(August 16, 2016 at 6:55 pm)abaris Wrote:(August 16, 2016 at 5:38 pm)Excited Penguin Wrote: The part about jealousy is a logical conclusion after you think about what he said, which is that basically it's not that he disagrees with Harris, but that he's pointing out obvious stuff.
Obvious as in everyone having two brain cells to rub together coming to the same conclusion. Every school kid with a basic level of education could do the same. Harris is just your usual snake oil vendor pointing out what everyone knew before if they have a basic level of education. He just sells it as being sensational.
Also, you obviously missed the part on torture and endorsing wars. Which is by far the more important issue. If it only was about running his mouth on no shit Sherlok issues, I would just stiffle a yawn and turn away.
Abris please cut me some slack here.
Sam is hardly a snake oil salesman. Trump is, Pat Roberson is sure. Now you assume that everyone already knows that is flat out crap. I can tell you and not just with Sam, but with Hitchens and Dawkins and Stenger, that before reading all those works, I didn't know shit.
I also don't agree with his Buddhism fetish. But Harris did provide me a voice with "The End Of Faith". And his book "Letter To A Christian Nation" also gave me a voice.
It's funny, but when you say, or imply what Sam does is common knowledge, that does not make sense to me. Hitchens dropped more names and history in "Hitch 22" in the same manor and that annoyed the fuck out of me. Most people do not know what Harris knows or Hitchens or Dawkins. But all of them have contributed to opening the door to skepticism, including Harris.
Don't assume that what Harris does is "common knowledge". I think it merely amounts to personality. I will say this, in the age of google, it is less of an excuse to avoid or ignore any position.
