on that not some junior high journalist trying to sell a dummied down BS story. What happend to open mindednes and critical thinking in reporting.
Sam isnt getting the credit he deserves here. In general most people don't see what he is doing. In addition to his widespread public education of atheism, he is showing how atheism can be spiritual, that you don't need religion to be spiritual, and he is showing how science can explain the philosophical questions, better than religion. He has truly made a niche for himself.
@Johnf85 I understand what he's doing, but he's also wrong. science only INFORMS "moral" decisions. I'm forced to look at Sam in a "do the ends justify the means" kind of way.
I read his book, and its well argued . . . but it's critical flaw lies in that morality = maximizing happiness utility. But that is a normative claim . . . and that is where science cannot go. Science describes how the world is, and makes no claims how the world should be. Oddly, he recognizes this argument, but his response leaves a lot to be desired.
@cdog4100 agreed! science only informs "moral" decisions. it cannot be a basis for a morality on its own. Sam is smart - the fact that I'm sure he's run into this argument makes me wonder if he still insists on science = morality dishonestly for practical reasons?
Gosh that almost sounds like godless heathens. Come into the 21 century brethren, abandon primitive beliefs and ways. We are modern homosapians who know more about our universe in the century then in the past 12,000 years put together.
I've never called myself an Atheist or thought of myself as one. I'm just an X catholic who no longer believes in the existence of Jehovah or Yahweh or Allah. They're just primitive god for primitive minds which need them to explain away earth quake or the death of a loved one. Enlightened people think and reason, they don't just believe because their parents believed. Sam Harris is a true free thinker. We don't need labels to differentiate ourselves from the christian hoards.
@LARRYLONGSTRETH This is the 1st time I've ever seen a comment from someone I know on a random youtube video. Its a sign from God! Haha seriously thats pretty cool.
Too true, they make him seem like a pure polemicist who's just out to piss people off.
He speaks with conviction on a controversial topic, but watch him argue and you will see a level-headedness and calmness that comes exclusively with the confidence of knowing that what you are doing is right.
for ..go...i mean for chr... i mean in heav..i mean for fuck sake how can someone just edit and cut the works of the freethinking mind and conjure it to be "vicious attacks on religion". No he is just trying to incite a reasoned debate on the stature of religion in society and why it has a monopoly over the mental being of so many millions of people.
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects.
Therefore, that includes the way you live YOUR life, ATHEISM, CHRISTIANITY, MUSLIM etc
Sam Harris is a hypocrite just like all human beings. We all are. He does the same thing that he hates...CONDEMN others. Exactly what people who hide behind other religions do. People want to be admired, but to be worshiped? Atheism is nothing but another religion. I don't believe people. Preachers are articulate too. So don't be a fool and be a bunch of blind followers. "He's so articulate." Come on. Are you kidding? Believe anything. Think for yourself. Find out for YOURSELF. YOUR LIFE.
Funny how they make Sam Harris sound so incendiary and provocative when he expresses his views calmly and articulately. He is not trying to provoke people to anger, he's just trying to get them to think logically and clearly about some established beliefs.
That's just like people claiming that South Park provokes religious hatred.
Their Muhammed character got the most softball treatment. And the guy who made death threats for them showing the character in now in prison on terrorism related charges.
"Ferocious attacks"??? I would describe his "attacks" as calm, measured, and rational. He strikes me as an incredibly gentle, non-violent person who's simply trying to start a dialogue with people who are addicted to irrational beliefs.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need religion, hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important, qualitative differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption.
Homosexual activists, with complete support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims and martyrs; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
@petrosmedia Not to be inflammatory, but when a religious person tells me to "keep searching for the truth", I can only take offense. The search for truth is what led me (and probably most other Atheists) away from any religion in the first place. Please don't undermine the years I spent tangling with my religion and myself before I finally realized that I didn't have a reason to believe.
@marsjacobvolta So why do you believe there is no God. And don't use science because it is not a scientific question. Knowing how the universe physically works does not explain away a creator.
@petrosmedia I didn't assert that there is no god. You're right about it not being a scientific question. Science employs methodological naturalism in order to estabelish facts about the universe. We can only measure things we can observe. Knowing how the universe works doesn't remove the possibility of a creator, but it doesn't suggest one either. I will believe in whatever it is you call god when you offer proper evidence.
@petrosmedia Yes, and that is my point. You're Catholic for no GOOD reason, but in fairy tales. And yes, there's more to this world than scientific fact. It's filled with myths. That is the problem.
@Comp1337e It looks like you need to learn more about Catholicism. The same Church that helped develop the scientific method, hospital and the university system where you were probably educated. There is more to live than scientific fact.Just stop and look around you. There is more to this world than what you can touch, see, hear, and smell.
@petrosmedia What have I the need to learn more about Catholicism for? It is a waste of time. Seriously, you're going to subscribe to the idea that the Catholics were the origin for the scientific method, and hospitals, and the university system? Let's say all this is true. Just because they can good, does not mean what they believe in is true.
What more is there besides what our five senses gives us? Are you looking for a sixth sense? Do you see dead people? We should base things on fact.
@Comp1337e What part of it is a waste of time? Either Jesus was a crazy man or He is God in the flesh. Tell me, how does knowing how the universe works say there is no God. And do you know what the church actually teaches about our universe? I would study a little more history before you say it is a waste of time. What about the study of human behavior like selfless love and morality? This human phenomenon can not studied using the scientific method. But this does not mean they don't exist.
@petrosmedia The part where I would waste my time learning about your religion, Catholicism. Yet ANOTHER RELIGION where, week after week, through repetition, faith keeps on being drilled into my brain, believing in things for which there is no evidence; that is the definition of faith (Heb.11:1). I've been to your churches many times; same ol', same ol'. - Your church teaches, God didit. Haha - Certainly altruism can be studied through the scientific method. Study a little more about science.
"Either Jesus was a crazy man or He is God in the flesh." You ignore another obvious option: legendary embellishment. Read the New Testament books in the order in which they were written, and you'll find that the claims made about Jesus become more and more fantastic over time (this is particularly true in terms of the synoptic gospels).
Remember, Jesus himself wrote nothing, and the accounts of his life were written anonymously, in another language, several decades after he died.
FYI, emotions and morality have been studied scientifically for quite a while, and our growing understanding of the human brain is providing amazing insights in our feelings and our moral evolution.
I see nothing in our behavior which would suggest we are "robots" (biological or otherwise), and your use of the word "just" seems to tip your hand. Do you find something inadequate about being a physical organism?
My ONLY point is that you can study morality and emotions without referring to something "outside" the natural world. Draw whatever metaphysical conclusions you must.
The commentator also completely misrepresented that speech he gave at the Atheist Alliance convention that was '07 I believe. Look it up on youtube and you will see what was actually said by Sam and by the audience members who commented.
WOW...the clip from the daily show was COMPLETELY TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT. Fire your editor, this is sloppy and unacceptable nightline, you should be fucking ashamed.
Sam is one of the most reasonable and patient human beings on the planet, vicious attack you say? What delusion are you living in nightline?
This was a complete smear of one of the most polite and objectively truthful proponents of atheism in the world. You're pathetic nightline. You're everything that's wrong with the media today, Shock jock sensationalism.
American Television should go hide under a burning building. Who buys this stuff? It's obviously not a non-partial one. The commentator should be ashamed of his job
You are related to Sam you moron, we are all apes from africa, and just another species of animals on this little planet. You should be honored to be related to him "Dan".
Sam Harris simply points out that "spiritual experience and guidance" are not entitled to Religion only. Studying meditation does not mean you are a Buddhist, or have any resemblance of eastern-religion faith. There is a significant difference between "training your mind", learning to concentrate for longer periods, use less energy etc, and devoting yourself to a higher intelligence to do your bidding for you!
PokkiTube 3 days ago
Sam Harris is talking about the disgusting nature of 'faith' . Prof. Richard Dawkins is about the realisation of what we are, from an evolutionary point. Christher Hitctens spoke about scociety, and the way that society fails people. GIVE IT UP FOR THE INTELLECTUALS.
101truthhurts 5 days ago
We MUST impose our atheism in society as a form of a cure for a disease that has lingered for far too long. Be aggressive with your views just like Religion was aggressive to us throughout the years. We've withstand prosecution, torture, and death, it's time to pay back, not with the same coin, but through critical and logical thinking.
tehkoalainsurgency 1 week ago
@tehkoalainsurgency Ok, you start killing the Christians, just don't kill my mother please, I'll start on the Muslims. *Rolls eyes. Idiot.
12Ominous 3 days ago
@12Ominous nobody said anything about killing Christians, so who's the idiot; the one who can't read apparently.
tehkoalainsurgency 3 days ago
@tehkoalainsurgency "We must impose our atheism in society as a form of a cure for a disease."
1) Do you know what impose means? 2) Do you know who you sound like? Not Hitler.
12Ominous 3 days ago
@12Ominous lol once you've misread something there's no back pedaling buddy, shitty try at that too. Imposing does not mean killing christians, you can impose a "law" or "authority" to regulate these nut jobs' interference with government and so on. Save yourself some trouble, don't bring shitty logic and bad reading to an argument.
tehkoalainsurgency 3 days ago
@tehkoalainsurgency Impose: Force (something unwelcome or unfamiliar) to be accepted or put in place:
How to intend to impose something onto someone? You can't make Religion illegal.
Learn how to articulate properly and you won't look like an idiot. Either way by using the word impose you imply the use of force which isn't acceptable.
12Ominous 3 days ago
@12Ominous let me ask you something, does the government use force to impose taxes on people? you have your definitions twisted, and googling the answer that best suits your ridiculous position isn't going to save you. You can't make religion illegal, I never said that, I said to be aggressive with secular views, through critical thinking and logic. You seem to make up stories in your head about what other people are saying that's a logical fallacy. Once you lose that way, it's over.
tehkoalainsurgency 3 days ago
harris talks sense , religion talks bollox
omifical124 1 week ago
This was terrible!
7777777joseh 1 week ago
What a shit, twisted piece of television about an intelligent man.
matprithellodave 1 week ago
What an unbelievably juvenile segment this was. I guess this is the problem of concision in television; something either has to be black or white, because there`s simply not enough time to portray the real thing. It`s an interesting thing when you consider that almost everything is grey and practically nothing is black and white.
EatCarlSagan 2 weeks ago
Sam Harris for President!
"Write-in" campaign - I've certainly heard worse ideas.
steveb0503 2 weeks ago
he's VERY wrong about taking anything religious people have to say seriously. not sure where his logic is on that one.
Alexanderisgreat 2 weeks ago
There are idiot atheists too. What else is new?
TheJo4an 2 weeks ago in playlist Fler videoklipp från AtheistMediaBlog
That report was absolute bullshit propaganda. I gave it a like for Sam, but the overall report was incredibly false and deceptive.
Ryakki 2 weeks ago
Go Sam! This is how the world must proceed if it's to improve. He is pushing at the door of history.
greggb777 2 weeks ago
Put in a Like because of Sam, not because of Dan. Surely Sam deserves more than such a spiteful reportage.
andreasdrg 2 weeks ago
The first two minutes is a pathetic botched propaganda hit job against Harris. Taking particular 3-second sound bytes out of context and painting him as offensive, aggressive, incendiary, etc. What a bunch of fucking cock-suckers ABC are.
huwrj 2 weeks ago 6
Comment removed
huwrj 2 weeks ago
Leave it to mainstream media to take things way out of context. I can't beleive this isn't The O'Reilly Factor.
They make it sound like meditation is in any way comparable to religiosity. Which it's not.
They make it sound like Sam Harris lives his day to day life in fear with all of his bodyguards. Which he doesn't.
And they make it sound way more militant than he is. If you want to listen to a listen to a militant atheist, google "Christopher Hitchens" (R.I.P).
ShmeeSLG 2 weeks ago
We have yet to see any fanatical atheists issue any fatwas on Sam Harris over his apostacy. Take a lesson, theists.
bnrshdydvdrtrk 2 weeks ago
This interview was annoyingly short and we didn't hear nearly enough from Sam, and heard way too much from the reporter.
dlbattle100 2 weeks ago
Harris is the man!!
sled1950 2 weeks ago
LOL @ a pope performing a magical ritual while the ugly voice speaks about morality
TheAbyrwalg 3 weeks ago
I consider myself a
Post-Theist
ramatirthadasa 3 weeks ago
I no longer label myself as an "atheist" as well. It's an empty label. Sam Harris is just being honest and approaching religion, the atheist label,and morality scientifically and logically, which I think is the right way. He's awesome!
CoreyfromEarth 3 weeks ago
@CoreyfromEarth IMO Sam Harris just wants your money and wants to save face for his false comments in his other book.
tubebooboob 3 weeks ago
@CoreyfromEarth Mixed in with my previous comment, I will give him some benefit of the doubt and say that he also wants to promote his ideas too.
tubebooboob 3 weeks ago
@tubebooboob LOL whatever you say pal.
CoreyfromEarth 3 weeks ago
I have read Hitchens, and above all Dawkins' book. Great books. But perhaps Sam is right to some degree. Science books tend to go towards Biology understanding rather then a head-on-take towards morality. But that's not strange in Atheism. Since Atheists don't see Morality as "absolutes" . Morality changes over time in so many ways. Sam is right to bring up the debate, because morality must be kept alive in terms of individualism as well as group wise. This video might look at Sam in a wrong way
ProdigyBigBoss89 1 month ago
@ProdigyBigBoss89 His argument, though, is that there ARE absolute moral values, we just don't necessarily know what they are. And maybe there are differing moral values that are equally beneficial, but they are nonetheless objectively better than others. No relativism.
Nemesis000000 3 weeks ago
@Nemesis000000 I guess. Funny thing about that. I like Sam, but tend to agree more with Dawkins and others. I agree that Sam's point (taken from your view) has merit. But I see Relativism and Morality as one if one aims to compare in the same consensus. Both are interchangably, some are less changable then others since they each have a "purpose" in the sense of Darwinian Natural Selection Survivalism. It may be more "random" than Sam's view, but to me it fits more with the facts at hand.
ProdigyBigBoss89 3 weeks ago
Sam Harris is a man of men. A true intellectual hero.
Secularologist 1 month ago
I didn't think the interview was so bad. Sam Harris still rocked. And there really are people who have - wrong-headedly I know - critiqued his masterful book. And that's ok to say.
blairdavidkelly 1 month ago
this isn't just bad reporting, it's at the worst dishonest or at the best cowardly.
fjoo 1 month ago
@fjoo Huh? I thought it was really good. What's your complaint?
Nemesis000000 3 weeks ago
@Nemesis000000 He spins up a fake controversy while praising Harris in a condescending way with sub-text to the religious. What Sam is saying isn't very controversial for most people with some basic understanding of the subject. It's only a minor debate regarding some of the details he suggests. (as he clearly states are only suggestions.)
The reason I think it's dishonest is because I know Harris (the reporter, not Sam) knows more about this subject than what he is presenting.
fjoo 3 weeks ago
@fjoo I don't know what you expect from a news report meant to introduce the guy to people. Obviously they only touch on issues. As for spinning up fake controversy, he did nothing of the kind. He presented the controversy that exists.
Nemesis000000 3 weeks ago
@Nemesis000000 Say you...
fjoo 3 weeks ago
@Nemesis000000 oh, and lol, "what you expect from a news reporter".. Objective news would be nice. This is neither news nor objective. - You get the news you deserve then I suppose. ;p
Especially this reporter who have been involved in the debate for a while, and has even said he is biased.
fjoo 3 weeks ago
@fjoo A news report, not reporter. And, specifically, one meant to introduce a person and a topic to viewers. You are being incredibly silly right now. I am a huge Sam Harris fan and there was not a thing unfair about this. No, it was not a very comprehensive analysis of the issues. So fucking what.
Nemesis000000 3 weeks ago
@Nemesis000000 It is a silly discussion, but that's fine.
I don't care if things are superficial, that's also fine. Not everyone cares equally about all things. It's the spinning in "news" that annoys me. Perhaps I only see it because I "know" the reporter, but the tone of this piece is not neutral. He is either trying to spin it to make it as edible as possible to the religious crowd, or at the worst sticking it to SH because of their disagreement.
fjoo 3 weeks ago
@Nemesis000000 (just for the record,, on a scale 1-10 this only gets a 3.5 in spinning, but the point remains.)
fjoo 3 weeks ago
I couldn't agree with Harris more. Hitchens would have agreed, too. We can't be too absolute.
pearljamrock 1 month ago
What a fucking terrible journo!..but WOO Sam!
WretchedRecords 1 month ago
Do I thumbs up for Sam Harris or thumbs down for the stupid interviewer? Mhmmmm.
Triipticz 1 month ago 3
Sam Harris is my hero.
zellfalcon31 1 month ago
I am an atheist too, not bothered in the slightest by Sam's statements. i think he is just being open minded. I am very intrigued by his direction for his next book.
6thMessenger 1 month ago
I'm an atheist and Sam Harris does not anger me. Fuck you Nightline commentator.
LambdaQuarks 1 month ago
This is American journalism for you. Make the smartest seem stupid. This is why I don't live in America. Just can't take shit like this anymore.
mesafalcon881 1 month ago 17
@mesafalcon881 Yup. The title of this video should be: "Hi, we totally misrepresent Sam Harris' points of view, reasoning, insights and intellectual discourse in this video. Oh, and also what other people think of him. Enjoy!"
KryzMasta 3 weeks ago
@mesafalcon881 It's called an impartial perspective idiot. The fact that you have 15 thumbs up suggests none of the problems humanity has will ever be eradicated even on the slim chance Religion is completely removed from society. Stupidity is not isolated to the Religious, evidently.
12Ominous 3 days ago
The journalist thinks that everybody that disagrees with Sam is angry... Just too silly...
nogodforjoy 1 month ago
BAAAAAAD journalism.
pcgamer010 1 month ago
"... Which have fueled angry debates on youtube."
Oh come on, posting a video saying "I like Superman" would fuel a debate on youtube. Next thing you know a bunch of fans would post comments saying that Marvel is better than DC and Batman can kick Superman's ass any day with kryptonite... And thus begins the flame war!
Do you agree? If so, thumbs up so people can see.
Stairc 1 month ago 3
@Stairc I completely disagree. You are assuming that people like to argue just for the sake of arguing! How dare you make such ridiculous......oh hang on.....maybe i should just thumbs up. ;0)
uknowispeaksense 1 month ago
@uknowispeaksense *laughs* Nice.
Stairc 1 month ago
His "ferocious" attacks on religion. Nothing about Sam Harris' rhetoric is ferocious. He calmly and plainly lays out his point. Being critical doesn't mean you're being fierce or cruel.
logsdonj 1 month ago
interviewer looks retarded
MrMilagroqq 1 month ago
Hmm... people seem mad here, but I think Sam came off just fine despite of the slightly sensational nature of the piece.
dan46and2 1 month ago
Terrible, terrible journalism; creating a controversy when in fact there is none and proceed to build from that imaginary controversy a 6 minute piece barely sufficient to compliment a TV dinner. Harris is just an intelligent man who advocates reasoned logic to approach subjective issues that can only be described controversial through the lens of a theocratic or dogmatic ruled society. Think it is news to us in Europe what this man is saying? Puh-lease..
namnack 1 month ago 3
I LOVE SAM HARRIS!!!!!!! He's hot, he's smart, eloquent, gentle and very much respected.....this journalist, Dan Harris- obviously no relationship (because Dan is a douse bag) got it 100% WRONG. Sam Harris is awesome.
tulipsontheorgan 1 month ago 3
Wow. That was terribly biased and dishonest
phillyC100 1 month ago
Maybe ABC should consider using cartoon characters like Mickey Mouse to interview their more serious guests, such a tactic may give ABC a little more gravity than Dan Harris seems capable of providing.
