Tfw used to be a Sam Harris fan

>tfw used to be a Sam Harris fan
>tfw I was 18 years old
>tfw 25 now

Kill me

How do I fix this

idk. how does this fuck explain redemption?

you atone for your crimes by converting to Islam, user

Just admit you were wrong and promise not to do it again.

Unlike Harris' side of the argument, our side believes in forgiveness and repentance.

>How do I fix this
No atheist cuckoldry survives after you start with the greeks, user. Enjoy the ride.

I like Sambo, he has interesting guests on his podcasts and is genuinely sincerely trying to make the world a better place.

Some of his arguments can be autistic/simplistic but that doesn't mean he's a cunt.

I agree, I think he is totally intellectually honest, just looking at the evidence and trying to work out what to believe based on that. I get that you could disagree with him, but I don't get how people on here get so worked up over him, he's pretty inoffensive.

>I don't get how people on here get so worked up over him, he's pretty inoffensive.

Jealousy. Like many here, Harris has a BA in philosophy. But, unlike many here, Harris has a job and is quite successful.

Because his atheism and morality arguments are stupid, and have been refuted before--several times, in fact--yet he continues to pretend they're somehow groundbreaking. It gets on our nerves.

I like him when he brings in people like Kasparov and critiquing perspectives of Islam in the media.

As a philosopher i skip him.

too little; too late

What's stupid about them?

At one point he had the plan to go visit Ted Kaczynski in prison and interview him for the podcast.

I hope he manages to pull that off sometime.

Not him, but presumably it's that Sam is spouting that you can get an ought from an is, which is something that Hume (rather convincingly) attempted to prove impossible. I.e. it is not possible to get/construct a normative claim using only descriptive claims

start reading marx and realise what has been in front of you all this time

>tfw unironically admiringly read Stalin and Mao when I was 15-18

how do I fix

You faggots like to complain about sam harris but I haven't seen a single coherent argument against him.

Becoming is a painful process my friend, you'll hate your current self as much as you hate your 18 year old self one day.

PUKE

Even a few chapters in of this, you'll shake of Stalin and Mao like they were a bad case of the fleas

glad you could join us mr Jordanson

>mfw the fedora supersedes personalities and we now have fedora-Christians

Lol on point. I haven't finished it yet because it can get tiring. But the amount of unbelievable shit
the SMERSH and Officers did is pretty insane.
Even if some of the content is overly hyperbolic, it's still fascinating

I am half eastern youropean and my great grandparents were killed in gulags. I've always found it fascinating how anglos need to go through existential crises before they acknowledge the faults of Marxism. Please don't go full circle by embracing the right wing meme.

My background is Ukrainian, so I guess its the weird emotional connection of those events. That and my dad had always hated Russians.

I haven't fallen for the right wing, all lefties are scum and degenerates meme though. I think forms of socialism should be implemented somehow, but we have to be extremely careful to not
fall down the path of Stalin, Fidel etc.

Accept that your intellectual interests and positions can and should change over time, and not be ashamed of those you had in the past, especially at the age of 18. Also, make sure to go back every few years to see whether or you still agree/disagree with your old ideas.

that would be fucking amazing

I like when Sam fans act like pewdewpie fans

Tomahawk Missiles

spoiler: your 18-year-old self was actually right.

You are now falsely embarrassed by the need to socialize with other human beings, which leads you into false views, and embarrasses you out of your previously correct attitudes. A closely related and wholly relevant idea: Stirner's "spooks".

Stirner is wrong in one thing.
The ego is the spook. It is also ruled by the authentic spook; the ghost in the circuit.

>dude you can derive an ought from an it lmao

Why is this hack taken seriously?

Incoherent arguments beget incoherent counter arguments.

pffhahahaha

Dont worry OP, I was big into Dawkins because my family would drag me to church TWICE a week and i found it boring and lame as fuck so I wanted to rebell in a really succinct way and there you have it.

Then I found Alan Watts and my mind got blown and all has been well since. It's a phase, don't worry too much about it.

>I think he is totally intellectually honest

I disagree. I still think we need someone like him, because he's a skilled sophist and a provocateur.
But he's not intellectually honest, he's an attention whore and his job is to get people involved on reddit and twitter and promote his brand.

You're all retarded.
Every single person who shits on Sam is either a muslim or a muslim sympathiser or a relativist.

Academia shits on Sam, because academia is filled with relativist, post structualists.

Want me to prove how stupid you are?
>OMG MORALITY ISN'T OBJECTIVE!!
Meanwhile you're a leftist activist that presupposes ethical positions as absolutes.

Kill yourself.

You're doing the good work my friend.
People really have to learn how to be critical of the Stalinist and Maoist projects without discarding arbitrarily the cause as a whole.

My speculation is that most hardcore leftists still defend these regimes because they have never overcome a certain brand of academic Marxism from the 50s-60s-70s, a time in which defending the USSR and CCP still made sense.
We're now past that, and criticisms of those regimes do not harm the cause in any sensible way, it is, instead, beneficial to it, since there is now the need of overcoming these stereotypes without losing the essence, the core of these ideas.

I think you mean "stop."

>my anecdotal private experience should account for the entire spectrum of a political regime
>bawww my kulak grandparents got their fields expropriated and were killed!!!
marxism debunked at last

>my autistic greentexting should account for the fact that I'm a contrarian retard looking to waste time
>bawww my shitty ideology has been proven to not work time and time again!!!
marxism defended at last

>How do I fix this
what, being 25?
nothing. you're fucked.

>just looking at the evidence and trying to work out what to believe based on that

The problem is that he just doesn't try hard enough. There are tons of issues that he could easily clear up with a bit of research, which he usually just doesn't bother to do, only to ignore ideas that actually go against his beliefs when he does encounter them anyway.

>OMG MORALITY ISN'T OBJECTIVE!!

But we're not even making such a claim, simply that Harris's own claims are either simple or weak and lacking in substance. You're assuming that disagreeing with Harris's reasoning means disagreeing with his core position on the essentially transcendental nature of morality's basis, which I won't deny has real substance to it, though not much beyond that.

On the other hand, the idea that we'll of course 'figure out' morality like any other science and be able to define specific, set rules for it is based in nothing other than his fancy and so much of his other related ideas stem from conceptions that are flat out wrong.

>guys lets stop trying to produce planes we've tried again and again and it never works, man is not meant to fly!
>all other ideologies have and are working fine
EXCELLENT!!

>moar autistic greentexting with completely irrelevant false analogies
>PLEASE ENGAGE ME
Here have a (You), autismo.