I hear alot of talk about the 2hr debate between Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson, who is a pragmatist, above all else. And Sam has a discussion with him for 2 hour hours about a word, truth.
Peterson claims its tied to what promotes life.
Sam Harris says, "No, truth can kill you,"
Like smallpox. Its true that it is deadly, but it also gives you immunities if you survive.
If it can kill you is that not true?
I agree with Sam. And if he calls himself an atheist then so am I.
But the word god still means something to me.
It doesn't mean the same thing to me 5hat it means to many others, but thats ok. When I hear the word God I think, good.
Thank God = Thank goodness
In God We Trust = In Good We Trust
One nation under God = One Nation Under Good

But I believe like Michio Kaku says, that we have a very good candidate for what Einstein called The Mind of God.

The thing about Harris is he never defines "Truth"
Hes non dogmatic, And I can see where Peterson is arguing for the dogmatic ideology of the far right authoritarianism.,
Harris is the opposite of totalitarian in his thinking.
His sense of humor about Religious bumkin, Mitts magic undies is epic.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/06/2018 08:50PM by koriwhore.

And please consider staying there until you can somehow work through your paralyzing obscession with atheists.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2018 02:05PM by steve benson.

Is Sam Harris the leader of the Atheists ?

He is sustained as such.

Dave the Atheist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is Sam Harris the leader of the Atheists ?

He wrote the best response to 9-11, The End of Faith, IMO.
I find myself agreeing with 99% of what he has to say, but unfortunately bigotry against atheists is still pretty much the last socially acceptable form of bigotry.

I agree. End of Faith is a good read. Letter to a Christian Nation is a true standout as well. Harris is at his best in his smaller essays. His doctoral dissertation was like reading War and Peace.


HH =)

Happy_Heretic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree. End of Faith is a good read. Letter to
> a Christian Nation is a true standout as well.
> Harris is at his best in his smaller essays. His
> doctoral dissertation was like reading War and
> Peace.
>
>
> HH =)
I hadn't read his dissertation, but I'm curious about his thinking, which is pretty grounded in ancient wisdom, especially Eastern.
He's written 5 NYT's bestsellers on philosophy, religion and morality, all of which are amazing. There's just quite a bit of pushback against him now and people, especially illiberal SJWs who see him as a racist and a sexist for just interviewing people like Lawrence Krauss and Charles Murray.
He is about as liberal as they come, just not trying to be politically correct, at all, which I like, especially these days.

Kori, I'd simply encourage you to make up your own mind about what you are or aren't...rather than constantly bringing up "celebrities" to agree with (or not).

Sam Harris' words can inform you. So can Peterson's. So can Einstein's and Sagan's. But to constantly refer to their opinions as justification for your identity is...well...obesequious.

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kori, I'd simply encourage you to make up your own
> mind about what you are or aren't...rather than
> constantly bringing up "celebrities" to agree with
> (or not).
>
> Sam Harris' words can inform you. So can
> Peterson's. So can Einstein's and Sagan's. But
> to constantly refer to their opinions as
> justification for your identity
> is...well...obesequious.

Thanks. I can't change my mind based upon input from people whose opinions I respect and rely upon to make sense out of an otherwise senseless world?
Sam Harris is one of those people, but he is obviously far mire than his identification. In fact he often says identity politics are toxic. I think he has included the atheist identity as toxic also, when it is used as a political identity, since its about the most politically toxic identity you could possibly choose.
I really think we are all agnostics when it comes to religion since nobody knows a GD thing about God one way or the other, But we dont live in an absolute universe. We live in a probabilistic universe. If we go by probabilities the chances of an omnipotent God, described by the Bible are approaching zero.
Which is why I say in regards to that God, i am an atheist. But not in regards to all notions of god, like Sagans or Einsteins or Kakus.

koriwhore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks. I can't change my mind based upon input
> from people whose opinions I respect and rely upon
> to make sense out of an otherwise senseless world?

Of course you can. But look at the title of this thread...essentially, you're saying that whatever Sam Harris is, you'll follow. Hundreds of your other threads basically express the same thing referring to other celebrities. It sounds a lot like "follow the prophet no matter what!"

> ...since its about the most politically
> toxic identity you could possibly choose.

You do realize that if it weren't a minority position, that wouldn't be the case, right? Besides, why do you give a flying f*ck what other people think of your "identity?"

> I really think we are all agnostics when it comes
> to religion since nobody knows a GD thing about
> God one way or the other...

Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive. Although when it comes to thousands of particular claimed god-things, we most certainly *aren't* agnostic. There's more than ample evidence to clearly show many thousands of claimed god-things don't exist.

>> ....people whose opinions I respect and rely upon to make sense out of an otherwise senseless world?

I think this is a key point....to you the world seems "senseless" and it would seem you can't comfortably exist in a senseless world, so you look to others opinions to make sense out of it for yourself. My TBM father was very much the same way.

When you post in this manner, a large part of your audience here maybe doesn't relate to that. The world doesn't seem "senseless" or to the extent it does, they make sense of it for themselves so they can comfortably exist in it. How they make sense of it will vary, but they make enough sense of it doesn't become a topic of constant conversation.

I think people here are just saying it would be nice if you could find your identity and be at peace with it so maybe we can discuss topics other than the formation of your identity with you :)

>> Which is why I say in regards to that God, i am an atheist. But not in regards to all notions of god, like Sagans or Einsteins or Kakus.

