Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Bushman
climber
The state of quantum flux
|
|
|
May 18, 2016 - 09:12pm PT
|
I
I started all the name calling
I miss Miss Piggy
I am the troll's troll's trolls
I lit the final fuse
I insulted everyone's name
I wanna be holy and martred
I'm Spartacus
I was put up to the ruse
I punked everyone
I'm the one to blame
I wanna be strapped to the catapult
I wanna go down in flames
I want to kill the Jabberwocky
I wanna kick ass and take names
I wanna quote the scriptures
I want a pious name
I'll persecute the ignorant
I'll be ignorant all the same
I wanna be right all the time
I'll play a superior game
I wanna be Jesus Christ
I don't wanna suffer in vain
I wanna be left alone
I wanna exhibit no shame
I'm all for live and let live
I don't wanna go insane
-bushman
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 18, 2016 - 09:29pm PT
|
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
May 19, 2016 - 07:37pm PT
|
I think that HFCS's response above is absolutely indicative of his general view...
the title of Sam Harris' blog post is also interesting, one wonders what it means, the limits of discourse? Did Harris think he would convince Chomsky to change his mind? based on Harris' argument?
And it is well known that HFCS is a fan of Harris, but interestingly, that is the issue here. In particular, by adopting Harris' argument HFCS feels he has taken the "right" position. When pressed, HFCS will produce many posts of Harris' YouTube presence, and quote extensively from Harris' writing, but very little of HFCS' own ideas. Though we now know he had an arabic girlfriend (or was it persian?) back in the 70's (or was it the 80's).
We can all read Harris without HFCS' help if we want to.
At least Harris stands behind his opinion, and even produces the dialog between him and Chomsky. But if we ask who is right we really can't decide, both have very good arguments supporting their positions. But as far as I know, there is no way to definitively determine the correctness of either position.
For my part I heed Chomsky, who at least cautions us to consider the effect of our own self interest in deciding in the international arena who is right and who wrong.
Moral intention doesn't get you far in a US court of law... Chomsky's point is that the US refuses to recognize any international authority in terms of deciding the rightness or wrongness of US actions. That's a problem...
So as a discussion it is quite interesting, with many interesting points to consider by two thoughtful people. It diminishes Harris in my eyes that he would claim he had the answer to some very complicated problems, and that Chomsky is incorrigible.
But all of this has nothing to do with HFCS, who not only adds nothing to the discussion, but doesn't have the balls to be associated with Harris' position. We have no idea who HFCS is...
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
May 19, 2016 - 09:53pm PT
|
We have no idea who HFCS is... (Ed)
Nor is it wise to probe too deeply . . . It may indeed be a blessing that by his anonymity we are shielded from dangerous tides - dark and swirling waters.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado & Nepal
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 08:53am PT
|
I too read through the Harris-Chomsky correspondence and came to the same conclusions as Ed. I am an admirer of Harris but I think he has a blind spot when it comes to Islam. Perhaps the fact that one of his parents was Jewish has something to do with this. It is extraordinarily difficult to see our own subtle or sometimes not so subtle, prejudices. Intellectuals are particularly adept at hiding theirs behind multiple layers of rationalization.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 10:53am PT
|
You could call it a consensus. Science is based on it.
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 10:54am PT
|
I have not spent much time reading or listening to Harris. This is not a disavowal as such but an explanation as to why I am only mildly interested, at least at the present time, in sampling that particular public climate of debate which appears to be the metier of Dr. Harris.
Harris has therefore flourished and come to prominence in that self-charged polemical environment-- and very much like Chomsky has by turns been elevated to a position as a sort of spokesman somewhat far outside the scope of his profession and training (biology). Chomsky was a language expert primarily, and came to prominence as a political expert during a period when the radical left had not yet ascended to governmental control of the major western powers.
Therefore at that time the Left required someone of the necessary credentials to "deconstruct" propaganda generated by the then anti-Communist western leadership. Chomsky, pleasantly surprised by his sudden undeserved prominence, and armed with all the correct gnostic pretensions, eagerly arose to the challenge ,and much like another disaffected intellectual of that time, Bertrand Russell, even began to disseminate "communiques" meant to coincide with official dispatches from the Kremlin and/or the N.Vietnam negotiating team during the infamous Paris Accords.
Chomsky is no longer needed for these high-minded purposes and so has consequently and eloquently slipped into well-deserved obscurity. The baby boomer Left, whom he helped to suckle to the aims of progressive collectivism, are now firmly in their generationally determined senior power phase and thereby enjoying their current domination of the present direction and tilt , however transient, of western culture and values --- such as who can use what bathroom, or the instruction manual for the salient detection of micro-aggressions.
Harris should explain why he has gone to such determined lengths to methodically harass such a relic emeritus as Mr. Chomsky : the language Commisar and resident intellectual of the earlier crusading era of the 60's Left. Today Chomsky is merely dispassionately and mechanistically echoing the party line on Islam and other issues -- and Harris must be aware of this.
Debating opponents must be getting into slim pickins these days for Harris, such that he has gone to such lengths to scare one out of the weeds.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 12:03pm PT
|
You could call it a consensus. Science is based on it.
Good one, MikeL!
Almost lost my beer.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 02:50pm PT
|
I really wanted to respond to Ed's rambling mess this afternoon (due to obviously stepping out of his wheelhouse - that of course being high energy exper physics) but alas, I got distracted by other things even including the crazies here over on the political threads. So that will have to wait. In the interim here's Sam Harris on the Art of Charm podcast amazingly discussing A LOT OF THE VERY SAME SILLINESS that goes on here. Go figure, how timely!
Episode 514
Sam Harris - the Anti Trump
http://theartofcharm.com/podcast-episodes/sam-harris-anti-trump-episode-514/
btw, in case there's any misconception, I am a HUGE Chomsky fan and the previous post was entirely misread it seems by the groupthink car (edit: not THAT surprisingly.)
Here's one of my favorite youtube lectures this year between no less than (the often "muddled" and "fumbling") Krauss and Chomsky... The Q&A session had Grade A questions and responses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbxp8ViBTu8
It's a shame so many posters dig into things only skin deep so much around here. As a csq much is lost.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 02:53pm PT
|
You should invite Sam Harris to contribute to this thread.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 02:59pm PT
|
Hey I gotta go but that last post (edit: by jgill) alludes to one of the very points mentioned by Ed previous page making no sense. Sam's ideas are others' ideas as well. This is precisely why Harris (also Chomsky) is so popular. He's a hell of a spokesperson.
We share in these ideas. It's not a Sam Harris idea any more than it is a British idea on most of these science topics or science vs religion topics.
And jgill, if you find religion and belief so god damn boring - which you've admitted to or suggested at least two or three times in the past - why do you persist on this thread? Just curious is all. The thread title is...
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 03:14pm PT
|
It's a shame so many posters dig into things only skin deep so much around here.
Look in the mirror dude.
You are one of the worst offenders period .....
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 05:54pm PT
|
gee, what a surprise, reference another YouTube video
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 07:40pm PT
|
Ward:
You are a lover of words. It's fun to arrange and sing them, sometimes even forgetting what one is talking about.
(Me, too.)
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 09:50pm PT
|
Eloquent, Ward.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
May 20, 2016 - 11:35pm PT
|
ok Ward... but who cares who was a communist, a lefty, disaffected, etc, etc...
did you actually read their arguments?
or do you just dismiss them, ad hominem?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!