Religion

LARED

(11,735 posts)

28. No one asked you to provide a precis of the article or Harris

Fri Nov 23, 2012, 07:58 PM

Nov 2012

Last edited Fri Nov 23, 2012, 09:17 PM - Edit history (1)

You believe Harris provided a persuasive and well wrought argument. I asked you to explain why you thought it was such article.

I don't see it. I see a list of anecdotal observations muddied by his own bias while conflating all forms of religious moderates into a bunch of people clinging onto tradition out of hope and ignorance, immune to progress; and apparently dangerous.

His thesis seems to be that moderates are driving all of us into the abyss. Since he never bothers to tell the reader what abyss he is referring to, it is difficult to decipher where the article is leading or what his argument actually is.

Moderates seem to be defined by Harris as those that fall between homicidal zealots and agnostics. A less than useful definition especially when these same folks are driving all of humanity into the abyss.

Harris seem barely able to hide his disdain for people of faith. It seeps in all over the article. It is nothing more than a rambling thinly veiled attack on religious moderates. So forgive me if I'm not interested in a real discussion.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

119 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Problem with Religious Moderates [View all] cleanhippie Nov 2012 OP

"religious moderate" is an oxymoran. aletier_v Nov 2012 #1

Perhaps, but that does not open dialogue with moderates here on DU. cleanhippie Nov 2012 #2

sometimes there is no point in "dialog" aletier_v Nov 2012 #10

So what would be point in commenting at all then? cleanhippie Nov 2012 #19

Excerpt from "The End of Faith" longship Nov 2012 #3

I recently read The Moral Landscape. cleanhippie Nov 2012 #4

IMHO, this is one of the most important points to discuss. trotsky Nov 2012 #5

I do know that, trotsky, but I will continue to try. cleanhippie Nov 2012 #6

If you legitimize these "other ways of knowing," there's no mechanism to determine which "other way" humblebum Nov 2012 #17

Your posts are always great for a laugh. cleanhippie Nov 2012 #20

Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #76

I think it has already been acknowledged that you and I disagree on what constitutes knowledge. humblebum Dec 2012 #85

Why Stop At Religion? Lacipyt Dec 2012 #73

Hopefully your post will be food for thought. Leontius Dec 2012 #74

Because only religion seeks to justify claims using "other ways of knowing." trotsky Dec 2012 #98

No. Actually law, art, entertainment, psychology, cooking, etc. utilize other ways of knowing. humblebum Dec 2012 #99

What does that mean? prefunk Dec 2012 #100

An epistemology that arrives at a conclusion utilizing evidence that is less than totally humblebum Dec 2012 #101

If something is not 100% objective, how can one be assured that the conclusion is correct? prefunk Dec 2012 #102

Sorry man, you are participating in an exercise in futility. cleanhippie Dec 2012 #103

Sure. I'll try. Generally the only disciplines that are considered any produce knowledge to the humblebum Dec 2012 #106

No. Not Only Religion Lacipyt Dec 2012 #107

I see the point you're missing. trotsky Dec 2012 #108

Not So Simple Lacipyt Dec 2012 #109

I see that Baxter didn't bring god into the equation either. trotsky Dec 2012 #110

You Are Welcome Lacipyt Dec 2012 #112

I'm not really interested in playing a game with you. trotsky Dec 2012 #113

Three Things Lacipyt Dec 2012 #114

Three replies, and a challenge. trotsky Dec 2012 #115

Okay Lacipyt Dec 2012 #117

Since you have proven yourself unwilling (or unable) to give up the straw men, trotsky Dec 2012 #118

Ay Caramba Lacipyt Dec 2012 #119

"But god is still being used to support horrible atrocities - all the time." humblebum Dec 2012 #111

Is this the same Sam Harris that considers the elimination of religion more important than the rug Nov 2012 #7

Great way to start the discussion, where to first Leontius Nov 2012 #8

The problem is and has always been humanity, as is evidenced by the massive numbers killed humblebum Nov 2012 #9

Lie, misleading and self-contradictory skepticscott Nov 2012 #11

The usual smokescreen and spin. humblebum Nov 2012 #16

Well let's be fair, Leontius Nov 2012 #12

It would have been useful if Mr. Harris told the reader LARED Nov 2012 #13

Amazing how anyone can think starting with, Leontius Nov 2012 #66

Sam Harris, the torture apologist? CrawlingChaos Nov 2012 #14

Dr. Harris presents a persuasive case. Sure to be well received here. dimbear Nov 2012 #15

Perhaps you can tell me why this is such a persuasive and well wrought argument LARED Nov 2012 #18

Harris' arguments are always framed within a very narrow epistemology humblebum Nov 2012 #21

And what is that skepticscott Nov 2012 #24

It's pretty evident that you already know the answer. By your response humblebum Nov 2012 #26

No, I'll respond by pointing out yet again skepticscott Nov 2012 #34

Um, Yeh. other ways of knowing has been discussed and referenced here for a very long time. humblebum Nov 2012 #35

Every time you repeat the same empty claim skepticscott Nov 2012 #36

I asked you a very direct question, and you only evade. humblebum Nov 2012 #37

No link, no evidence skepticscott Nov 2012 #38

That what I thought. You are well aware that we have had these discussions before and humblebum Nov 2012 #40

Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #77

Pleading ignorance tama Dec 2012 #80

I've stated the kinds of discussions I've taken part in skepticscott Dec 2012 #87

OK tama Dec 2012 #89

And he will go on making such claims. However there is evidence to the contrary that goes back humblebum Dec 2012 #90

From your link tama Dec 2012 #91

Little google tama Dec 2012 #92

As stated many times skepticscott Dec 2012 #94

And again, your concept of "knowing" is not shared by everyone, to say the least. humblebum Dec 2012 #95

AS I recall, you claimed that no examples of other ways of knowing had ever been demonstrated. humblebum Dec 2012 #96

Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #93

Scott tama Dec 2012 #97

In all honesty, it's a matter of personal judgment. Those who approach with an open mind, dimbear Nov 2012 #22

Two things LARED Nov 2012 #23

For the same reason that I'm not penning a precis of the Gettysburg Address, I'm not rewriting dimbear Nov 2012 #27

No one asked you to provide a precis of the article or Harris LARED Nov 2012 #28

Thank you for your considered reply. dimbear Nov 2012 #29

So permit me to ask as you seem to LARED Nov 2012 #30

Harris is addressing liberal religionists, he is trying to convince them to stop dimbear Nov 2012 #31

I thought Harris was addressing religious moderates????? LARED Nov 2012 #32

Yes, better term. Just because I see them as the same thing doesn't mean dimbear Nov 2012 #33

Offending words(?) tama Dec 2012 #82

You make an interesting and deep point. dimbear Dec 2012 #83

No problem tama Dec 2012 #84

There are fora available right here on DU where Christians don't run into criticism from seculars. dimbear Dec 2012 #86

Is that all you do? tama Dec 2012 #88

A flawed and slanted view of the state of nonliteralist religious thought is not Leontius Nov 2012 #25

Interesting read. hrmjustin Nov 2012 #39

The mind of Mr Harris covers almost every topic, like a wide shallow puddle struggle4progress Nov 2012 #41

"Imagine" (says Mr Harris to us) "that we could revive a well-educated Christian struggle4progress Nov 2012 #42

I'm sure Mr Harris is speaking of the common man, not.. JKingman Nov 2012 #43

Reread the quote: Harris imagines "a well-educated Christian of the fourteenth century" struggle4progress Nov 2012 #45

What constituted "well educated" in the fourteenth century? JKingman Nov 2012 #46

I personally do not consider it surprising that the knowledge available today struggle4progress Nov 2012 #49

"Perhaps we ought to be surprised instead where we do not find significant advances" cleanhippie Nov 2012 #69

You and I have so few productive conversations because we cannot even agree about exactly struggle4progress Nov 2012 #71

Then lets agree about exactly what we are discussing. cleanhippie Nov 2012 #72

Your tactic here is woefully predictable. trotsky Nov 2012 #50

Seven links so far from me, zero from you. Have a nice day! struggle4progress Nov 2012 #51

That's because this isn't a Google contest. trotsky Nov 2012 #52

It is a somewhat pointless comparision LARED Nov 2012 #54

No, I mean anything that could be considered progress or advancement. trotsky Nov 2012 #58

Our Christian might well have thought the earth round, but it would have been a matter of faith to dimbear Nov 2012 #53

St. Vergil of Salzburg struggle4progress Nov 2012 #55

"Cecco D'Ascoli, is the adopted name of Francis, or Francesco Stabili; a native of Ascoli, struggle4progress Nov 2012 #56

Of course, the execution of Cecco D'Ascoli is quite disgusting and pointless struggle4progress Nov 2012 #57

Mr Harris thinks a fourteenth century man today "would be considered a fool to think ... struggle4progress Nov 2012 #44

Explain to us the fourteenth century concept of .. JKingman Nov 2012 #47

One ought to begin with the facts and proceed thence to the analysis, whereas struggle4progress Nov 2012 #48

Mr. Harris' first mistake okasha Dec 2012 #116

Just for reference purposes, Dr. Harris received his Ph.D. in neuroscience from Stanford in 2009. dimbear Nov 2012 #59

For reference only; you posted a fallacious appeal to authority. nt LARED Nov 2012 #60

For further reference, dimbear didn't claim the argument was true BECAUSE of Harris' credentials. trotsky Nov 2012 #61

For even further reference, dimbear does hold the view that LARED Nov 2012 #62

And yet he still didn't claim that because of Harris' education, his argument is true. trotsky Nov 2012 #63

So why post his education then, LARED Nov 2012 #64

Why? Because some people are in favor of KNOWLEDGE about JKingman Nov 2012 #65

Well you might be right LARED Nov 2012 #67

I believe everything I read on the internet. JKingman Nov 2012 #68

I mention Dr. Harris' degrees because I believe in courtesy to living authors, in general. dimbear Nov 2012 #70

Drat that nasty old Constitution! okasha Dec 2012 #75

The problem of state apologists tama Dec 2012 #78

The thing is, though... LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #79

Indeed tama Dec 2012 #81

I'm a religious Liberal and not sure if this is aimed at me 4_TN_TITANS Dec 2012 #104

You are 100% correct about that. cleanhippie Dec 2012 #105