Why does Veeky Forums hate harris?

Most people on Veeky Forums don't care about that.
t. most people on Veeky Forums

Because I've grown out of scientism

>Obscure narrow specialty
>Overstates the effects of drugs for normie
>Grabs on low hanging fruit
>Speaks in a calm manner

>Speaks in a calm manner

That's what I hate most about him.

His idea that intent excuses outcome is dumb as fuck tbqh. Everyone thinks their intentions are good, and if you were to point this out he will fall back to his holy grail meme of moral objectivism.

>His idea that intent excuses outcome is dumb as fuck tbqh.

Yeah, although the idea itself is not as controversial.
What's funny about Harris' take is that he doesn't seem to be aware of how much of a "might makes right" argument and Western tradition his whole morality stands on.
You could easily imagine a world where authoritarian Islamists held power and a pro-Jihad Harris explaining calmly how killing infidels isn't as wrong as killing muslims.

Except that's not what he said.

The mods need to start cracking down on Harris and Peterson threads. This is absurd.

This week there were three Peterson threads at one point.

>Everyone thinks their intentions are good

How naive are you actually?

There are plenty of people who do evil for the sake of the evil. Which is why the Columbine teens didn't just commit suicide in their basement, but felt they had to murder a bunch of innocent schoolmates as well just so everyone understood how much they hated life.

Do you really think they didn't understand that what they were doing was malevolent?

Freedom of speech, fuckwad.

I disagree, in fact his philosophy arguments remind of the battles of undergrad minds in Veeky Forums philosophy threads. Yes his religion stuff is cringey, but not nearly as bad as Dawkins but not nearly as good as Hitchens. I primarily listen to his current events/science guests, where he can at least lead a somewhat informed interview, even when faced with a lack of knowledge in the area.

I certainly dont know how he attracts rabid fans however.

You know that picture was edited, right?
The original picture was of her holding her own book.

Because he is a hack. A hack!

Also this:

What, you think this one is real?

Reddit absolutely hates Sam Harris because of his anti Islam statements.

Consider this possibility. Imagine if everyone in your city was me, Sam Harris. Your mayor, your doctor, your entire postal service. The criminals in prisons. Even your dog, somehow, was me.

I invite you to ask - would that really be such a bad thing? Imagine the possibilities of a world comprised of only a single, solitary, utilitarian mind. Just think about how smooth and well-maintained the public utilities would be, for example. Your pizzas would show up exactly fifteen minutes after you ordered them. Your kids would get great marks in school.

All I'm raising with this thought is the possibilities of a world in which all are one. Where we think about not being Sam Harris in the same way we think about the slave trade, or FGM. This is a glorious horizon of possibilities I fail to find any flaws in.

How would a single mind be able to process all those different tasks at once? Unless they have autonomy of thought, in which case they're individuals again and we're worse off because there's going to be less variation in innovation.

It's not good to get all your information about the outside world from /pol/.

Reddit is very anti-Muslim.

You're looking too deeply into this.

Well it could be. I don't know... I just know that the sasha grey one was an edit since I saw the original picture years before the meme took off

>Reddit is very anti-Muslim.

I laughed at this. Browse by /r/all and not your niche communities like kotakuinaction or t_d

Reddit front page is the epitome of leftist SJW.

Atheists are fine. It's the ones that think they've got hold of something really big and you're too stupid to see it that are the problem. Be an atheist, just don't be an asshole.

>when you spend so much time in a literal neo-nazi echo chamber that you think that anything short of calling Muslims shitskins and goatfuckers is extreme SJW leftism
kek

Except they're not. Firstly, a lot of the liberals are of the "good lord!" variety and are basically just smug about being centrists (think Sargon of Akkad). So they hate Islam too. Then there's the fact that conservikiddies show up even in the SJW-leaning liberal safehavens (/r/politics &c.), and then there's the fact that those alt-right communities are about as big as the liberal/"socialist" ones (they just often aren't explicitly about politics, ex. pussypassdenied).

All of this I know because, fuck me, I like getting butthurt and sneering at plebs.

If his transparent idiocy needs to be explained to you, you are a pleb that is utterly beyond hope. Just enjoy him, for fuck's sake.

He is completely wrong on science can solve moral claims.
He was completely wrong on the Trump stuff.
He is completely wrong on the religion debate.
He has no idea about female nature.

He got btfo by based Chomsky like all hacks like him.