gsenski 1 month ago
This is pure sensationalism and "narrative construction" (i.e. fiction). Although many will disagree with Harris on one point or another (I certainly have criticized his obsession with Islam), few have any real vitriol towards him in the atheist community. There's a difference between disagreement and hate, a difference these journalists either don't understand, or are voluntarily ignoring.
jjgdenisrobert 1 month ago
Clip at 3:00 - Taken completely out of context. Utterly worthless, garbage journalism.
davethehostage 1 month ago 4
every atheist knows what Sam mean by spiritual experience when they listen to Carl Sagan, no god necessary.
jadagod 2 months ago 46
@jadagod Actually, Sam makes the point that this is not actually true. It's more than this. It's peak mental experience that can often only be achieved by years of contemplation and meditation, perhaps isolated in a cave.
Nemesis000000 3 weeks ago
@jadagod Meh...I suspect that most atheists-- indeed, most people-- know what Harris means by having "spiritual experiences." At least, I like to think so.
writersblock26 2 weeks ago
@jadagod Amen.
dannytibi 20 hours ago
Jesus christ what slanted journalism. Oh my god.
FoldedTapestry 2 months ago
this kind of jounalism is the product of the media that only thinks to entertain its dumb, short memory viewers and by doing so totally devaluing intellectual arguments, viewers and guests.
bebzelle 2 months ago
Wow this is horrible journalism. They could've started out by stating the way Sam starts out a speech -- that he apologizes for offending anyone and that he is NOT being deliberately provocative. But, instead, they make it look like that's his goal. Which means they couldn't be more wrong. Nightline, you are terrible.
JDoucette 2 months ago 2
I really don't understand why Nightline is trying to kick Harris in a corner by saying both sides don't like him.. I'm sure any atheist would be proud of someone actually stepping up to the deluded and trying to make them see reality as it is. Harris is doing an amazing job & I hope I keep seeing him trying to get the truth out to people
chchcheckittt 2 months ago
"No realations to Sam, btw!!!"
kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
alanhf 2 months ago
"What is moral, what is not, and who has the authority to say which is which?"
(Questions you will never hear properly debated in Congress)
rmcdaniel423 2 months ago
Christopher Hitchens is at least as provocative, and doesn't use a secret address or anything like that. So I'm not sure Harris has to, or does, worry about his personal safety more than anyone else.
charlesvan13 2 months ago
This is suuuuch a bad journalism haha.
BobMcCob 2 months ago
oh please. he's so right about being called an 'atheist'. i'm not able to swallow the tag 'atheist'... if you like it, use it.
this is crap journalism. as if there is some club of us that call ourselves 'atheists'. and the generalizations he's making about 'scientists' etc... etc... so lame. this is a hack job. selectively picking footage. this is angering. such hack crap!!!
Liteboyiam 2 months ago
@fuck192ass ok fire marshall bill. Maybe you live somewhere in the world where it is very nice and wet and humid, but for those of us that live somewhere dry, fire only needs one thing, a spark. You do not need a breeze to carry fire (although it helps) or to start one. You sound well educated but you must not have spent much time outdoors, it takes almost NOTHING to start a fire in the wilderness, especially on a dry day.
TheHansome21 2 months ago
@fuck192ass He does not dismiss naturalistic fallacy, rather tries to make everyone understand and sometimes is drawn out in his explanation. He knows people are stupid or religion wouldn't be so popular. Also, what was with the metaphor about the man throwing out a cigarette? NONE of those conditions are necessary for a fire, just the cigarette and something to burn (brush/bush/tree/sticks/twigs/leaves). You are using a straw man argument yourself, Mr. holier than thou
TheHansome21 2 months ago
fail journalism
ebowebo 2 months ago
@fuck192ass
So you disagree for the sake of disagreeing?
Its because of people like you we're not progressing as a species.
Always these whiny clowns nitpicking and making irrelevant statements
sonykroket 2 months ago
@fuck192ass As for me, I refuse to indulge someone who clearly has to much time on their hands and nothing better to do with it than to sit behind a computer, watch videos feat. people he disagrees with, and reply to every person whose ideas don't coincide with his.
livingdeadgrl18 2 months ago
@fuck192ass no attacks from authority, etc. He possesses one of the sharpest, most logical minds. You write as though you expect me to solve a riddle. If you want to have a proper intellectual debate with someone, leave behind any vague and vaporous statements such as "His case against religion mistakes one causal factor among many as the sole source of historical violence," and cite clear examples of what the fuck it is exactly that you are saying.
livingdeadgrl18 2 months ago
@fuck192ass How exactly is it obvious that my first statement-about your religiosity-is not true. I don't know you, I'm not inside your mind. There is no evidence to suggest to me that you indeed are not religious. It's a good thing that Harris doesn't speak in nuances. He's forthright about what he believes, he's not a politician. Also, if you bother to read The Moral Landscape, you will find that it is anything but 'fallacy-ridden". There are no ad hominem attacks...
livingdeadgrl18 2 months ago
@fuck192ass okay
LARRYLONGSTRETH 2 months ago
@fuck192ass Only someone of deeply held religious faith would think Sam's 'train of thought' illogical. But yes, it is an us v. them situation. Us=rational people, them=irrational people.
livingdeadgrl18 2 months ago
@fuck192ass Let me guess...you're religious?
livingdeadgrl18 2 months ago
No, scientists turned discussions of morality over to philosophers, who apply reason to questions of morality. As for his comments about scientists not focusing on questions like "how to raise children" I'm a bit surprised him saying this because it's called developmental psychology.
