JRPC wrote:Fair enough. Did you opt for the Murray or the Klein one?
JRPC wrote:
"Sam Harris is among our farthest-ranging, deepest-probing, and most straight & open public intellectuals, engaging sincerely with ideas & people whether he agrees with them or not".
hunk wrote:Philosophy buff face, respect!
Facewon wrote:This is what I'm saying. I've read nearly all of his books. More than half for sure. Moral landscape, free will, end of faith (aaaages ago). I've read heaps of his articles, I've watched vids. I did a moral philosophy course a while back, happened to be about the time moral landscape came out. Spent ages reading up on the criticism of that. I don't need to be more aware of the guy's thoughts on things. I recommend googling Russell blackford and reading his reviews of moral landscape. And massimo pillugi. Blackford is a better/actual philosopher than Harris. But he is as kind to Harris as possible while still disagreeing. Or not even disagreeing, just pointing out that he hasn't done the legwork on various schools of thought around moral error theory and situational ethics. I find it all interesting, for one, but more importantly, and hopefully you'll see the trend here, you'll discover that Harris is cooky cutter in his thinking on moral philosophy. Basically, you can kind of agree with a broad version of what he's saying in the ML (and I do), but with a bit more reading and legwork, you discover plenty of folks have done a better job of what he's saying previously, without ignoring large chunks of philosophical criticism. So, if you like, there's the beginning of my bias against Harris. Pick a topic which isn't one of his specialties, and he just ignores mountains of work from specialists in that field. Moral philosophy, history, geopolitics, religion, add race and IQ to the list. Probably worth thinking about why in every tustle he's in, where he's non expert, experts are generally frustrated with him. Now, speaking generally, thats probably also a good time to point out that having folks outside a discipline critiquing it isn't necessarily a bad thing, but, it requires a little humility from those in and outside. Hunk's mentioned Kuhn and popper, but I'd just recommend more generally reading some general philosophy of science. There's a number of excellent, readable and shortish (300 page) philosophy of science books out there. There's currently a poor relationship between a lot of scientists (Krause famously) and philosophers generally, and philosophers of science specifically. And it's to the detriment of the scientists, IMO. Harris should be sympathetic to the philosophers of science, should be angling himself in that lane, but he's not, he's hard line the other way. Its a problem.
Vela wrote:Wait, jrpc is I australia isn't he? Which city? This is completely separate from the discussion btw
JRPC wrote:[q
Moral philosophy and ethics is my jam (with a good dash of medical ethics), or at least it has been for the last 3 or 4 years, and I have come out the other end of that a hard Harrisian. The Moral Landscape, Free Will and Lying are now pretty much core software running on my brain.
My view from what you've said here, despite obviously having read some Harris, is that I don't think you've actualy understood it. Not fully. Not deeply. Maybe to avoid falling into another rabbit-hole here, I could stretch that to perhaps that you're reading him differently to how I do.
Maybe we should leave it there.
acemuzzy wrote:Had this been linked?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627312005843/pdfft?md5=8cbbdf721004ffdeb80c12cd1bec5597&pid=1-s2.0-S0896627312005843-main.pdf
"Fractionating human intelligence - Scientists debunk the IQ myth: Notion of measuring one's intelligence quotient by singular, standardized test is highly misleading"
Facewon wrote:Streets barber is a dude who cuts homeless folks hair for free. He's a champ. He's brother of my guy nima, who I coach with. I could be way off base, but I know nima is away for today's game because of a wedding.
Ahahahaha! “You didn’t understand it properly!”JRPC wrote:...
My view from what you've said here, despite obviously having read some Harris, is that I don't think you've actualy understood it. Not fully. Not deeply. ...
I wonder what Harris would make of this. You've basically turned him into a kind of religion. Seems to go against everything he purports to stand for. And no fucking wonder a proper discussion has been impossible from the start. If only you'd declared your bias then...JRPC wrote:Moral philosophy and ethics is my jam (with a good dash of medical ethics), or at least it has been for the last 3 or 4 years, and I have come out the other end of that a hard Harrisian. The Moral Landscape, Free Will and Lying are now pretty much core software running on my brain.
Facewon wrote:Look out. Vela, are you saying you going to a baha'i wedding today? If it involves the streets barber or a bloke called nima as guests, then fuck me small world. One of my fellow assistant coaches isn't on the trip to Warrnambool because of a wedding, I think. He's baha'i.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!