I dont want to sound like a fan boy but, can you thnk of anyone whose books I could read, or videos I could watch who is more brilliant and insightful than him? — rickyk95
can you thnk of anyone whose books I could read, or videos I could watch who is more brilliant and insightful than him? — rickyk95
Christopher Hitchens had a nearly-unmatched erudition, combined with an acerbic and pointed style of argumentation. I would recommend not only his writings, but the copious amount of videos of his debates, lectures, and interviews, available on YouTube. This is not to say that the man was perfect, either in his arguments or his interpersonal style, but his was a unique mind, greatly missed and not easily replicated. Alas, weathering The Age of Trump is just a bit tougher without his biting social commentary.I truly believe that Sam Harris is the smartest philosopher alive, the clarity and precision of his insights is impressive. Although this is certainly not the case, he appears to be almost infallible. I dont want to sound like a fan boy but, can you thnk of anyone whose books I could read, or videos I could watch who is more brilliant and insightful than him? He is just so logical and mathematical with his arguments, I always try to come with counterarguments to what he says but what he says simply makes a lot of sense! What other people like him could I follow? — rickyk95
rickyk95
53
I truly believe that Sam Harris is the smartest philosopher alive, the clarity and precision of his insights is impressive. Although this is certainly not the case, he appears to be almost infallible. I dont want to sound like a fan boy but, can you thnk of anyone whose books I could read, or videos I could watch who is more brilliant and insightful than him? He is just so logical and mathematical with his arguments, I always try to come with counterarguments to what he says but what he says simply makes a lot of sense! What other people like him could I follow? — rickyk95
I truly believe that Sam Harris is the smartest philosopher alive, — rickyk95
Whats an example of one of his dumb ideas? — DingoJones
In one of his works he argued in favor of torture and separately in favor of treating beliefs like actions. IOW if Muslims have certainly beliefs that might lead to violence or classify people a certain dangerous way, these should be treated (the thoughts) as actions. I have problems with both positions, and their combination is incredibly bad. He denied the implications of his positions in the book, without acknowledging that horrific positions could be deduced from his arguments. Pre-emptive torture based on beliefs can be deduced from his arguments. Again. He later, when this was all pointed out, said he was against such things. But he created the premises that lead to some really horrible conclusions. He says the conclusions are not his, but he never denied that his assertions and conclusions that are these premises are false.Whats an example of one of his dumb ideas? — DingoJones
In one of his works he argued in favor of torture and separately in favor of treating beliefs like actions. — Coben
What I have learned about Atheists and intellectuals in general is that they don't actually have an education until they understanding sociology and political theory, specifically the rich variety of humanist thought contained in the Liberal tradition. — JerseyFlight
I don't think Harris is really a genuine philosopher, but what this neuroscientist is, is one of the best intelligent academic commentators and interviewers who is thoughtful, respectful in an era where others hurl accusations and vitriol.I truly believe that Sam Harris is the smartest philosopher alive, the clarity and precision of his insights is impressive. — rickyk95
Before answering your question, I would remind that not to be a "genuine philosopher" isn't negative or condescending (perhaps in our times it would be the opposite). Being a "philosopher" is as loose or even looser than being a historian. — ssu
He is just so logical and mathematical with his arguments, I always try to come with counterarguments to what he says but what he says simply makes a lot of sense — rickyk95
Something like that, yes.From what you posted, it seems like you just mean a professional or working philosopher? — DingoJones
Well, any non-woke commentator will get at least irritation from the woke identity politics crowd from the left. I guess Sam Harris got his baptism of fire and the full wrath of that crowd after presenting his views on islam. And have to say, Harris does take it under his skin (which is understandable) and for example his conversation with mainstream journalist Ezra Klein some time ago was simply painful to listen, even if both tried to be cordial.People hate him though, so the clarity of his points gets lost in the emotional reactions he provokes in people. There are a few of these public figures that are like that, the mere mention of their names taps into a ready waiting mob that feel like they need to tear him down. — DingoJones
(and he extends this to the idea of treating beliefs AS actions. We can't tolerate certain beliefs and we must treat them as fait accompli actions. Interesting what happens if you apply this to his beliefs about torture,say)“Given the link between belief and action, it is clear that we can no more tolerate a diversity of religious beliefs than a diversity of beliefs about epidemiology and basic hygiene.”
― Sam Harris, The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason
I believe that I have successfully argued for the use of torture in any circumstance in which we would be willing to cause collateral damage (p198)
Given what many of us believe about the exigencies of our war on terrorism, the practice of torture, in certain circumstances, would seem to be not only permissible, but necessary. (p199)
(and he extends this to the idea of treating beliefs AS actions. We can't tolerate certain beliefs and we must treat them as fait accompli actions. Interesting what happens if you apply this to his beliefs about torture,say) — Coben
I believe that I have successfully argued for the use of torture in any circumstance in which we would be willing to cause collateral damage (p198)
Given what many of us believe about the exigencies of our war on terrorism, the practice of torture, in certain circumstances, would seem to be not only permissible, but necessary. (p199)
I think there's a wide agreement in the scientific community that there indeed have to rules and limitations to research. Starting from the oath of Hippocrates, it is obvious that there is both a moral and a societal issue here. I do remember, just to give an example, the researchers that cloned Dolly the sheep were first asking for a serious public discussion and regulation on human cloning.Do you think certain lines of research should be off-limits for the good of society? — RogueAI
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.