On the Freedom to Offend an Imaginary God
Posted: 19 September 2012 07:38 PM   [ Ignore ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  800
Joined  2010-11-12

Golly, I’m beginning to think that Sam Harris, although very smart, is just another human being composed of self-serving opinions. beliefs and half-truths.
In this article he proposes that Mormonism is more quirky than the other religions.
That’s like saying that some night time dreams are more real than others.
He exposes his political liberalism which to this old capitalist indicates a mental infirmity.
(Neither he nor I can help what our brain’s come up with.)
I think I like Sam, but his opinions are looking more and like his opinions.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 September 2012 09:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  800
Joined  2010-11-12
toombaru - 19 September 2012 07:38 PM

Golly, I’m beginning to think that Sam Harris, although very smart, is just another human being composed of self-serving opinions. beliefs and half-truths.
In this article he proposes that Mormonism is more quirky than the other religions.
That’s like saying that some night time dreams are more real than others.
He exposes his political liberalism which to this old capitalist indicates a mental infirmity.
(Neither he nor I can help what our brain’s come up with.)
I think I like Sam, but his opinions are looking more and like his opinions.

 

If free will does not exit, there is no freedom to offend an imaginary God.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2012 05:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  122
Joined  2011-05-10

“If free will does not exit, there is no freedom to offend an imaginary God.”

Exactly!

This proves that Sam doesn’t really believe that free will doesn’t exist.

 Signature 

Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-incurred immaturity.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 September 2012 08:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  800
Joined  2010-11-12
kikl - 20 September 2012 05:08 AM

“If free will does not exit, there is no freedom to offend an imaginary God.”

Exactly!

This proves that Sam doesn’t really believe that free will doesn’t exist.

That doesn’t mean it does.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 January 2013 01:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  48
Joined  2013-01-26

I think Sam is right on about Mormonism. It does have many particulars that seperate it from the rest of christianity. Many of which are very unplausible. If mormonism falls however, that doesn’t necessarily does any damage to any other religion.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
Newbie
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  46
Joined  2012-09-20

Are you saying that all religions are equally quirky then? I think we all (and Sam) must agree that they’re all equally false, but to say that they’re all equally batshit seems to be a different measure to me.

 Signature 

“Does history record any case in which the majority was right?”
Robert A. Heinlein

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 05:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
Newbie
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  46
Joined  2012-09-20
kikl - 20 September 2012 05:08 AM

“If free will does not exit, there is no freedom to offend an imaginary God.”

Exactly!

This proves that Sam doesn’t really believe that free will doesn’t exist.

Sam might not, but his “causes” do… wink

 Signature 

“Does history record any case in which the majority was right?”
Robert A. Heinlein

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 April 2013 02:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  48
Joined  2013-01-26

I suppose some are more ‘out there’ than others.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 May 2013 12:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2011-01-15

Just to clarify I think his point is pretty self explanatory when he explained it… himself. But basically he thinks (and is correct btw) that if you have a bad idea you cannot take the roots of that bad idea, create a new idea and say that the NEW idea which is just the old bad idea with some extra crap thrown on top, and call it good.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 01 May 2013 08:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]  
Newbie
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  46
Joined  2012-09-20
HobbesBrundige - 01 May 2013 12:08 PM

Just to clarify I think his point is pretty self explanatory when he explained it… himself. But basically he thinks (and is correct btw) that if you have a bad idea you cannot take the roots of that bad idea, create a new idea and say that the NEW idea which is just the old bad idea with some extra crap thrown on top, and call it good.

Who is the “he” you’re referring to in your post? The topic maker or Sam H. ?

 Signature 

“Does history record any case in which the majority was right?”
Robert A. Heinlein

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 May 2013 10:25 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  3
Joined  2011-01-15

The almighty god of course. Praise him.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 May 2013 02:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  48
Joined  2013-01-26

?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 May 2013 07:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]  
Newbie
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  46
Joined  2012-09-20
GreenInferno - 01 May 2013 08:31 PM
HobbesBrundige - 01 May 2013 12:08 PM

Just to clarify I think his point is pretty self explanatory when he explained it… himself. But basically he thinks (and is correct btw) that if you have a bad idea you cannot take the roots of that bad idea, create a new idea and say that the NEW idea which is just the old bad idea with some extra crap thrown on top, and call it good.

Who is the “he” you’re referring to in your post? The topic maker or Sam H. ?

I can’t tell if you’re being ironic or not, but aren’t you supposed to use a pronoun when referring to Him?

 Signature 

“Does history record any case in which the majority was right?”
Robert A. Heinlein

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed