Sam Harris vs. Noam Chomsky "The Limits of Discourse" - Harris creeps me the hell out.

[redgreenandblue]

IMO Harris perfectly exemplifies the mindset of the "benevolent imperialist liberal". He comes across as a self-entitled prick who sees the rest of the world as below him.

In the "failed attempt at discourse" which Harris later published on his website he, amongst other things, defends Bush by saying he "meant well" when invading Iraq and dismisses literally all atrocities comitted by the West in the 20th century by claiming that "the intentions were good".

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-limits-of-discourse

[bananas]

1. Harris is a creep. nt

[cpwm17]

2. Unfortunately he has his supporters around here.

He's a pseudo-liberal, war-mongering neocon. He'll defend any war atrocity by the US or Israel.

He supported the Iraq War and he openly supported Israel's recent atrocities against the Gaza Strip. You know, those scary brown Muslims' lives aren't worth the life of us superior Westerners.

[bananas]

3. Mindfulness' "truthiness" problem: Sam Harris, science and the truth about Buddhist tradition

http://www.salon.com/2014/12/06/mindfulness_truthiness_problem_sam_harris_science_and_the_truth_about_buddhist_tradition/

Mindfulness’ “truthiness” problem: Sam Harris, science and the truth about Buddhist tradition

Sam Harris wants practitioners out of religion business. But the supposed science behind it is its own mythology

Ronald Purser and Andrew Cooper
Saturday, Dec 6, 2014 3:45 PM UTC

<snip>

Mindfulness advocates have often responded to criticisms by comparing their initiatives to the work of the Buddha, reminding us that he often taught kings, merchants, and feudal village leaders. This is true, but misleading. The Buddha certainly did converse with leaders and the merchant class, but what he taught them was not a mindfulness-based intervention so they could simply feel better about themselves. Nor did the Buddha simply provide them a meditative technique for improving concentration so that kings and merchants could obtain wealth and riches for their own sake. Rather, the Buddha advocated a wiser form of ethical leadership based on fair and just means for the acquisition and proper use of wealth. Moreover, the Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi, an eminent American-born Theravada Buddhist monk and English translator of the Buddha’s earliest discourses, noted, “I do not know of any discourse in which the Buddha teaches satipatthana meditation and systematic vipassana meditation [the main sources of practice for the mindfulness movement] to householders. Those are monastic practices, which normally presuppose renunciation — or at least a strong disposition to renunciation.”

For every Silicon Valley executive who takes a mindfulness workshop, there might well be someone less privileged — say, a renter in San Francisco who is being forced out of her apartment by Silicon Valley money buying up the city’s real estate — who thinks, “Well, if those are the people that Buddhism is appealing to and the places Buddhist teachers are doing their teaching, then I don’t think I have a place in that practice.” For every person who is convinced by the claims of scientific validity to try meditation, maybe there are others who think, “This sounds just too good to be true. In fact, it doesn’t sound true at all.” And in both cases, they would have good reason to be put off by Buddhist practice, reasons every bit as good as those put forth by the mindfulness movement to promote their form of stealth Buddhism. In fact, to us, their reasons might be better.

<snip>

[Exilednight]

4. Someone needs to tell Harris that the road to hell is

Paved with good intentions.

[cpwm17]

5. Here's this from the Majority Report

[redgreenandblue]

7. That was awesome.

Thanks.

[Recursion]

6. Ooh... drugged out white American comes to India to "find himself"

We certainly never have seen that before...