• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Sam Harris

I heard him speak yesterday at the Skeptic's Society. Although I haven't read his books yet, I can say he's a great speaker, and he did seem to apologize to the criticisms from skeptics about his treatment of spirituality. But he also pointed out that he spent a page clearly defining what he means by this term, and that he isn't a mystic in the sense we might think. But I would caution skeptics from concluding that only fools or epileptics find spiritual rituals useful. Sam Harris said that he doesn't add any extra meaning to his meditation experimentation. He just finds it useful for certain things, and really does intend to be scientific about what it can do for health or wellbeing. I'll read his books soon and see how bad it is for myself, but again, in real life, he seems incredibly well grounded and presents his case quite well.

I can't imagine why Randi and he would have issues. Sometimes these things can be imagined or projected, but I certainly don't know what the case is here.
 
I heard him speak in "The god who wasn't there" and he was a great speaking, I agree.

Who said him and Randi have issues???
 
Donn said:
Appreciate your input.

I am going to have to go away and read and learn.

I never knew about this expansionist side to Islam, I always figured it was just "religion" like any other: mindless, ritual, cultural, but not real.
Click to expand...


Good reading :) I will state for the record that, other than the coworkers and few friends I have, I do not have first-hand information, and my opinions are based on the aforementioned books, as well as a few others that I've been reading. Islam ("submission') is a system of law and a method for 'rightly guided' living. Allah does not request love, only obediance. The Koran frequently states that all the world *must* submit. There are verses that say 'there is no compulsion in religion' but there are more verses that instruct the faithful to slay all unbelievers, with Jews singled out (Mohammed had run-ins with them in Medina, especially after he failed to convince them he was another in a line of prophets, and eventually killed or enslaved most of them in the Arabian penisula). People were given the choice of conversion, enslavement, or payment of crushing 'jizya' or head tax. "People of the book" (Jews and Christians) are treated marginally better than the 'pagans' (Hindus, for example). Since the Koran is believed to be the 'uncreated' word of God (ie, has existed for all time unchanged and was revealed to Mohammed over a period of years), they do not have, in Islam, the debates and critical discussions that Jews and Christians have regarding their respective scriptures.

I found the other book I have - "The Malady of Islam" by Abdelwahab Meddeb, translated from the French. It's hard to read. He talks about the destruction of the 1500 year old Buddha statues several years ago, but after several pages I still couldn't figure out if he thought it was 'right' or 'wrong' based on his own Muslim identity. He's certainly not condeming it.

Anyway, don't mean to be so long-winded and bore everyone on the thread, but I enjoy history and this has been my latest direction (I've exhausted everything I can find on the Black Plague...)
 
Plastictowel said:
Is there maybe a Dawkins book covering the same content just better ???
Click to expand...

The God Delusion is great (just out)--and Sam Harris' new book is a great short read, Letters to a Christian Nation. There isn't a trace of woo. There's also a new book called The Reason Driven Life that I've got to get by someone or other--I heard about it from a point of inquiry podcast (I think)...anyone read it?

At the end of End of Faith, Sam Harris shows that you can still fill the "spiritual gap" with Eastern mystic type stuff--not reincarnation or the woo--just the meditation and contemplation. I figure it it softens the route away from faith for some, then maybe it's "okay"...like the evangelical Christian, Francis Collins and his understanding and promotion of evolution. Eugenie Scott and Dennett and Ruse seem to walk on eggshells to appease the true believers. I think that reason often has to soften the blow to get reach those living in fear of biting from the proverbial tree of knowledge. I'm willing to cut Sam Harris some slack...and I encourage anyone to pick up his latest book. He's a 100% materialist atheist from all I've read and heard from him lately--and a smart man to boot. He's spoken and written about how atheists have pummeled him for his woo leanings, and explained that it is greatly exaggerated. Besides, he has evolved. :)

And he's a great speaker:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=116152867541418146


Shermer's new book, Why Darwin Matters is also good...but it handles religon with kid gloves... Stick with Dawkins and Sam Harris' latest book if you can't deal with molly coddling of spiritual notions.
 
Last edited:
Plastictowel said:
I wanted to read the end of faith after seeing this man on "The god who wasn't there." But you guys say it's a bad read??? Damn, sounded very interesting :(
Click to expand...

Plastictowel, go ahead and read the end of faith. It is a good read.
In my opinion, most of the criticism is unfounded. It seems that, as soon as anything sounds slightly woo-ish, some readers' eyes just glaze over and they quit trying to understand what is actually written. Sam does discuss a secular spirituality that the rest of the book is not dependent upon. And this is what I always see griped about. I admit, at first blush, these sections seem pretty woo-ish. With a careful reading it is clear that they are not. Sam is only recognizing that certain activities do, in fact, alter one's moment to moment experience of reality. Conventional religious praying, chanting and other repetitive activities, and meditation as practiced by some of the Eastern religions are among those activities. Regardless of the original belief that brought these practices into being, it is undeniable that practicing them can alter one's mental state. I suspect that last sentence is where most critics are lost. I guess many people do not realize that certain mental activities can and do result in altered mental states. A long sit at a blackjack table or a repetitive position on a manufacturing line should be enough to convince most people otherwise.

Once it is accepted that altered mental states exist, it isn't hard to imagine that some of those altered mental states might be desirable. Sam then points out that meditation as practiced by Buddhism, for example, can be used as a means to achieve a desired mental state. This is decoupled from any of the irrational beliefs that Buddhism may have originally attached to these meditative traditions.

The items that I believe deserve criticism, are rarely brought up. I think Sam is naïve in thinking that there is any reasonable chance that Sheldrake and others might have something really worth investigating. I've only seen a few people harp on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom