Religion, Politics and the End of the World (9/9)

Looks like Sam is a lair both the moderator and speaker refereed towards his book and both time he says that's not what it is.
If you tell me that i read from you book and what i get from it is not what you actual mean seems like you are just trying to dodge a bullet in front of all the people that you are just trying to deceive people to believe in some thing that you don't know much about
As far as media is concern they are just trying to get more viewers even if its with lies.

I think the distinction between irrational vs non-rational is an important one. An irrational action is one that opposes what is rational, but a non-rational action is an action that does not employ the use of reason. Dancing, for example, is non-rational. If you haven't already, check out Nietzsche's use of dancing as a metaphor for how to live one's life (or Wittgenstein's discussion of reason's limits). Reason is only one of our mental faculties.

What a great debate. For those of you who, like me, do not believe in the supernatural, give Hedges a chance. His book on Christian fascism is worth your time. You have to admit that his point that religion is nonrational and not irrational is a good one. Consider the great contributions to modern society made by the nonrational actions of people like Gandhi and MLK. Just a thought.

@jonwold82, I tried very hard... listening to Hedges is really hard work as his delivery is just terrible.

I'm not sure non-rational / irrational is a good point; it seems like semantics to me but I got what he was on about, I think.

Gandhi arguably caused a pile of trouble by creating Pakistan for muslims, and MLK proudly declared that he never bothered with any book than the bible.

It is not for Harris to "admit" your preconceived notion that the West that the rise of fundamentalism is due to Western policies.
It is for you to prove it!

But I am not holding my breath that you can.

Actually, he does not "defend" judaism in any way, shape, or form.

Did you watch the discussion at all, before commenting?

in one of the parts he says jewish mothers dont teach their kids the way muslim mothers do

To me, it appears the moderator questions Harris more because he never answers the main question of whether horrible behavior is caused by "religion" or rather "hopeless circumstance combined with ANY dogmatic doctrine that alleviates grievances".
It can undoubtedly be demonstrated that religion is one catalyst to horrible behavior, but other "secular" doctrines are equally effective in causing inhuman behavior as seen in Nazi Germany, USSR & Imperial Britain & USA. That's the main point.

Actually, he answers that question throughout the discussion. Maybe you you did not watch everything.

He does not question that the inhumane behaviour of nazis is related to the doctrine of nazism. By the same token, the inhumane behaviour of islamists is related to islam.

It is the moderator who keeps trying to whitewash islam selectively.

Na, Harris doesn't ever really answer "why" extremism takes hold. It's asked explicitly 2x, in mid & end of part 7/9. He does mention Nazis after 1st time, but doesn't answer the point at all. Then when asked 2nd time (after he didn't answer 1st time) he says, "I reject that analysis" then he goes on talking but not to the point.
I think Harris' position has some merit, but I don't respect him at all..he must know this is an important issue but apparently doesn't want to undermine his industry