1 2 3 >  Last ›
 
   
 

Being Mr. Reasonable

 
eucaryote
 
Avatar
 
 
eucaryote
Total Posts:  3495
Joined  20-08-2006
 
 
 
13 October 2018 11:39
 
 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17032
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
13 October 2018 16:06
 

I have no love for Harris but I couldn’t get through that, it’s a completely biased agenda ridden rant even worse then what he accuses Harris of.

 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  600
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
14 October 2018 04:52
 

My god it’s got to be 10,000 words!  People have pointed out Harris’ errors on these topics in far fewer here, and far more rigorously, if you ask me.

 
LadyJane
 
Avatar
 
 
LadyJane
Total Posts:  3057
Joined  26-03-2013
 
 
 
14 October 2018 05:43
 

The irony will not be lost on those who take the time to read this article.  Time well spent.  Thanks, eucaryote.

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6161
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
14 October 2018 06:55
 
eucaryote - 13 October 2018 11:39 AM

Being Mr. Reasonable

Full of appeals to complexity, red herrings, overgeneralizations, projections, and spurious similarities used to bolster false dilemmas. These assholes are apologists.

 

 
 
LadyJane
 
Avatar
 
 
LadyJane
Total Posts:  3057
Joined  26-03-2013
 
 
 
14 October 2018 07:14
 

Any of you fellas get past the first paragraph?

Doubt is the beginning of knowledge, which is why people who are too arrogant often turn out not to be as smart as they think they are. If you’re excessively confident in yourself, you’re not going to listen to other people, which means you’re not going to learn very much.

Ha ha!

 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  600
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
14 October 2018 07:27
 
LadyJane - 14 October 2018 07:14 AM

Any of you fellas get past the first paragraph?

Doubt is the beginning of knowledge, which is why people who are too arrogant often turn out not to be as smart as they think they are. If you’re excessively confident in yourself, you’re not going to listen to other people, which means you’re not going to learn very much.

Ha ha!

I read the whole article, including the notes.  I didn’t fail to note that their criticism of Harris casting people he disagrees with into a defective type opens by casting him into a defective type because they disagree with him, then fortifies that position with arguments against his views and arguments—some contestable, others obvious, and none (in my opinion) particularly engaging.  In any case, I’d hardly call it a knock down piece; more like the usual pissing contest among intellectuals, none of it original or particularly interesting.  Perhaps this kind of relatively weak intellectual belaboring and ad hominem castigation appeals to some, but not to me.

[ Edited: 14 October 2018 07:34 by TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher]
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6161
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
14 October 2018 07:53
 
LadyJane - 14 October 2018 07:14 AM

Any of you fellas get past the first paragraph?

Doubt is the beginning of knowledge, which is why people who are too arrogant often turn out not to be as smart as they think they are. If you’re excessively confident in yourself, you’re not going to listen to other people, which means you’re not going to learn very much.

Ha ha!

I did, and something tells me that your character attack on cue is in line with the writers’ proclivity for cherry picked projection. i.e. a disagreement must be due to narcissism rather than genuine analysis.

Start watching how often and from who this common scapegoat is being dealt and the cyclical logic starts to jump off the page. Or don’t and just read the entire thing with a critical eye. While Sam may fall victim to some unintentional race baiting as an acute natural byproduct of some of the dialogues he’s choosing to confront, his overall narratives are much clearer and much less racially antagonistic than the actual baiters (e.g. these authors) desire to comport.

There’s something very simply misguided about struggling with the concept of how scripture influences cognition which influences behaviors.

[ Edited: 14 October 2018 07:58 by Jb8989]
 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17032
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
14 October 2018 08:09
 
LadyJane - 14 October 2018 07:14 AM

Any of you fellas get past the first paragraph?

Doubt is the beginning of knowledge, which is why people who are too arrogant often turn out not to be as smart as they think they are. If you’re excessively confident in yourself, you’re not going to listen to other people, which means you’re not going to learn very much.