JovialJewels 3 months ago
Gee, there wasn't any spin on that segment at all.
ChipArgyle 3 months ago 3
it's fairly simple as i see it, all thought is inherently a neurological process, even tapping out this response is the product of synapses firing off as a result of external stimuli, ergo... anything we think, reason, is entirely in the domain of science.
moshun 3 months ago
science informs moral decisions, it doesn't dictate them. it tells us what will happen if we do things a certain way. it is then up to us to decide what to do with that information. THAT decision is the moral dilemma - and I use the term "moral" colloquially. It all comes down to desires, motivation, and practicality. There is no actual intrinsic "right" or "wrong".
bossmonkeykj 3 months ago
@bossmonkeykj I agree. Morality is based on the collective understanding and acceptable behaviors of the culture. However, I think the point that Sam tries to convy is that the culture should be based on science and facts. Thus the morality of the culture is based on the culture of truth and science, rather than religion and irrational thinking.
whitefire1997 3 months ago
@whitefire1997 Well, to me he seems to take a more aggressive position than that. That morality is directly dictated by science. Check out this debate to see what I'm talking about: h t t p : / / w w w . y o u t u b e .com/watch?v=5ScMJEVoj-s
Lawrence Krauss is in that debate, and he has it right. I forget if it was in that debate but he says mentions two evolutionary moral impulses (self-interest and clan-interest which is also indirectly selfish) that I liked.
bossmonkeykj 3 months ago
@bossmonkeykj Yes I remember this from my psych and soc classes in high school :) Those two impulses are instinctual by human nature. Preservation of self transposes into preservation of tribe as humans instinctually are pack animals. The one thing that never changes in human nature. I still think that, in my opinion, morality would benefit from a reduction of religions influence in the majority and an increase in overall critical and intellectual moral development. I do enjoy the discussions.
whitefire1997 3 months ago
What I don't get is that since when doesn't science tell us about raising kids? What about developmental psychology and other fields like it?
zeldaofarel 3 months ago in playlist More videos from AtheistMediaBlog
stupid journalism. From the intro right through the whole commentary going along with the video report. The ABC folks had already made up their mind and attempting to spoonfeed that to us. No wonder I quit watching such shows. I will let sam speak for himself and judge him based on that not some junior high journalist trying to sell a dummied down BS story. What happend to open mindednes and critical thinking in reporting.
ofosusam 3 months ago
Sam isnt getting the credit he deserves here. In general most people don't see what he is doing. In addition to his widespread public education of atheism, he is showing how atheism can be spiritual, that you don't need religion to be spiritual, and he is showing how science can explain the philosophical questions, better than religion. He has truly made a niche for himself.
Johnf85 3 months ago
@Johnf85 I understand what he's doing, but he's also wrong. science only INFORMS "moral" decisions. I'm forced to look at Sam in a "do the ends justify the means" kind of way.
bossmonkeykj 3 months ago
@Johnf85 yeah religion is anything but spiritual... its big business and the most powerful political lobby group...
JamesIsViolet 3 months ago
I don't think Sam Harris has any desire to anger anybody. The journalists asks loaded questions.
kaduisaui 3 months ago
Comment removed
CameSawConquered47 3 months ago
I read his book, and its well argued . . . but it's critical flaw lies in that morality = maximizing happiness utility. But that is a normative claim . . . and that is where science cannot go. Science describes how the world is, and makes no claims how the world should be. Oddly, he recognizes this argument, but his response leaves a lot to be desired.
cdog4100 3 months ago
@cdog4100 agreed! science only informs "moral" decisions. it cannot be a basis for a morality on its own. Sam is smart - the fact that I'm sure he's run into this argument makes me wonder if he still insists on science = morality dishonestly for practical reasons?
bossmonkeykj 3 months ago
Oh they can entangle all they want as long as I don't get caught in their entanglement.
TheDano1947 3 months ago
Gosh that almost sounds like godless heathens. Come into the 21 century brethren, abandon primitive beliefs and ways. We are modern homosapians who know more about our universe in the century then in the past 12,000 years put together.
TheDano1947 3 months ago
I've never called myself an Atheist or thought of myself as one. I'm just an X catholic who no longer believes in the existence of Jehovah or Yahweh or Allah. They're just primitive god for primitive minds which need them to explain away earth quake or the death of a loved one. Enlightened people think and reason, they don't just believe because their parents believed. Sam Harris is a true free thinker. We don't need labels to differentiate ourselves from the christian hoards.
TheDano1947 3 months ago
If not the scientific method, then what?
biggregg5 4 months ago
@biggregg5 you're right! this is the definition of biased journalism.
tiberiius 4 months ago
This is terrible journalism. People often applaud Sam's remarks, and it's beyond dishonest to say that atheists are mad at him. Spin-aroonie!
