Sam Harris Talks about the Defence of Religion

[_Some Schmo]

I'm still amused Dart would compare himself with a fictional atheist in regards to wit, intelligence, and logical thinking. Very. Very amused.

Makes sense though... what dart thinks of himself is a fictional character.

[_dartagnan]

antishock, is this really so hard for you to understand?

My point is simple. My usage of the term "idiot" is rarely meant to be as encompassing as Schmo constantly suggests. I brought up House because I have been deprived of American television for years, and that was one of the first shows I saw, but more to the point, most people here have probably seen an episode, and he used the word idiot nearly as much as I do. But nobody responds the way Schmo does. Why? Because internet expression clearly has its limitations. You're missing out on all kinds of body language that speaks louder than anything a keyboard can convey.

Am I "comparing" myself to him? I guess, but not for the reasons you are trying to create.

I'm not saying I'm a doctor.

I'm not saying I'm an atheist.

I'm not saying I'm addicted to vicotin.

I'm not saying I'm a cripple.

What does it matter if he is fictional or real? The producers clearly felt his personality would resonate with real people, and it clearly has. Is Schmo comparing himself to Homer Simpson?

I'm saying I don't understand why it is so difficult for people here to understand the simple fact that my usage of the term is hyperbolic. It is a personality trait the same as it is with many others. I referenced House because chances are, everyone here has seen an episode and can get the point.

I guess not.

[_antishock8]

Brother,

I get your point. I'm just amused, since you're clearly hostile toward most atheists, that you'd end up comparing your wit, style, and intelligence with that of a fictional atheist. It's ironic.

[_dartagnan]

Except I never compared my "wit and intelligence" with him.

[_antishock8]

Except I never compared my "wit and intelligence" with him.

Inference is a b*tch, my friend.

[_Calculus Crusader]

It's kind of amazing they have enough time to write all that crap when their hands are so busy stroking each other.

I personally think Sam Harris is one of the greatest thinkers of our time.

I'm not frustrated. I don't mind that people know I admire and respect Harris. I do. He's a brilliant guy.

[_Some Schmo]

...I have demonstrated as much on numerous occassions. No one here has been able to defend him, including you.

This is a shining example of why you're completely useless to discuss anything with, and why I never bother. Let's break this down so that maybe even your tiny intellect will grasp it.

If someone actually had defended him (Dawkins):
- Would you notice it?
- Would you acknowledge it?
- Would you concede any possible defence?
- Or would you be half-reading it, already putting together some moronic counter to Dawkins' defence?

I think we all know the answers to these questions, given your posting history.

Let me show you, by example, how stupid this kind of line is (the flavor of which you use regularly in your posts):

I have demonstrated on several occasions, dart, that you are a complete moron (actually, you've demonstrated it on several occasions, but that's beside the point here), and you've never been able to defend yourself against that charge. So clearly, you are a moron. Using methods borrowed from you, I've been able to prove that you are a moron, and there's absolutely nothing you can say to refute it. You must be afraid to, since you never do it. Or you just can't... yeah, that must be it.

Now, do you really anticipate that you'll be able to say anything that will change anyone's mind on this? Do you think you'll change my mind? If, by some stretch of the imagination, you're thinking, "Well, there's no point. His mind is made up," then you will begin to approach the understanding of why I never bother to discuss anything with you in response to your moronic comments about Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, evolution, god, religion, etc, etc, and would rather just point out the obvious: you're a moron. That's far more fun than beating my head against a wall trying to make you understand the simplest of things.

[_dartagnan]

Just as I expected.

You can't defend your claim.

You can't even present a single innovative idea this guy came up with, because you don't know of any.

Trying to defer to something Dawkins might have said favorably about him (gee, like that's surprising?) is pretty darn funny, if not outright clear intellectal cowardice.

Do you think you'll change my mind?

Of course not. Your mind might be small, but at least its made up.

Stop acting like you're having fun at my expense, when you know damn well it is the other way around. You made an idiotic comment, and nobody thinks this is about trying to change your mind. Hell even EA, one of your own atheist cohorts, can't seem to put a dent in the block head of yours.

[_JohnStuartMill]

Well, it's disappointing (to me, anyway) that you would quote such a mischaracterization of the guy.

I think it's pretty dead on. I would describe him as dogmatic, intolerant, quasi-religious, and morally sketchy. Sort of Bill Maher like, I guess.

^ Everybody shut up and listen to this guy.

[_marg]

Well, it's disappointing (to me, anyway) that you would quote such a mischaracterization of the guy.

I think it's pretty dead on. I would describe him as dogmatic, intolerant, quasi-religious, and morally sketchy. Sort of Bill Maher like, I guess.

^ Everybody shut up and listen to this guy.

Which guy E.A.? E.A. may be a female. But no I don't listen to everything nor agree with everything E.A. has to say.
And in this thread I don't agree with E.A.'s assessment of Harris.