Has Sam Harris made philosophy, and humanities in general, obsolete?

>>1764184
He's easily one of the greatest authors/philosophers/intellectuals of our time.

>>1764192
That's stricly your opinion, and quite frankly an unfounded one.

>>1764184
How? He's just a meme.

>>1764184
Sam Harris is a god damn clown

I've seen this face before. You can tell just from looking in his eyes that he's a sociopath. There's just something there, like a self-absorption so complete that it's collapsed into a singularity like a black hole of personality. Can anyone else get this from photographs of people? So he's a writer? I doubt he even believes a single word he's ever written. I'm guessing his books are elaborate puffed-up verbal constructs drawing together a mishmash of tangentially facts to bravely assail some stupid little worthless orthodoxy or other, eh?

>>1764184
*tips fedora*

/lit/ and /his/ only hate this guy because he's anti religion they try waaaaaaay too hard to not be "fedora" because their fragile little egos and identities are wrapped in what their 4chan board likes

me, someone with some self worth? He's okay. Sometimes he's too heavy handed in his conclusion, but, he mostly btfos religicuckolds.

>>1764451
I think /his/ hates him more because of his views on morality.

>>1764451
I'm an atheist and I think he's completely retarded because of his views on morality and politics

He's a hack. Never understood why he's held in such high regard by some. His ideas on international politics seem completely unfounded and drawn from thin air and he always falls through when debating these things with anyone who's actually done their homework. Read his exchange with Noam Chomsky or even his discussion with Dan Carlin, an amateur historian, and tell me I'm wrong.

>>1764451
he's a STEMcuck, of course /his/ hates him

I mean he is alright but he is no revolutionary mind. I like when he debated people.

>>1764184
If we let philosophy die, science becomes a democratic opinion (the majority vote), and that's scary, because most of that has already been done before, and look a t the state of it now. We can't talk about race, or religion, even among scientists. It's ridiculous. We need the space to ALWAYS question something, and that space isn't afforded to us by science alone.

“We can say it even more simply: we need a world government. . . . The diversity of our religious beliefs constitutes a primary obstacle here.”

>>1764655
...the Bible warned us about this shit.

Let me guess. He's Jewish?

>>1764184
I liked his view on morality. It's possible to marry science and morality. But it's not possible to marry machinery and morality, or to say "Philosophy is obsolete" or "We need a one world government".

>>1764664

His mother is indeed Jewish.

>>1764192
He is a great actor. I loved him in Zoolander and Meet the Fockers.

>>1764655
I don't know if we "need" a world government, that's too strong a word, but I do think it's inevitable. It will probably happen in the next few hundred years. Depends on how long it takes to start colonizing space.

>>1764184
I don't know but I loved Meet the Fockers

>>1764678
Nah.. /pol/itician here. Globalism ALWAYS sees problems.

>>1764704
Just a tip but bragging that you're from /pol/ on /his/ is not a good idea.

>Globalism ALWAYS sees problems

Are you a time traveler from the future? Or perhaps from the far past, during the pre-hyper-war era of the Finish Empire and the PIE people?

>>1764711
>Just a tip but bragging that you're from /pol/ on /his/ is not a good idea.

Why?

>>1764711
>Just a tip but bragging that you're from /pol/ on /his/ is not a good idea.

I know; but from experience, I can safely tell you why globalism always ends in failure.

>Are you a time traveler from the future? Or perhaps from the far past, during the pre-hyper-war era of the Finish Empire and the PIE people?

No. When you look at systems like math, for example, you don't say "Well, if I exponentialize that number, then it will be less than what it started out with. We know how globalism works; we know the methods it takes. Statism becomes imperialism, and that becomes global control. It's been tried many times before.

The reason it can't work is because, like language, the experiences of individual groups can never be properly portrayed when we unify everyone under a common language. This is what happened when Proto-Indo European groups separated; you could tell who was at the bottom of society by the language they used. Perhaps the word for House in German is a cognate to the word for "Cave" in Latin. You see where I'm going with this? Language itself is a great model to follow when talking about globalism, because we can see the extent a language expands; but just as it expands, many people have to educate rules into the language to keep people from forming dialects or separate languages. I personally can't understand a lot of the thug-gangster speak from African American communities in the ghettos, and they probably can't understand me perfectly, but that's my point. Language is a tool for communication, and we go just so far in our communication. We can never communicate past a national point. There will always be that lack of communication between peoples. I believe morality and property, like language, to be a form of communication. Communication only goes just so far, and then it divides naturally. That's always been historically true for thousands of years. And based on its historical nature, the system doesn't seem to change much

>>1764672
Gold.

>>1764192
>intellectual

He's a pseud. Come back when you look into real intellectuals like Chomsky.

>>1764759
harris is reddit gold

>>1764713
>Why?
because it triggers the leftypol SJWs

>>1764803
>Chomsky
I don't think blaming America, Britain, and Israel for everything counts as intellectualism.

>>1765233
Chomsky was fundamental in the development of modern programming and linguistics.

Also he's not entirely wrong by any stretch.

>>1765248
>Chomsky was fundamental in the development of modern programming and linguistics

Irrelevant appeal to authority

>Also he's not entirely wrong

Meaningless equivocation.

>>1764192
Agree anon. Great project.
Show religion is dumb. (end of faith)
Show you don't need religion for morality.(moral landscape)
Show an example of secular morality.(lying)
Show you don't need region for spiritualism.(waking up)

File: image.jpg (341KB, 1600x1400px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 1600x1400px

>>1764460
That just shows that you are retarded anon-kun.

>>1764503
Holy shit. You actually read that but concluded either Chompsky or Carlin even said a single thing? This board is unbelievable.

File: image.jpg (43KB, 460x345px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 460x345px

>>1764704
>thinking /pol/ makes you sound more credible.

>>1764740
You are fucking retarded. You think only so many people can learn a language, or only so diverse of people? /pol/ itself has people from literally everywhere in the world using English all the time. And you think that analyzing language is like math? How can people like you even type coherently?

>>1764803
Not even sure if this is a troll.

>>1765296
It's not irrelevant to say "here's some fundamental achievements" as a qualification of him being an intellectual.

>>1765233
>redpilled on the Eternal Anglo and the Eternal Jew

based Chomsky

>>1765365
Yes he was a brilliant linguist. That gives you a reason to think he might be a brilliant political commentator.
>until you read or listen to anything he writes or says.

File: intredasting.jpg (44KB, 549x563px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 549x563px

>>1764740
>but from experience, I can safely tell you why globalism always ends in failure.
What experience do you have other than reading this on /pol/?

>>1765411
Philosophy, the topic which initiated this thread of discussion (>>1764192
>>1764803), is about more than political commentary. Philosophy of language is an equally valid subpart to judge someone to be an intellectual.

>>1764184
The "post-structuralist" retards already did that.

In a sense though, they were all simply a reaction to Nietzsche, which means he was the beginning of the end. And he actually knew that he would be, because he had reached the ultimate conclusion of philosophy, and in the future there would only be: his successors, or the proceeding successors of Christ.

>>1765450
That's irrelevant to whether he is making any sense in any particular moment. He made great advances in linguistics at one point. That was pretty genius. Maybe he's become retarded or senile since then, or there's some other reason. I don't know. But I do know that when he talks about politics he makes no sense.

>>1765507
Here's a great example of Chomsky esque pseudo intellectualism. Not hist saying things clearly. Instead laying increasing amounts of bullshit until the end has no apparent relationship to the beginning.

Maybe there's some super secret relationship in your mind. But if you aren't spelling it out then I can't tell you what part is wrong, and it's impossible to talk with you. Then you just strut around making superior noises when in fact you're just unable to communicate.

>>1764655
>history proves that appointing leaders is a game roulette
>narrowing down a single leader to a single game of global roulette

It amazes me that what many classify as intelligent could be so dangerously incorrect, it has to be pride though, right? I mean I can't see any other reason for the lack and abandonment of foresight. One would have to be arrogant to not see the flaw in the idea of a one world government. As if man isn't fragile in relation to self control and the temptation to exploit others.

>>1764655
>world government is possible, we just need to get rid of everyone who disagrees with me
bluepillers are so stupid

File: image.jpg (565KB, 2560x1707px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 2560x1707px

>>1765892
As long as the world government has a second amendment it's fine anon-kun. In fact. A world government should mandate universal gun ownership and abolish any armed force.

>>1765937
Please go back to your containment board.

>>1764670
So he's Jewish by Jewish law.