Ha ha!

You like it because it’s what you wanted to hear.

 
 
LadyJane
 
Avatar
 
 
LadyJane
Total Posts:  3057
Joined  26-03-2013
 
 
 
14 October 2018 08:15
 

There’s an irritating thing that some men—and let’s be honest, it is nearly always men—tend to do. They enjoy telling other people why those people’s opinions are daft, delusional, and irrational, and promise to explain how things really are and what you would notice if you weren’t so blinkered by bias and sentiment. They expound upon the importance of shedding ideological presuppositions and examining the world using cool reason. Yet they are so wrapped up in telling everybody else why they are wrong that they cannot actually hear what anybody else is even arguing to begin with. Sometimes this produces comical levels of obliviousness, e.g., My brain-dead, slanderous opponents do nothing but resort to ad hominems or My new bestseller is about how liberals took away free speech. (It is related to the phenomenon known as “mansplaining”; one of us once overheard a gentleman repeatedly interrupting a woman he was with in order to tell her how important he thought feminism was.)

Ha ha!

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6161
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
14 October 2018 08:35
 
GAD - 14 October 2018 08:09 AM
LadyJane - 14 October 2018 07:14 AM

Any of you fellas get past the first paragraph?

Doubt is the beginning of knowledge, which is why people who are too arrogant often turn out not to be as smart as they think they are. If you’re excessively confident in yourself, you’re not going to listen to other people, which means you’re not going to learn very much.

Ha ha!

You like it because it’s what you wanted to hear.

Between this and the ideas can’t be owned thing, I think LJ and owl guy are banging.

 
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15224
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
14 October 2018 08:38
 
LadyJane - 14 October 2018 08:15 AM

There’s an irritating thing that some men—and let’s be honest, it is nearly always men—tend to do. They enjoy telling other people why those people’s opinions are daft, delusional, and irrational, and promise to explain how things really are and what you would notice if you weren’t so blinkered by bias and sentiment. They expound upon the importance of shedding ideological presuppositions and examining the world using cool reason. Yet they are so wrapped up in telling everybody else why they are wrong that they cannot actually hear what anybody else is even arguing to begin with. Sometimes this produces comical levels of obliviousness, e.g., My brain-dead, slanderous opponents do nothing but resort to ad hominems or My new bestseller is about how liberals took away free speech. (It is related to the phenomenon known as “mansplaining”; one of us once overheard a gentleman repeatedly interrupting a woman he was with in order to tell her how important he thought feminism was.)

Ha ha!

Excuse me LJ, but let me explain why given your attitudes and beliefs you find this particular paragraph worth quoting. Now….

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17032
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
14 October 2018 08:42
 
Jb8989 - 14 October 2018 08:35 AM
GAD - 14 October 2018 08:09 AM
LadyJane - 14 October 2018 07:14 AM

Any of you fellas get past the first paragraph?

Doubt is the beginning of knowledge, which is why people who are too arrogant often turn out not to be as smart as they think they are. If you’re excessively confident in yourself, you’re not going to listen to other people, which means you’re not going to learn very much.

Ha ha!

You like it because it’s what you wanted to hear.

Between this and the ideas can’t be owned thing, I think LJ and owl guy are banging.

I wonder in which ones personal universe. 

 

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2713
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
14 October 2018 11:55
 
LadyJane - 14 October 2018 08:15 AM

There’s an irritating thing that some men—and let’s be honest, it is nearly always men—tend to do. They enjoy telling other people why those people’s opinions are daft, delusional, and irrational, and promise to explain how things really are and what you would notice if you weren’t so blinkered by bias and sentiment. They expound upon the importance of shedding ideological presuppositions and examining the world using cool reason. Yet they are so wrapped up in telling everybody else why they are wrong that they cannot actually hear what anybody else is even arguing to begin with. Sometimes this produces comical levels of obliviousness, e.g., My brain-dead, slanderous opponents do nothing but resort to ad hominems or My new bestseller is about how liberals took away free speech. (It is related to the phenomenon known as “mansplaining”; one of us once overheard a gentleman repeatedly interrupting a woman he was with in order to tell her how important he thought feminism was.)

Ha ha!

Ha ha!

But of course, he (they) won’t admit it.
(There’s a fair amount of ‘mansplaining’ that goes on at times.)

 

 
 
eucaryote
 
Avatar
 
 
eucaryote
Total Posts:  3495
Joined  20-08-2006
 
 
 
14 October 2018 15:01
 
LadyJane - 14 October 2018 05:43 AM

The irony will not be lost on those who take the time to read this article.  Time well spent.  Thanks, eucaryote.

Yes, it’s long, but extremely well written and well organized - complete with sufficient footnotes to preclude the criticism that words were taken out of context.

I’ve followed Harris for a long time. I admit that I’ve learned a great deal from watching him constantly having to pull his foot out of his mouth. To some extent I’ve learned much about his favorite topics as he addressed them or as other, more knowledgeable people took his arguments apart, as in the piece I posted. I’ve always been curious why he chooses what hill to die on. He once strenuously made the case that it was statistically more likely that Jesus would return to Jerusalem than Missouri…..WTF
I enjoyed listening to Sean Carroll (on Harris’s podcast) take apart his ideas on free will and consciousness. Dan Dennett reviewed his book on free will and made the following comments regarding Harris’s fleshing out of an idea that is “not even wrong”.

The book is, thus, valuable as a compact and compelling expression of an opinion widely shared by eminent scientists these days. It is also valuable, as I will show, as a veritable museum of mistakes, none of them new and all of them seductive—alluring enough to lull the critical faculties of this host of brilliant thinkers who do not make a profession of thinking about free will.  And, to be sure, these mistakes have also been made, sometimes for centuries, by philosophers themselves.  But I think we have made some progress in philosophy of late, and Harris and others need to do their homework if they want to engage with the best thought on the topic.

I am not being disingenuous when I say this museum of mistakes is valuable; I am grateful to Harris for saying, so boldly and clearly, what less outgoing scientists are thinking but keeping to themselves. I have always suspected that many who hold this hard determinist view are making these mistakes, but we mustn’t put words in people’s mouths, and now Harris has done us a great service by articulating the points explicitly, and the chorus of approval he has received from scientists goes a long way to confirming that they have been making these mistakes all along.  Wolfgang Pauli’s famous dismissal of another physicist’s work as “not even wrong” reminds us of the value of crystallizing an ambient cloud of hunches into something that can be shown to be wrong.  Correcting widespread misunderstanding is usually the work of many hands, and Harris has made a significant contribution.

So I agree with this - that by not paying any attention to the thoughts of others and the history of work on these subjects, Harris manages, with the assistance of a myriad of lame thought experiments, to expand and fixate greatly on some rather elementary ideas that were digested whole by more serious students some time ago.

It seems that Harris is wanting to create a lasting personality cult based on his self improvement “meditation” principles and his homespun mystic philosophies. Perhaps something not unlike Hubbard/Dianetics and Scientology.  He’s starting to sound more like Deepak Chopra to me. It’s quite apparent that he considers himself more “woke” than others - this state the result of countless hours of navel gazing from which he has apparently learned that “he is not the author of his actions”, confirming that he is as much a dualist as any religious person. who seem uncomfortable in their own bodies. Maybe more, as he seems to see virtue in spending time chasing his shadow - trying not to think rather than in organizing a coherent train of thought.

I’ve grown fond of Sam mostly for the reasons elucidated by Dennett above. Sam can produce some rather eloquent expositions of ideas that are “not even wrong”.

 
 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  20872
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
14 October 2018 16:00
 

He should have stopped with TEOF, and only about half of that.

 
 1 2 3 >  Last ›