He was also freaking out when he heard his waiter was unvaxxed.
Anybody who believes another person’s vaxx status affects his health has drunk too much mainstream media koolaid (we’ve known from the start that the vaxx doesn’t prevent the spread)
Hard to believe people looked at this guy like the next Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins less than decade ago.
Now he just repeats CNN pundit lunacy.
TDS really should be a subject of scientific study. I'm convinced these people must have some sort of clinically detectable brain chemistry. They genuinely need pathologizing.
Even before Trump he was a lunatic. Fully committed to act utilitarianism as a societal remedy. The kind of social engineering he advocated for in The End of Faith would give even the WEF pause.
One of them is almost entirely an argument about what is truth, which is a really interesting question but neither of them say anything worthwhile about it. If they had started to seriously approach truth, they would have risked shattering liberalism. It's not worth listening to at all.
It would force them to examine the sources of their foundational assumptions and reveal some of the contradictions. They both operate off the idea that various liberal ideas are derived scientifically in the same way gravity is derived by observing an apple fall, which is absurd on its face. If they realized that all laws are by nature a codification of metaphysically derived morality, they'd have to take a hard look at their own religious principles which often conflict with observable reality, such as racial differences or the societal harm caused by LGBT.
Several, they're a good watch, but the first one which was on Sam's podcast was very bad. It may be worth listening to hear the trainwreck, but the second one on Sam's podcast was good and all subsequent ones were good.
Sam Harris is the same elitist intellectual bug he's always been. He recognized that the populist movements like America First represent an existential threat to the ivory towers which prop him up. He hasn't changed, he's revealed himself.
Sam Harris is just the honest one. The Stephen Pinkers, Charles Murrays, all those guys voted Biden; and nothing would have stopped them from doing so.
Sam was super popular back when when the New Atheist movement was alive and well (~10-15 years ago) when hating on conservatives and Christians was popular with anyone under the age of 30.
Then the slippery slope hit the West hard and the cracks in the movement began to show. People realized none of the claims the New Atheists made about religion were actually true, and began to see how the New Atheists were just as dogmatic as the religious people they hated. This was assisted in no small part by JBP who introduced a new way of looking at religion that allowed atheists to appreciate its utility without requiring them to acknowledge supernatural influences. This was basically the nail in the coffin for the movement.
After the death of New Atheism, most atheists now are either (#1) fanatical followers of the woke religion, or (#2) normal non-religious people who see religion as silly at worst or useful at best, but either way far preferable to the woke religion that is in the process of destroying our culture from the inside.
Sam always had "Jesus Derangement Syndrome", and since Trump entered the political scene it appears he has "Trump Derangement Syndrome". Sam clearly has something wrong with him; a weak point or blind spot that he just can't get past.
People realized none of the claims the New Atheists made about religion were actually true, and began to see how the New Atheists were just as dogmatic as the religious people they hated.
It was the "Atheism plus" movement that killed it.
When a bunch of marxists tried to turn it from being about relentlessly debunking religious arguments to being about progressive politics. When supposed atheists began making excuses for islamists.
That was when all the sane people - myself included - bailed.
The final nail in the coffin was hammered in by none other than Richard Dawkins himself, when he publicly concluded that he had begun to see Christianty - as flawed as it was - as 'a bulwark against something worse'. That was at the start of 2016.
It drives me to distraction when I hear that too. Steven Crowder was saying it recently. "Sam Harris is a very smart man, I'm not denying it, he's incredibly intelligent."
How so? Plenty of people can sound smart--can even write smart-sounding books--but can't take care of themselves, their ideas can't withstand argumentation, their analyses of the present are built of nothing but their desires reinforced by their echo chambers, and their predictions are crap, because they're too smart to entertain the possibility that they might be wrong.
"He's smart. He's smart. He's smart" is all I ever hear about this dumb guy.
Probe anyone and you will find at least some extraordinarily dumb opinions, and question him about it, and you'll see the most laughable rationalizations you can imagine.