>>1765942
I'm pretty sure the agenda at the moment is to take the guns away though. Even then though, with technology where it's at and headed, aside from assistance from God Himself, I don't think man, even with arms, would be equipped well enough to uncoil the tentacles modern technology could potentially grip the world and it's societies with.

With that said, whether people believe or not though, it's already written that this will eventually happen. People will actually see it as a logical decision.

>>1764184
He was great in Zoolander.

I liked the scene where Derek was telling Mugatu that Science can dictate Morality.

And then Mugatu started screaming about inventing Deontological Ethics, had me rolling on the floor.

>>1766008
I prefer his voice work

>>1766008
Zoolander 2 was a mistake tho. It is a shame that Sam isn´t as funny as he used to be.

>>1765879
I don't share your intuition that being a great author/philosopher/intellectual (of our time, i.e. living) needs to be tied to points in time. I value the whole work of an artist much more than just someone's latest works. I also don't think that Chomsky ever stopped writing about linguistics, just because he got into political writing, too, but I don't know much about him.

Was Newton no longer a great intellectual, when he started doing worthless nutjob alchemy in his last decades of life? Did Watson cease to be a great geneticist when he failed with his racist studies because he was a bad clinical scientist? Did Kelvin cease to be a great physicists when he failed in his attempts at geology?

I just think late ramblings detriment from that status, but they don't destroy it.

(The phenomenon that great physicists and mathematicians write worthless ramblings in their late years is quite common, by the way.)

>>1765890
The relationship is "super secret" to you because you haven't read Nietzsche and his predecessors enough, or what you read you barely understood.

Post-structuralists made philosophy obsolete by turning it into a joke. Most of them were more preoccupied with appearance and writing something "catchy". They didn't properly expand on Nietzsche's ideas, or take perspectivism to its fullest conclusion like he did himself (which is what Will to Power is, which nobody fucking gets and everyone tries to claim it was all his sister).

>>1766008
I agree. although i'm more of a tropic thunder guy myself

>>1765312
No it just means your a cuck who supports open borders. If you don't accept a refugee family, you are a hypocrite for sucking Harris's cock.

File: 1472166071765.png (803KB, 1100x700px) Image search: [Google]

803KB, 1100x700px

>>1764184
yes he did, and thats why humanities hate him.
philosophers have completely rejected the enlightenment and instead have adopted ideologies that are so ingenious, so contorted, so demented, that 99.99% of people just laugh at them. sam still believes in reason, and his arguements make alot of sense to the majority of people and they come to his side.

continental philosophers are enraged that people are swayed by his arguments, while ignoring the retarded anti reason, anti science, and anti humanism positions they hold from 10+ years of isolation in the academy divorced from reality.

because they cant win any arguments, they are reduced to calling him names. its really really sad

reddit

>>1764184
3rd rate utilitarian, which is itself 3rd ethical system.

I lost all respect for Harris after he slammed Dawkins for supporting SyeTen's/Sargon video that compared 3rd wave feminists to Muslim fundies.

>>1767012
he didnt slam dawkins tho.
sargon is awesome, btw

>>1767017
Ok slam was a bit too strong, but he did side with the cucks that banned Dakwins from that event. Fucking shameful.

He has no integrity.

>>1767032
he did?
i remember otherwise.
..... are you a continental philosopher? are you just fucking lying to me?

>>1767058
No, you stupid fuck face. Here is the proof. Start at 50 seconds in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3SRuEP6A_4


Fuck off with your idol shit and think for yourself. Your selective memory is cancer.

>>1764184
I never understood how he supports Hillary.

He whines about Muslims musliming, but then goes ahead and says criticism of Jews is off limits.

>>1767157
Because he is a kike, a legitimate one.
Fuck him, even Dawkins attacks the Zionist fucks.

>>1767168
Yeah, he never has a bad word to say about Jews or Israel. He occasional criticizes Judaism with the softest gloves, but makes sure to show distinction between

>>1765341
It has to be.

>>1767032
>>1767110
you video doesnt say what what you claim it to say. sam harris agreed with the video, but thought it was well made.

harris did not "slam" anything.

>>1764184
Maybe. I mean, 'Night at the Museum' is going to be pretty tough to top.

>>1764192
I'm thinking this bait was successful.

>>1767118
because Hillary has and will kill more Muslims than Trump or Johnson

also because he's a Jew

>>1764184
Reminder to assume utilitarianism first & wet dream over Brave New World as an ideal world.