Sam Harris argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-09-2013, 09:27 PM
Sam Harris argument
I've been reading The End of Faith and I'm in the chapter about Ethics/morals.

I agree with most of Sam's points on morality, as we define it, to be dependent on the well being/suffering of sentient creatures, and therefore since we are physical beings in a physical universe we can make objective judgments on how to move human beings towards happiness/love instead of hate/suffering.

However, theres the rebuttal that a lot of people like to use which is, "well without god why should i even care about happiness/love, and how can YOU say what happiness/love is, and that I should strive for it".

I know the above rebuttal is bullshit, but I can't think of a solid comeback for it.

HELP ME GUYS. Censored
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2013, 10:15 PM
Sam Harris argument
(25-09-2013 09:27 PM)Shawnzy Wrote:  I've been reading The End of Faith and I'm in the chapter about Ethics/morals.

I agree with most of Sam's points on morality, as we define it, to be dependent on the well being/suffering of sentient creatures, and therefore since we are physical beings in a physical universe we can make objective judgments on how to move human beings towards happiness/love instead of hate/suffering.

However, theres the rebuttal that a lot of people like to use which is, "well without god why should i even care about happiness/love, and how can YOU say what happiness/love is, and that I should strive for it".

I know the above rebuttal is bullshit, but I can't think of a solid comeback for it.

HELP ME GUYS. Censored

I am not sure if I understand that rebuttal, but I would say that happiness is that, what we strive for, more or less by definition.
so happiness can be different things for different people.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2013, 10:59 PM
Tongue RE: Sam Harris argument
(25-09-2013 10:15 PM)black_squirrel Wrote:  
(25-09-2013 09:27 PM)Shawnzy Wrote:  I've been reading The End of Faith and I'm in the chapter about Ethics/morals.

I agree with most of Sam's points on morality, as we define it, to be dependent on the well being/suffering of sentient creatures, and therefore since we are physical beings in a physical universe we can make objective judgments on how to move human beings towards happiness/love instead of hate/suffering.

However, theres the rebuttal that a lot of people like to use which is, "well without god why should i even care about happiness/love, and how can YOU say what happiness/love is, and that I should strive for it".

I know the above rebuttal is bullshit, but I can't think of a solid comeback for it.

HELP ME GUYS. Censored

I am not sure if I understand that rebuttal, but I would say that happiness is that, what we strive for, more or less by definition.
so happiness can be different things for different people.
I haven't read "The End of Faith" yet, but from what I understand ifrom his other books and have seen on video, he describes morality as a continuum from the worst possible environment for everyone moving toward the best possible environment for happiness for the most people and animals. By that guide we can make moral judgments as to the best course of action in a given ethical situation.
The tired excuse most religious people trot out to justify their objection to your unbelief is that without the 10 Commandments humanity would have no moral compass. Their assertion that biblical morals are superior to secular morals is an obvious fallacy. No modern person takes their morality form the bible or they would be crushing their neighbor's head with a rock for mowing his yard on a Sunday afternoon and murdering disrespectful children. Even Christians impose their modern morality when considering biblical guidelines.
As to why one would care about living a moral life--who really believes that normal humans would become rabid criminals without God's direction? Not even the most pious churchgoer. It's just a knee-jerk platitude people are conditioned to give by reverend so and so... The next time someone hits you with "biblical morality" as them if they believe that all the babies drowned in the Great Flood in Genesis deserved to die by God's "righteous" hand, and if they say yes you'll know that you're talking to a truly immoral person.
Chopdoc Cool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chopdoc's post
26-09-2013, 01:21 AM
Re: Sam Harris argument
After those types of comments, I would explain why with the Golden Rule.

Golden rule, silver rule, platinum rule... All that shabazz. Because most people and I desire it is a good reason to want happiness kept around.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2013, 01:42 AM
RE: Sam Harris argument
Sam Harris supports torture and is not an atheist. He is a follower of Judaism (A religion) and continually supports the founding of and the actions of the religious fascist state known as Israel.

I have no reason to read Sam Harris just like I have no reason to read Anne Coulter, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, or any other nut jobs.

Anyone that supports Israeli Apartheid and Torture probably shouldn't be the one to go to for learning morality.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2013, 06:09 AM
RE: Sam Harris argument
(26-09-2013 01:42 AM)I and I Wrote:  Sam Harris supports torture and is not an atheist. He is a follower of Judaism (A religion) and continually supports the founding of and the actions of the religious fascist state known as Israel.

I have no reason to read Sam Harris just like I have no reason to read Anne Coulter, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, or any other nut jobs.

Anyone that supports Israeli Apartheid and Torture probably shouldn't be the one to go to for learning morality.

Quote:Harris's basic message is that the time has come to freely question the idea of religious faith. Harris consistently criticizes Islam, Christianity, and Judaism which he says tend to be monolithic and ready to harm others only for their religion. He feels that the survival of civilization is in danger because of a taboo against questioning religious beliefs, and that this taboo impedes progress toward more enlightened approaches to spirituality and ethics.

Although an atheist, Harris avoids using the term, arguing that the label is both unnecessary and a liability. His position is that "atheism" is not in itself a worldview or a philosophy. He believes atheists "should not call ourselves anything. We should go under the radar—for the rest of our lives. And while there, we should be decent, honest people, who destroy bad ideas wherever we find them".

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
26-09-2013, 11:27 AM
RE: Sam Harris argument
(26-09-2013 01:21 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  After those types of comments, I would explain why with the Golden Rule.

Golden rule, silver rule, platinum rule... All that shabazz. Because most people and I desire it is a good reason to want happiness kept around.

I agree, but how would you come back from somebody saying "If there is no god, then why should i even CARE about love/happiness"

Sorry if it seems like I'm playing an extra annoying version of Devil's advocate, I'm just trying to iron out all the wrinkles in my thinking.Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2013, 11:29 AM
RE: Sam Harris argument
(26-09-2013 01:42 AM)I and I Wrote:  Sam Harris supports torture and is not an atheist. He is a follower of Judaism (A religion) and continually supports the founding of and the actions of the religious fascist state known as Israel.

I have no reason to read Sam Harris just like I have no reason to read Anne Coulter, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, or any other nut jobs.

Hmmmmmm, about now would be a great time for some hard proof that Sam is a practicing Jew.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2013, 05:10 PM
Re: RE: Sam Harris argument
(26-09-2013 11:27 AM)Shawnzy Wrote:  
(26-09-2013 01:21 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  After those types of comments, I would explain why with the Golden Rule.

Golden rule, silver rule, platinum rule... All that shabazz. Because most people and I desire it is a good reason to want happiness kept around.

I agree, but how would you come back from somebody saying "If there is no god, then why should i even CARE about love/happiness"

Sorry if it seems like I'm playing an extra annoying version of Devil's advocate, I'm just trying to iron out all the wrinkles in my thinking.Drinking Beverage

Ain't no thang but a chicken wing... Which is covered in buffalo seasoning and giving me heartburn.

Simply I like love/happiness and I care... Because I live in a society were it's enjoyable and most efficient when people care; therefore, I want the other people in the society to also care.

So I will treat them in ways I think will make the impression of caring for love/happiness to make it a reciprocal cycle.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
26-09-2013, 05:30 PM
RE: Sam Harris argument
http://mondoweiss.net/2012/09/sam-harris...q-war.html

Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: