On the Freedom to Offend an Imaginary God

 
 
Avatar
 
 
toombaru
Total Posts:  800
Joined  12-11-2010
 
 
 
19 September 2012 19:38
 

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.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
toombaru
Total Posts:  800
Joined  12-11-2010
 
 
 
19 September 2012 21:49
 
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.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
kikl
Total Posts:  122
Joined  10-05-2011
 
 
 
20 September 2012 05:08
 

“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.

 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
toombaru
Total Posts:  800
Joined  12-11-2010
 
 
 
20 September 2012 08:18
 
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.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
NewShoe
Total Posts:  48
Joined  26-01-2013
 
 
 
26 January 2013 13:29
 

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.

 
GreenInferno
 
Avatar
 
 
GreenInferno
Total Posts:  68
Joined  20-09-2012
 
 
 
29 April 2013 05:57
 

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.

 
 
GreenInferno
 
Avatar
 
 
GreenInferno
Total Posts:  68
Joined  20-09-2012
 
 
 
29 April 2013 05:58
 
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

 
 
 
Avatar
 
 
NewShoe
Total Posts:  48
Joined  26-01-2013
 
 
 
29 April 2013 14:40
 

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

 
HobbesBrundige
 
Avatar
 
 
HobbesBrundige
Total Posts:  3
Joined  15-01-2011
 
 
 
01 May 2013 12:08
 

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.

 
GreenInferno
 
Avatar
 
 
GreenInferno
Total Posts:  68
Joined  20-09-2012
 
 
 
01 May 2013 20:31
 
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. ?

 
 
HobbesBrundige
 
Avatar
 
 
HobbesBrundige
Total Posts:  3
Joined  15-01-2011
 
 
 
02 May 2013 10:25
 

The almighty god of course. Praise him.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
NewShoe
Total Posts:  48
Joined  26-01-2013
 
 
 
02 May 2013 14:11
 

?

 
GreenInferno
 
Avatar
 
 
GreenInferno
Total Posts:  68
Joined  20-09-2012
 
 
 
02 May 2013 19:50
 
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?