>Chomsky
>Anything but a senile old pseud

See yourself out and don't post here again

t. Brainlet
you're just SEETHING that he btfo's everyone he debates with.

quite the opposite
he's a hack and the only people who like him are brainlets

he's the warren buffet of philosophy

not at all, he always comes out on top in any debate he's involved him, I'd be hard pressed to find one where he doesn't. His groupies are annoying though. I just appreciate him for who he is: a very intelligent erudite who is extremely good at debating and deconstructing the worldview of those he fires at. 99 percent of people who hate him are just frustrated by this and his groupies.

He's not really a neurosceintist
shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/neuroscientist-sam-harris/

Is a racist that swallowed american exceptionalism memes

Is basically an autistic alt righter that for some reason supports Israel

Is a liar
>but when did buddhists ever hurt anyone? :(
>what do you mean there are tonnes of Hindu and Buddhist terrorist acts? No i don't think its related to material conditions

His fan base is obnoxious

Edits his blogs

Gets into pointless arguments to make his sub-human fan base like him more
>le chomsky got pawn'd! better post it on my site XD

And, most importantly, he's a rabid materialist and anglo-consequentialit

No, I just think he's overrated and worshipped by morons (like you) when in reality, he's not all that clever as he'd like you to believe

Didn't he claim that the Republicans in the US are the worst group of people to ever exist, or something similar? The guy is out of his mind.

He failed miserably to demonstrate his point to Chomsky.

>self-serving metaphor that completely misses the point
>self-serving metaphor that demonstrates how delusional he really is
>lmao! getting old huh Chomsky?

He couldn't even have a honest debate with Ben Afleck for fuck sake

>ISIS cuts off heads and we wont don't do anything about it. That goes to show how soft Obama is on Islam
>what do you mean Obama declared the war the next day?
>I love how liberals are so quick to call me a racist even though I never even googled Islam or any of the countries I assume are bad

He's literally retarded.

And he said that it was an outrageous claim and the key word was 'potentially' and that is because of climate change.
You'd have known that if you weren't regurgitating second hand drivel and actually researched the subject more which I know you won't as you just want him to fit in your worldview as an insane leftist.
And spoken like a true brainlet you just say 'hack' and 'moron' thinking you made a point, I suggest you watch some of Chomsky so you can learn from him how to actually make a point.

I don't give a fuck about your opinion though bro
Chomsky is a hack

The real answer is Veeky Forums is filled with brainlets and pseuds

and just like that you confirmed everything in my post.
keep embarrassing yourself brainlet.

Reddit hates muslims and loves Sam Harris, pretty much anything Sam Harris says is the mainstream opinion on reddit

reddit is too mainstream to have one opinion, it's like saying facebook has an opinion.

>for some reason supports Israel

He's a jew.

user, are you lonely? Internet forum-based identity politics? You need help.

holy shit, being this butthurt about someone not liking the overrated gnome propped up by twenty something starbucks revolutionaries. calm down mate, enjoy him, not everyone's gonna bow to the same shrine. don't be upset.

sure thing retard
Chomsky is a hack
You like him because he's a pseud like you

All of the western world should hate Muslims

As if it wasn't obvious, lol
He's an honorary kike with that thing

keep going brainlet
You have to have an axe to grind to claim I'm the one who was upset at someone's opinion on the internet. see him here being upset at that very thing

because he's smug and thinks he's right about things which have no answers to

>free will isn't real lol!
>the self isn't real lol!

yea he said the republicans are the worst group of people in human history because 'unlike ISIS' they want to destroy civilization

he's a laughing stock at this point

>In the midst of this ordinariness, however, I was suddenly struck by the knowledge that I loved my friend. This shouldn’t have surprised me—he was, after all, one of my best friends. However, at that age I was not in the habit of dwelling on how much I loved the men in my life. Now I could feel that I loved him, and this feeling had ethical implications that suddenly seemed as profound as they now sound pedestrian on the page: I wanted him to be happy.

>What did I care if my friend was better looking or a better athlete than I was? If I could have bestowed those gifts on him, I would have. Truly wanting him to be happy made his happiness my own.

>A certain euphoria was creeping into these reflections, perhaps, but the general feeling remained one of absolute sobriety—and of moral and emotional clarity unlike any I had ever known.

>And then came the insight that irrevocably transformed my sense of how good human life could be. I was feeling boundless love for one of my best friends, and I suddenly realized that if a stranger had walked through the door at that moment, he or she would have been fully included in this love. Love was at bottom impersonal—and deeper than any personal history could justify. Indeed, a transactional form of love—'I love you because'.

He literally wrote this in one of his books.

Hitchens literary talent was limited to turning a good phrase. He seriously couldn't write with anything approaching clarity or structure. It really limited him.

