"Some intuitions are truly basic to our thinking...

>I dunno, I just feel it in my gut or something; and I’ll just assume so does everyone else.

What he said is not wrong. Every ethicist find statements that trascend common sense and build a system upon it. What's cringeworthy in Sam's philosophy is not this foundation (which is perfectly reasonable) but what follows it.

>dude imagine if (this scenario which won't ever happen) happens... We would have to so (fucked up shit) *hits bong*... what I'm saying is that we have to kill all muslims! *light a joint*

The basis of all philosophical systems rely on a ton of assumptions. Sam's is no different in this regard.

...

>crazy junkie kills 2 people
>we kill 100 civilians the same die

>DUDE WE TOTALLY NEED TO NUKE MUSLIMS THEY KILLED A COP OMG

Pretty much all modern philosophy relies on some level of similar mental gymnastics so they don't have to address the lack of tangible evidence behind any of it.

We need to kill muslims because they believe they are divinely commanded to violently propagate a religion that hasn't progressed since the middle ages. Rid the world of such a retarded ideology and it would instantly become a better place.

Let's kill Americans too, then. Their plague is not religion, yet they seem to benunable of stop killing civilians. This tradition has gone on for 2 straight centuries now, with virtually no interruption, and there are maybe 5 wars that you could deem as ethical in their entire history.

Are you fine with nuking Washington DC? I'm not, nor I'm fine with nuking Iran.

*cringes and looks away*

guess reddit servers are down right now?

>ew, this goes against the propaganda people taught me

Agreed, a death toll of 100 is way too low considering the firepower the USAF has at its disposal. Are they even trying?

yes you've put forth some absolutely revolutionary ideas that are completely shattering my closed-in tribalistic worldview

your arguments weren't original either, in fact they're the generic response you get from Sam Harris' fans and (when they manage to say soemthing that goes beyond the classic "lol muslims are not white") /pol/tards.

(is this redditor still responding to me?)
>yes
(good, good little redditor, yes)
>he is trapped in his archetypal persona demanded by the collective unconscious
(yes yes, of course, the poor fool, what should we do)
>nothing yet, wait wait, his time will come
(yes of course yes)

>this is your brain on Breitbart
Yeah, you've changed my mind: the US is a force of good and we should nuke Iran (yes, this was your argument).

Pretty much all things relies on some level of similar mental gymnastics so they don't have to address the lack of tangible evidence behind any of it.

Not him, but why do you like Muslims so much? Objectively speaking, their ideology is violent. We don't hear about many Hindu terrorist attacks, even though there's a frigging billion of them. There's also a frigging billion Chinese people and yet Chinese terrorism is almost unheard of. There are some terrorist attacks in China but they're carried out by Muslim minorities living in the frontier regions. It's not a coincidence that the only terrorists in China are Muslim. Islamic violence has to do with the absolutist nature of the religion, and the stress that contact with modernity causes.

I wouldn't want angry rednecks immigrating to my country, and by the same token I don't want Muslims coming in either, at least not in large numbers.

P.S. I barely know who Sam Harris even is, other than the fact that he's mentioned in the same breath as Richard Dawkins and Hitchens.

That woman looks like a macaque

All philosophy is mental gymnastics that has no real basis in reality. You can argue science doesn't either, but it gets a hell of a lot of obvious observable results.

30 years ago would you have proposed nuking Ireland?
20 years ago would you have proposed nuking Italy and Yugoslavia?
Is terrorism (which doesn't exceed our death tolls) enough to kill random civilians on a daily basis in 9 different countries?

I'm not supporting Islam as a religion (in fact I find it disgusting), rather I'm arguing against indiscriminate killing (in your case) and genocide (in that other user's case).

No, I don't want to nuke anyone, just an immigration ban, and more watchful police. I don't really think the IRA are comparable to Muslim terrorists, because Muslims kill more people in one day than the IRA did in one year, and because the IRA was relatively principled, i.e. they wouldn't gun down random people in France or Germany.

And we did bomb Serbia, quite extensively, and most liberals were okay with that.

The Muslims that commit terroristic acts are in quite a different position than the typical Chinese or a Hindu in India.

>Islamic violence has to do with the absolutist nature of the religion, and the stress that contact with modernity causes
It's also hard to blame them for feeling stressed when you consider the violent nature of that contact.

I just think muh muslims are a smokescreen that distracts us from the real culprits. Harris is a full on neocon shill, not even a consistent islamophobe, but someone who sells whatever his beltway masters are pushing this month. I'm really not enthusiastic about the security state.

>wanting muslims to immigrate here is somehow a small gov. position

enjoy your authoritarian theocracy

kant raped Hume's corpse

you mean hume's destruction of all human psychology brought kant to lead philosophy on an infinitely inward spiraling goose chase

Elaborate.

Not him but I don't see it entirely as a religious problem
You can't even really nail down what "the problem" is
If you think it's an ideological problem then you should equally have a problem with Christians (Muslims are arguably the most "redpilled" group of people on the planet)

If you think it's a cultural problem (a matter of devoutness or radical-ness) then it's really more of a racial problem because black Muslims and Persians don't behave anything like Arabs

I think it's really an identity problem (heavily stemming from race) that comes from the fact that most Muslims will inherently side with the Palestinians over the Israelis, and so the collective Arab or Muslim identity will hate (or at least resent us) for siding with who they see as the bad guys
So Islam has kind of become the antipode or "counter culture" to western culture
So the while the ideology and culture behind it make Muslims prone radicalization, ultimately it's the fact that Muslims see themselves in fundamental opposition to the western world that drives a fatal wedge between us and them

This is the reason that multigenerational natives are deciding to blow themselves up for no reason
Islam is the alt right for minorities
The only difference between a white alt right member and a Muslim is the fact that the white person will identify with the western world and want to fix it while a Muslim resents it and wants to destroy it

Many philosophers make arguments where an intuition is compared to an alternative which is argued to lead to an absurd conclusion, leaving us to accept the intuition. But a recent book by Herman Cappelen argues against the idea that contemporary philosophers are actually 'relying on intuitions as evidence' in their theories.

>Being in denial this much