What if it's not just an opinion, but an entire worldview, with hundreds of nested opinions and rationalizations bundled together into a giant ball of hypocrisy and stupidity?
That is what makes it more intractable. You cannot persuade someone of something that goes against his entire worldview. And you can't change his worldview until you have persuaded him that most individual elements are wrong. Chicken and egg problem.
Sure, there's also clever and there's cunning and it's been argued that physical agility and dexterity, and social interpretation and navigation (and even physical navigation) are types of intelligence. I'm just not sure the ability to vomit up academic-sounding gobbledegook is any sort of intelligence more than it is a parlor trick.
You can convince a room full of modestly intelligent people that you can read minds or speak to the dead with cold reading and other tricks. There is no shortage of tricks to appear not as you are. It helps to be attempting to trick someone lesser than you in some way, but it's not necessary.
I've never seen or heard anything out of Harris, even when I agreed with it, that struck me as insight.
I knew he was a charlatan when I first saw him on Rogan a long time ago. He was pretty much the redditor version of a guru: all big, fancy sounding words that expressed absolutely nothing. Although the fact that he never criticized Judaism said it all
Rogan is one of a very small handful of content creators who could have easily jump-started a legitimate alternative video platform to compete with YouTube. Instead, he took the ticket.
My guess is he decided he couldn’t weather the inevitable storm of accusations of anti-Semitism, which come part and parcel with any attempt to break the media monopoly.
Although the fact that he never criticized Judaism said it all
It took me less than a minute to find the following quote from his book 'End of Faith' - published very recently in 2004, so perhaps you hadn't gotten around to it.
Judaism is as intrinsically divisive, as ridiculous in its literalism, and as at odds with the civilizing insights of modernity as any other religion
I meant during the Rogan interview I watched. It was all Christianity and Islam. Though of course one quick line in his book is the same as a newspaper making a headline retraction in the middle of the paper in fine print. Just covering his ass more than anything
That's quite rich. So one example from a book that you obviously haven't read is 'one quick line'. Here's another 'quick line'! I guess that makes for two!
Muslims and Jews generally take the same arrogant view of their own enterprises and have spent millennia passionately reiterating the errors of other faiths. It should go without saying that these rival belief systems are all equally uncontaminated by evidence
The fact that you cannot think of any reason why a religion that has 1% of the adherents that its competitors do would get less attention, and instead posit some sort of secret agenda, is quite baffling - but that's motivated reasoning for ya.
BTW, how much time did he spend on Jainism? Obviously, he's in the tank for the damn Jains!
Less money overall than most other countries, and with massive strings attached. What is wrong with Israel existing? Is there something wrong with Jews existing or having a country?
If there was a Christian state that kept most of it's population Christian would you approve?
No issues there. Albeit Israel has a large non-religious population. Do not conflate ethnicity with religion. Now can anybody answer the questions I made or is it too hard?
Huh, maybe I'm a judgmental asshole as I have noted in my mind I would disown family and friends if they did something truly terrible (ANYTHING bad with children, murder, rape etc) cause he doesn't care, so long as you're on HIS team.
What a delightfully loyal dog he is (apologies to all dogs compering you to this guy)
If Donald Trump had committed a murder, would you support him in an election, Joe Biden, or neither/third party?
I assume you'll go for neither/third party, but I think there are many people in the right who would say that Joe Biden would still do more damage to the country.
The worst thing he said is not even that. It's that he is willing to undermine every institution in order to prevail. It borders on the sociopathic. And that guy, who thinks that he'll decide ex cathedra who is enough of a threat to merit media dishonesty and censorship to defeat, calls Trump a narcissist.
The only defense is on who he murders as like everyone, you get the standard "if you kill a proven child molester, you get a head start if we can't get you a suspended sentence"
But joking aside, it's this whole attitude of "I'll burn everything to the ground unless I get my way!" Is what their opposition underestimates. You can't negotiate, find common cause or compromise, they want you on your knees serving them like happy little minions. If any institution is infected with a person with that mindset in a position of power, the only solution is to tear all power away from it and rebuild from scratch if required.