His book about the Clintons was almost gibberish, and I hate the Clintons.

yea his word saladry is unbearable

and he would still be perfectly able to defend that.
that's what I was admiring about him. I admire him as a sophist.

Because he is a hack

>especially after reading his exchange with Chomsky, in which he was completely BTFO
>It's hard not to appreciate a thinker as lucid as he

You don't pay attention to his political views, you believe chomsky left him BTFO
And you think it is hard not to appreciate him as a lucid thinker
These seem like contradictory points

Ya, but this thread is about Sam Harris.

The fact that he is such an uninspiring hack that he didn't warrant much discussion causing this thread to become a Chomsky thread

He's simply annoying. His moral theory is retarded, his logical positivism is retarded, and he also refuses to apply his critiques of Abrahamic religion to his own pseudo-Buddhism.

>Intellectual.
>Atheist.

I just can't.

tips mitre

I responded to someone doing the same thing =, read the comment i replied to. most people on reddit hate muslims and love Sam Harris, pretty much anything Sam Harris says is the mainstream opinion on reddit

>Why does Veeky Forums hate harris?
He proved himself to be a total fool in his talks with Peterson.

Everyone who isn't mentally ill.

The only reason people think Chomsky won that battle was because Harris retreated and didn't want to engage further. For good reason though, Chomsky kept leading him in circles hoping to catch him off guard since he can't win with raw arguments.

Reasonable people look at that as Chomsky having another episode of epileptic seizure while brainlet socialists view it as a momentous victory.

Sam Harris is a philosopher in the same way that Niel Degrasse Tyson is a scientist. At the end of the day he's a pop figure presenting the shallowest of ideas, vetted first and foremost by their novelty to his demographic. There's a reason he takes a stance against Abrahamic religion, it smacks of controversy in America, but doesn't take it to its logical conclusion and really does pussy out in critiques of Islam and Judaism (he's very pro Israel, shocking), someone who went all the way would be Christopher Hitchens, who at least was genuine whatever his faults.

Sam Harris exists to promote Sam Harris, not the truth. Just look at that debacle he had with Chomsky, he basically tried to get in some kind of intellectual quarrel with him and Chomsky just wrote him off. He'd never even heard of him. Harris proceeded to make a big stint stink about it, wanting to capitalize on Chomsky's image of an intellectual by pretending to have 'defeated' him.

The man is entirely pathetic, all his talk of moral objectivism throughs science is totally without proof, but because he introduces him as a neuroscientist people are ready to respect him. He is the very definition of presenting not your ideas based on merit, but through posturing.

t. Sam Harris

>Peterson

hello /pol/

t. 'social libertarian'

Let it go Sam

not until I convince my followers that you are a hack

I haven't read that but thought Hostage to History by him was very good.

This guy is still being shilled around here?

I quite like his podcasts.

I almost wish Peterson never said anything about trannies, it occupies .1% of what he actually talks about but is the only thing the general public associates him with.

>it occupies .1% of what he actually talks about

Nonsense, and the rest of it doesn't have any merit either.

I'm overwhelmed by the substance of your post.

Ah, then I can see as to why you'd think Peterson's drivel has any substance.

his tranny shtick is far more interesting than whatever it is he talks about

the dudes a jungian fanatic

I quite like Hitchens, and have somewhat of a weak spot for him, but sadly this is true most of the time. Some of his books are exempt of this though (such as the one on Henry Kissinger)

dribble*

Please stop posting this man and Peterson

>t. never read Jung

please, you wouldn't even know who he is if it wasn't for him speaking out against the trans bill

It's a catch-22 to be sure, but his talk on psychology is much more interesting and is the bulk of what his videos are on.

I like him too. I just think a fair evaluation of his writing includes that criticism.

Good to hear, I feel that the opinions regarding him (including his writing of course) are way too black and white.

He has a point. Many of the top republicans know that climate change is a serious threat, but choose to publicly deny it. What kind of morals are that? This is indeed a great risk to civilization.

He's great. Definately a populist, but great.
>Acknowledges diferences in IQ in race
>Acknowledges that free will doesnt exist
>Vegan

B A S E D

>Acknowledges diferences in IQ in race
Who doesn't? It's been tested. The debate is on whether people in Africa score lower due to socio-economic differences or due to genetic differences. Does Harris actually say that black people are genetically less smart than white people?

He is a completely innocuous, boringly inconsistent blowhard.

His fanboys are rabid proselytes that should be put down to save the species.

Hitchens was clearly the superior member of the New Atheists. The guy actually could write.