Sounds like you are saying you're atheist, but you like the god philosophy of certain learned people. That's cool. I feel the same. Sounds like you have it all figured out then.

Well said.

If I could add one thing to your wonderfully worded advice. Sometimes in expanding your exposure to everything you lose perspective. Years ago after a particularly identity striping philosophy read I recall thinking that Marx was a poor misunderstood soul who's ideas weren't far off. Since then I have gone by the personal idiom "Start with an opinion and end with and opinion, but sometimes not the same opinion."

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kori, I'd simply encourage you to make up your own
> mind about what you are or aren't...rather than
> constantly bringing up "celebrities" to agree with
> (or not).
>
> Sam Harris' words can inform you. So can
> Peterson's. So can Einstein's and Sagan's. But
> to constantly refer to their opinions as
> justification for your identity
> is...well...obesequious.
---------------------------------------------------
For Kori!

Kolob is 100% accurate ----- you need to make up your own mind about things but of course you can change with more 'information'.

I suggest you study 'intuition' it is a form of 'psychic ability' just provides a few 'tools' a person can use to help in making decisions or deciding what to believe. You could also get free training on utube on 'remote viewing' another psychic tool that has been confirmed as 'real' by the CIA. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLeoU6HNu3A

These are 'tools' not always perfect but along with personal study of available information should provide a person a more 'firm' basis to establish a more lasting belief on.

Glad you are eager to find truth ----- you just need to be open and study 'ways' on how to do that task!!!

Good luck on your search for truth, but the these mental techniques infers 'truth' is available we just need to look within ourselves for the answers we are seeking ----- we can get help and also help ourselves using what we have been provided with!

spiritist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Kori, I'd simply encourage you to make up your
> own
> > mind about what you are or aren't...rather than
> > constantly bringing up "celebrities" to agree
> with
> > (or not).
> >
> > Sam Harris' words can inform you. So can
> > Peterson's. So can Einstein's and Sagan's.
> But
> > to constantly refer to their opinions as
> > justification for your identity
> > is...well...obesequious.
> --------------------------------------------------
> -
> For Kori!
>
> Kolob is 100% accurate ----- you need to make up
> your own mind about things but of course you can
> change with more 'information'.
>
> I suggest you study 'intuition' it is a form of
> 'psychic ability' just provides a few 'tools' a
> person can use to help in making decisions or
> deciding what to believe. You could also get free
> training on utube on 'remote viewing' another
> psychic tool that has been confirmed as 'real' by
> the CIA.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLeoU6HNu3A
>
> These are 'tools' not always perfect but along
> with personal study of available information
> should provide a person a more 'firm' basis to
> establish a more lasting belief on.
>
> Glad you are eager to find truth ----- you just
> need to be open and study 'ways' on how to do that
> task!!!
>
> Good luck on your search for truth, but the these
> mental techniques infers 'truth' is available we
> just need to look within ourselves for the answers
> we are seeking ----- we can get help and also
> help ourselves using what we have been provided
> with!
Thanks for the input.

I've always considered myself a humanist and a secularist. Atheist is a label that seems pretty toxic still to me. They guys I respect moat really dont have time for the whole Theist vs Atheist debate. Theyre more interested in discovering how the universe could exist w/o need for supernatural explanations.
Like NdGT who said," Once you conclude God did it, you become worthless to me in the lab because you have abandoned the search for the real cause."

I've always considered myself a humanist and a secularist. Atheist is a label that seems pretty toxic still to me. They guys I respect moat really dont have time for the whole Theist vs Atheist debate. Theyre more interested in discovering how the universe could exist w/o need for supernatural explanations.
Like NdGT who said," Once you conclude God did it, you become worthless to me in the lab because you have abandoned the search for the real cause."
_______________________________________________________
I agree the 'atheist' label is not well understood in our society. Many would think you are trying to 'attack' religion and God versus just have a position if you try to bring it up that much.

I am asking wouldn't it be nice to be able to ask a question and get an answer from 'higher self, intuition, etc.'. That is why someone who is a 'truth seeker' should be interested in reading at least one book on the subject of using your intuition, try it and then dump it if you are not satisfied.

Maybe you have already studied a book on intuition. If so, forget what I suggested.

The answer isn't always God did it! I am doing some work on Moses and 'God' didn't do anything in the various 'stories' according to what I am getting. Another project on Jesus, where 'God' didn't do anything there either! I am doing some more work on the Nazca mummies and God didn't do anything there either but there is a lot of 'scientific' information coming out and a lot of questions that everyone wants to know.

Hopefully, I will see how accurate my 'intuitive conclusions' on some of these things are. So far I am in line with what 'science' has identified so far and most key issues identified by the remote viewers. Hope it stays that way, however, science can/will only be able to go so far versus what intuits can.

We already have a word for good. It's called "good."

There is no objective definition of good.

You can test this for yourself. Just walk around on the street and ask strangers the following question: Is gun control good?

See how many answers you get.

Good guess!

Case closed...

The case cannot be closed until Judic West has offered his judgment.

I've heard, through mutual friends, that Judic is on an epic bender, with a robot whose last name is Rodriguez.

You can't make this shit up!

At least you spelled Atheist correctly.

Dave the Atheist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At least you spelled Atheist correctly.


Atheist has a small 'a' btw