It will not even register. In fact, I think it will help him. When did anyone's negative comments about Trump, no matter how extreme, result in professional suicide?
It's not like that rodeo guy who said he didn't like Obama.
He was also freaking out when he heard his waiter was unvaxxed.
Anybody who believes another person’s vaxx status affects his health has drunk too much mainstream media koolaid (we’ve known from the start that the vaxx doesn’t prevent the spread)
If he actually believed there was a deadly highly-contagious disease going around, he wouldn't be out at a restaurant.
If there was, I missed it.
Yep. His brain has completely broken.
Hard to believe people looked at this guy like the next Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins less than decade ago.
Now he just repeats CNN pundit lunacy.
TDS really should be a subject of scientific study. I'm convinced these people must have some sort of clinically detectable brain chemistry. They genuinely need pathologizing.
Even before Trump he was a lunatic. Fully committed to act utilitarianism as a societal remedy. The kind of social engineering he advocated for in The End of Faith would give even the WEF pause.
Any particular examples you recall?
I only know about Sam Harris in passing from his old Rogan appearances and his feuds with Jordan Peterson.
One of them is almost entirely an argument about what is truth, which is a really interesting question but neither of them say anything worthwhile about it. If they had started to seriously approach truth, they would have risked shattering liberalism. It's not worth listening to at all.
Why is this?
It would force them to examine the sources of their foundational assumptions and reveal some of the contradictions. They both operate off the idea that various liberal ideas are derived scientifically in the same way gravity is derived by observing an apple fall, which is absurd on its face. If they realized that all laws are by nature a codification of metaphysically derived morality, they'd have to take a hard look at their own religious principles which often conflict with observable reality, such as racial differences or the societal harm caused by LGBT.
Several, they're a good watch, but the first one which was on Sam's podcast was very bad. It may be worth listening to hear the trainwreck, but the second one on Sam's podcast was good and all subsequent ones were good.
Sam Harris is the same elitist intellectual bug he's always been. He recognized that the populist movements like America First represent an existential threat to the ivory towers which prop him up. He hasn't changed, he's revealed himself.
Sam Harris is just the honest one. The Stephen Pinkers, Charles Murrays, all those guys voted Biden; and nothing would have stopped them from doing so.
Murray voted for Biden? I would imagine he'd sit out the election before doing that.
Harris may be honest, but he's a dull ass. His tone reminds me of the NPR girls from "Delicious Dish" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPpcfH_HHH8
Early life. Check it.
LibsofTiktok, can you tell me more of who is behind it? Does it break the leftist narrative you want to peddle?
Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks.
Comment Approved: Claiming someone is a jew is not an attack.
Sam was super popular back when when the New Atheist movement was alive and well (~10-15 years ago) when hating on conservatives and Christians was popular with anyone under the age of 30.
Then the slippery slope hit the West hard and the cracks in the movement began to show. People realized none of the claims the New Atheists made about religion were actually true, and began to see how the New Atheists were just as dogmatic as the religious people they hated. This was assisted in no small part by JBP who introduced a new way of looking at religion that allowed atheists to appreciate its utility without requiring them to acknowledge supernatural influences. This was basically the nail in the coffin for the movement.
After the death of New Atheism, most atheists now are either (#1) fanatical followers of the woke religion, or (#2) normal non-religious people who see religion as silly at worst or useful at best, but either way far preferable to the woke religion that is in the process of destroying our culture from the inside.
Sam always had "Jesus Derangement Syndrome", and since Trump entered the political scene it appears he has "Trump Derangement Syndrome". Sam clearly has something wrong with him; a weak point or blind spot that he just can't get past.
It was the "Atheism plus" movement that killed it.
When a bunch of marxists tried to turn it from being about relentlessly debunking religious arguments to being about progressive politics. When supposed atheists began making excuses for islamists.
That was when all the sane people - myself included - bailed.
The final nail in the coffin was hammered in by none other than Richard Dawkins himself, when he publicly concluded that he had begun to see Christianty - as flawed as it was - as 'a bulwark against something worse'. That was at the start of 2016.
Accurate and really well-put.
No it was popular with the retarded
It drives me to distraction when I hear that too. Steven Crowder was saying it recently. "Sam Harris is a very smart man, I'm not denying it, he's incredibly intelligent."
How so? Plenty of people can sound smart--can even write smart-sounding books--but can't take care of themselves, their ideas can't withstand argumentation, their analyses of the present are built of nothing but their desires reinforced by their echo chambers, and their predictions are crap, because they're too smart to entertain the possibility that they might be wrong.
"He's smart. He's smart. He's smart" is all I ever hear about this dumb guy.
He's intelligent in the sense of being able to memorize ideas and regurgitate them in a clear way. As far as discernment and wisdom, he's childish.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
You know - smart smart. Like Obama.
Probe anyone and you will find at least some extraordinarily dumb opinions, and question him about it, and you'll see the most laughable rationalizations you can imagine.
That does not make someone 'dumb'.
What if it's not just an opinion, but an entire worldview, with hundreds of nested opinions and rationalizations bundled together into a giant ball of hypocrisy and stupidity?
That is what makes it more intractable. You cannot persuade someone of something that goes against his entire worldview. And you can't change his worldview until you have persuaded him that most individual elements are wrong. Chicken and egg problem.
smart = think fast, produce answer, break stuff
wise = thought slow, answer available, build stuff
Some nuance to the above, but if you aspire to the latter you'll get it.
Sure, there's also clever and there's cunning and it's been argued that physical agility and dexterity, and social interpretation and navigation (and even physical navigation) are types of intelligence. I'm just not sure the ability to vomit up academic-sounding gobbledegook is any sort of intelligence more than it is a parlor trick.
You can convince a room full of modestly intelligent people that you can read minds or speak to the dead with cold reading and other tricks. There is no shortage of tricks to appear not as you are. It helps to be attempting to trick someone lesser than you in some way, but it's not necessary.
I've never seen or heard anything out of Harris, even when I agreed with it, that struck me as insight.
The best I can give you for him is "excellent proof that Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma should definitely be three discrete mental stats in D&D".
of course not, if wouldn't be communism if you weren't stepping over a pile of corpses on the way to utopia
if anything that is a bonus as long as the corpses are those of the "undesirables" and "reactionaries"
Sam Harris is jewish.
I knew he was a charlatan when I first saw him on Rogan a long time ago. He was pretty much the redditor version of a guru: all big, fancy sounding words that expressed absolutely nothing. Although the fact that he never criticized Judaism said it all
It's interesting how many personalities Rogan introduced me to over the years on YT that I would never know otherwise.
And how that all stopped when he disappeared behind the Spotify wall and I never followed.
I wonder what if anything has replaced Rogan as the incubator for myself and others to be introduced to new ideas and non-MSM personalities.
He got to have guests like Robert Malone on Spotify, which would have never flown on Youtube.
I don't begrudge Rogan for going to Spotify to get paid.
But for me, it was the end of an era.
Just the fact that viewing his podcast involved
was enough to get me to break the habit.
At one point, I went back and started at Episode #1 with Redban and the snowflake effects on Justin.TV and watched several hundred in sequence.
His clips are still on YT though I'm sure lots off people watch those.
I still do see his clips on YT.
But it's more akin to seeing what Rogan's up to rather than watching a full episode and leaning something new or getting to know someone.
I haven't watched a full episode since he left YT.
At least personally, his move to Spotify made him much less culturally relevant even if he's ungodly richer.
I wonder if he considered that.
Rogan is one of a very small handful of content creators who could have easily jump-started a legitimate alternative video platform to compete with YouTube. Instead, he took the ticket.
My guess is he decided he couldn’t weather the inevitable storm of accusations of anti-Semitism, which come part and parcel with any attempt to break the media monopoly.
It took me less than a minute to find the following quote from his book 'End of Faith' - published very recently in 2004, so perhaps you hadn't gotten around to it.
I meant during the Rogan interview I watched. It was all Christianity and Islam. Though of course one quick line in his book is the same as a newspaper making a headline retraction in the middle of the paper in fine print. Just covering his ass more than anything
That's quite rich. So one example from a book that you obviously haven't read is 'one quick line'. Here's another 'quick line'! I guess that makes for two!
The fact that you cannot think of any reason why a religion that has 1% of the adherents that its competitors do would get less attention, and instead posit some sort of secret agenda, is quite baffling - but that's motivated reasoning for ya.
BTW, how much time did he spend on Jainism? Obviously, he's in the tank for the damn Jains!
Sam Harris was a big voice for atheism and atheists. He is an atheist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism#%22Four_Horsemen%22
He's a grifter who only cares about America donating millions to Israel and his marks are redditors like you
Less money overall than most other countries, and with massive strings attached. What is wrong with Israel existing? Is there something wrong with Jews existing or having a country?
lol revealed yourself
Can't answer the questions? What is wrong in being Jewish?
No. The problem is most of them aren't in it.
No issues there. Albeit Israel has a large non-religious population. Do not conflate ethnicity with religion. Now can anybody answer the questions I made or is it too hard?
Are you confusing leftists who happens to be Jewish with the whole Jewish population?
I only managed about 30 minutes of the interview... seeing TDS in action is quite surreal.
Huh, maybe I'm a judgmental asshole as I have noted in my mind I would disown family and friends if they did something truly terrible (ANYTHING bad with children, murder, rape etc) cause he doesn't care, so long as you're on HIS team.
What a delightfully loyal dog he is (apologies to all dogs compering you to this guy)
If Donald Trump had committed a murder, would you support him in an election, Joe Biden, or neither/third party?
I assume you'll go for neither/third party, but I think there are many people in the right who would say that Joe Biden would still do more damage to the country.
The worst thing he said is not even that. It's that he is willing to undermine every institution in order to prevail. It borders on the sociopathic. And that guy, who thinks that he'll decide ex cathedra who is enough of a threat to merit media dishonesty and censorship to defeat, calls Trump a narcissist.
The only defense is on who he murders as like everyone, you get the standard "if you kill a proven child molester, you get a head start if we can't get you a suspended sentence"
But joking aside, it's this whole attitude of "I'll burn everything to the ground unless I get my way!" Is what their opposition underestimates. You can't negotiate, find common cause or compromise, they want you on your knees serving them like happy little minions. If any institution is infected with a person with that mindset in a position of power, the only solution is to tear all power away from it and rebuild from scratch if required.
A retarded atheist, what are the odds?
It will not even register. In fact, I think it will help him. When did anyone's negative comments about Trump, no matter how extreme, result in professional suicide?
It's not like that rodeo guy who said he didn't like Obama.
Early life
"Could have?" He probably does.
Never trust an atheist.
Sad to see Sam Harris fall like this. Atheism+ was a huge mistake.
There are many in the self-improvement/philosophy/intellectual/spiritual worlds that have turned in the last 5 years.
Sadguru is one. Paulo Coelho, Caroline Myss, Kryon, etc...
all sleepers, as it turns out.
Fascinating, and a good lesson to not rely on teachers alone for your wisdom.
God bless you guys.
I had no idea he had gone this far off the rails… Fuck there goes any remaining respect I had for him.
Sad to see Sam Harris fall like this. Atheism+ was a huge mistake. He always had TDS, but never a terminal case like this.
LEO need to make a point of checking out this dude's basement. This level of mental illness is definitely an indicator of something much worse.
He is a disgrace to pedophiles everywhere.