LARRYLONGSTRETH 4 months ago 67
@LARRYLONGSTRETH This is the 1st time I've ever seen a comment from someone I know on a random youtube video. Its a sign from God! Haha seriously thats pretty cool.
Clintdarkstone 1 month ago
@LARRYLONGSTRETH
Too true, they make him seem like a pure polemicist who's just out to piss people off.
He speaks with conviction on a controversial topic, but watch him argue and you will see a level-headedness and calmness that comes exclusively with the confidence of knowing that what you are doing is right.
hastyvictories 4 weeks ago 2
He Wants to stand out, this is his way of doing it
HipHopcheerleader 4 months ago
JESUS Nightline stop quotemining and cherrypicking!!!!!!
IncognitoObserver 4 months ago 2
Carl Sagan believe this way too. Science should be answering those questions.
tenorhighc1 4 months ago
for ..go...i mean for chr... i mean in heav..i mean for fuck sake how can someone just edit and cut the works of the freethinking mind and conjure it to be "vicious attacks on religion". No he is just trying to incite a reasoned debate on the stature of religion in society and why it has a monopoly over the mental being of so many millions of people.
MrLukeroberts91 4 months ago
RELIGION: (noun)
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects.
Therefore, that includes the way you live YOUR life, ATHEISM, CHRISTIANITY, MUSLIM etc
mindyourbiztv 4 months ago
@mindyourbiztv Atheism isn't a set of beliefs, it is one belief, nothing more.
Atheists do not automatically belong to a organisation,It just says that you don't believe in god nothing more.
fruiteo 4 months ago
@fruiteo Atheism isn't a set of beliefs. It's a lack of belief. Simple as that.
ParadigmShift22 4 months ago
@ParadigmShift22 my mistake,thanks for your correction.
fruiteo 4 months ago
@mindyourbiztv An Atheist doesn't believe in a god or gods. That isn't a set of beliefs, it's disbelief in something people take on faith.
DarkEmergence 4 months ago
Sam Harris is a hypocrite just like all human beings. We all are. He does the same thing that he hates...CONDEMN others. Exactly what people who hide behind other religions do. People want to be admired, but to be worshiped? Atheism is nothing but another religion. I don't believe people. Preachers are articulate too. So don't be a fool and be a bunch of blind followers. "He's so articulate." Come on. Are you kidding? Believe anything. Think for yourself. Find out for YOURSELF. YOUR LIFE.
mindyourbiztv 4 months ago
"He's been forced to live with his family in a undisclosed location" - sounds like most people
craigpsimpson 4 months ago
sam is the man.
amindbody 4 months ago
ARTICULATION and intelligent oratory skills don't equate to correctness or truth.
In other words, just because he sounds smart, doesn't make him right folks.
navyman4 4 months ago
nightline is stupid
TheManpreet84 4 months ago
this is a really awful interview, and it completely misrepresents the mainstream atheist opinion
tuck5649 4 months ago
Funny how they make Sam Harris sound so incendiary and provocative when he expresses his views calmly and articulately. He is not trying to provoke people to anger, he's just trying to get them to think logically and clearly about some established beliefs.
livingdeadgrl18 4 months ago 79
@livingdeadgrl18
That's just like people claiming that South Park provokes religious hatred.
Their Muhammed character got the most softball treatment. And the guy who made death threats for them showing the character in now in prison on terrorism related charges.
charlesvan13 2 months ago
"Ferocious attacks"??? I would describe his "attacks" as calm, measured, and rational. He strikes me as an incredibly gentle, non-violent person who's simply trying to start a dialogue with people who are addicted to irrational beliefs.
Chrisdvc26 4 months ago
I love Sam Harris. Too bad United States doesn't appreciate people with fucking brains.
SpearofDestiny0 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need religion, hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important, qualitative differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption.
Homosexual activists, with complete support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims and martyrs; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
americans are fucking idiots...
Darusdei 5 months ago
That is one sexy atheist.
lkm5002 5 months ago
I am Catholic because of reason. Keep searching for truth :)
petrosmedia 5 months ago
@petrosmedia dumbass..
McGregoryO 5 months ago
@petrosmedia Not to be inflammatory, but when a religious person tells me to "keep searching for the truth", I can only take offense. The search for truth is what led me (and probably most other Atheists) away from any religion in the first place. Please don't undermine the years I spent tangling with my religion and myself before I finally realized that I didn't have a reason to believe.
marsjacobvolta 5 months ago
@marsjacobvolta So why do you believe there is no God. And don't use science because it is not a scientific question. Knowing how the universe physically works does not explain away a creator.
petrosmedia 5 months ago
@petrosmedia I didn't assert that there is no god. You're right about it not being a scientific question. Science employs methodological naturalism in order to estabelish facts about the universe. We can only measure things we can observe. Knowing how the universe works doesn't remove the possibility of a creator, but it doesn't suggest one either. I will believe in whatever it is you call god when you offer proper evidence.
marsjacobvolta 5 months ago
@petrosmedia You're a Catholic because of BAD reason. Keep searching for scientific truth. :)
Comp1337e 5 months ago
@Comp1337e Being Catholic has nothing to do with scientific reasons. There is more to this world than scientific facts.
petrosmedia 5 months ago
@petrosmedia Yes, and that is my point. You're Catholic for no GOOD reason, but in fairy tales. And yes, there's more to this world than scientific fact. It's filled with myths. That is the problem.
Comp1337e 5 months ago
@Comp1337e It looks like you need to learn more about Catholicism. The same Church that helped develop the scientific method, hospital and the university system where you were probably educated. There is more to live than scientific fact.Just stop and look around you. There is more to this world than what you can touch, see, hear, and smell.
petrosmedia 5 months ago
@petrosmedia What have I the need to learn more about Catholicism for? It is a waste of time. Seriously, you're going to subscribe to the idea that the Catholics were the origin for the scientific method, and hospitals, and the university system? Let's say all this is true. Just because they can good, does not mean what they believe in is true.
What more is there besides what our five senses gives us? Are you looking for a sixth sense? Do you see dead people? We should base things on fact.
Comp1337e 5 months ago
@Comp1337e What part of it is a waste of time? Either Jesus was a crazy man or He is God in the flesh. Tell me, how does knowing how the universe works say there is no God. And do you know what the church actually teaches about our universe? I would study a little more history before you say it is a waste of time. What about the study of human behavior like selfless love and morality? This human phenomenon can not studied using the scientific method. But this does not mean they don't exist.
petrosmedia 5 months ago
@petrosmedia The part where I would waste my time learning about your religion, Catholicism. Yet ANOTHER RELIGION where, week after week, through repetition, faith keeps on being drilled into my brain, believing in things for which there is no evidence; that is the definition of faith (Heb.11:1). I've been to your churches many times; same ol', same ol'. - Your church teaches, God didit. Haha - Certainly altruism can be studied through the scientific method. Study a little more about science.
Comp1337e 5 months ago
@petrosmedia
"Either Jesus was a crazy man or He is God in the flesh." You ignore another obvious option: legendary embellishment. Read the New Testament books in the order in which they were written, and you'll find that the claims made about Jesus become more and more fantastic over time (this is particularly true in terms of the synoptic gospels).
Remember, Jesus himself wrote nothing, and the accounts of his life were written anonymously, in another language, several decades after he died.
ClumsyRoot 5 months ago
FYI, emotions and morality have been studied scientifically for quite a while, and our growing understanding of the human brain is providing amazing insights in our feelings and our moral evolution.
ClumsyRoot 5 months ago
@ClumsyRoot So we are just complex, biological robots?
petrosmedia 5 months ago
@petrosmedia
I see nothing in our behavior which would suggest we are "robots" (biological or otherwise), and your use of the word "just" seems to tip your hand. Do you find something inadequate about being a physical organism?
My ONLY point is that you can study morality and emotions without referring to something "outside" the natural world. Draw whatever metaphysical conclusions you must.
ClumsyRoot 5 months ago
That's because science can't answer those questions. That's not what science does!
Dayoldsushy 5 months ago
Nightline... officially garbag now.
Callirgos1 5 months ago
The commentator also completely misrepresented that speech he gave at the Atheist Alliance convention that was '07 I believe. Look it up on youtube and you will see what was actually said by Sam and by the audience members who commented.
ZachRose88 5 months ago
This interviewer and the mediatribe he belongs to are bigotted idiots
sonykroket 5 months ago
Harris=endboss BTW
sonykroket 5 months ago
Who do you have to defend yourself all the time when you say you don't believe in fairytales?
And be attacked by people who claim to be offended because you don't agree with their skydaddy of choice.
Fuck all these reli-dipshits, remember Galileo
sonykroket 5 months ago
"Scientists have been tearing his book apart" - The Internet
TimBangsies 5 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
i take my moral science and atheism with less bigotry and hubris. and less milk in my coffee.
waterspindle 5 months ago
WOW...the clip from the daily show was COMPLETELY TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT. Fire your editor, this is sloppy and unacceptable nightline, you should be fucking ashamed.
drpeppa2357 6 months ago
Sam is one of the most reasonable and patient human beings on the planet, vicious attack you say? What delusion are you living in nightline?
This was a complete smear of one of the most polite and objectively truthful proponents of atheism in the world. You're pathetic nightline. You're everything that's wrong with the media today, Shock jock sensationalism.
drpeppa2357 6 months ago 4
American Television should go hide under a burning building. Who buys this stuff? It's obviously not a non-partial one. The commentator should be ashamed of his job
MrPlatonist 6 months ago
lol @ "ferocious attacks"
he is one of the LEAST passionate people with his demeanor.
AssistingHealth 6 months ago
Yes Sam is correct, atheism is a religious term and should not be used by the non religious
Evolvedprimate 6 months ago
You are related to Sam you moron, we are all apes from africa, and just another species of animals on this little planet. You should be honored to be related to him "Dan".
brendakim1111 6 months ago