This.
tbh he is a joke ngl
Sam Harris is a mindless leftist.
You couldn't have presented a less valuable statement.
you could believe those things without following a religion so whats the point of the actual religion
His entire argument is that your brain and thoughts are simply material chemical reactions and you lack free will. He also has left-wing viewpoints. Hence, by definition, he's a mindless leftist.
Because 99% of people aren't going to follow a value system unless there's benefits and consequences (heaven, hell, God, etc). If you just tell people that there's no God but they still have to follow a value system that's built upon a belief in God, then no one will listen to it. Look at all the blue haired atheists on campus who abuse drugs and get tattoos.
You're welcome to attempt to disprove determinism. You won't be able to, of course.
You're welcome to attempt to disprove free will. You won't be able to, of course. Sam Harris is for leftist 20 year olds who want an excuse for their degeneracy instead of blaming themselves.
He's good if you don't delve deeper into his political standpoints, then you'll realise just how much of a shill he really is. I like comparing him to Ben Shapiro in the sense that both are very normie-friendly and get the job of bringing normies closer to the redpill done, but at the end of the day are nothing more than controlled opposition.
Free will has been disproven both scientifically and philosophically. Its not my fault you haven't bothered doing the research.
Show evidence. Determinism is cope for 20 year old leftists who want to do all the degeneracy they want and then blame "bUt mUh deTeRminISm".
the consequences of having no value system in a society is robbery and murder happening constantly everywhere, or other injustices. we have laws that get people to follow rules so as to create a functioning society. you wouldn't need a god or any other made up things to get people to follow along, it comes down to whether or not you want to have moral consideration. if you do, then treating others as if they are worthy of moral consideration is going to be beneficial to you because they're more likely to do the same for you.
You're severely overrating the average IQ citizen. You're also completely forgetting about the low IQ population. Laws only work when people have a sense of morality. When people don't have a God-given set of values, they will try to create their own (abortion, eugenics, holocaust, etc).
determinism is true if you believe that cause and effect is a real thing, and if you think objects in the universe abide by the laws of physics. think about this: if you were to shoot two particles at each other, knowing the speed they're traveling at and how much they weigh, etc, you would be able to know how they are going to interact upon collision. you would be able to predict mathematically how they are going to bounce off of each other and what direction they will fly in next. in that case, if you had a machine that could measure the speed and direction of every particle in the universe you would be able to predict the future with 100% accuracy, every event and every decision anyone ever made. the idea that you have free will just doesn't make sense. particles interact in predictable ways, we just aren't able to measure literally everything to be able to see the future.
god is made up, there is no evidence that one exists. we know that people don't like being killed, or being stolen from, or getting raped, so by putting laws in place that say people can't do those things, and by not murdering and raping each other for the most part, we can form a functioning society. most people do have moral consideration, most people don't go around robbing people or killing those they don't like.
As I'm sure you understand, I'm not going to do a scientific dissertation right here and now. If you are actually interested, google is your friend. The fact is that free will is intellectually indefensible.
Wait what? How is free will not true? You saying i can't go now and kill random 10 people if i want to?
Isn't he ethnically Jewish lol? I'm not calling his criticism of Christianity and Islam invalid - he raises good points - but it would also explain why he conveniently leaves Judaism out of the equation or barely delves deeper into it, while there's quite a bit to be criticised about it.
Functioning society was only formed when the belief in God was placed. Without a set value system, people do whatever they want.
bro i don't want to be rude but you might actually be stupid. i'll try to explain it again i guess: if you can shoot two individual particles at each other and measure how they will react you could hypothetically do this for any particle in the universe, and predict anything you wanted. you are able to understand that the universe consists of particles, yes? did you know that people's brains are made of particles too? are you able to understand what i'm saying? should i type in larger text or something, or are you not able to grasp hypothetical situations?
Any evidence for this?
people believed in how they wanted to be treated and created a god character that commanded people to behave in certain ways to justify what they already wanted.
Sounds like a defeatist "if you're born poor your can never escape poverty" mentality. Again, not surprising coming from Sam Harris, a leftist cuck. Someone who's born in Saurdi Arabia has the free will to not become muslim, but they are pressured by society to do so. You're only arguing for free will not existing at the macro level for people born in poverty, cultures, etc.
Sure, but that doesn't account for Quantum physics.
Sure, but why did people create the God character when they could've just implemented laws? Why has every society that has become Atheist had a heavily decreased quality of life, more degeneracy, and an eventual collapse? The only way collapse can be prevented in Atheist societies is with strong authoritative government, which can be seen in China.
You see, this is why I didn't bother doing any lengthy writeup. I made several claims, and you just ignored every single one, called it "cope" and then say "quantum mechanics have been theorized as a part of consciouscness" - you have zero idea of what you're talking about.
it does i am literally talking about every single particle in the universe. if you could accurately measure, hypothetically, the speed and direction of any and all particles, you would know the future. this necessarily means that no one can have free will. if you believe people have free will you necessarily believe in some form of magic or don’t think the laws of physics are real, in which case i cannot help you.
god was created because it could be used to scare people into submission. if they don’t do what u say they “go to hell”. it happened to be effective back when we lived in caves and had no idea what math was.
there have been no atheist societies. every massive society to date has been religious because people need to cope with heaven and the afterlife. atheists are still and have always been the minority everywhere.
Disprove my argument about modern explanations of conscious decisions relying on quantum mechanics. No fMRI has been able to disprove free will despite being able to detect brain activity.
[1] You never made an argument. You made a nonsensical statement with zero explanation or links. On top of that, I've already made several claims for you to address.
Quantum particles are volatile and cannot be accurately predicted.
Yes, eternal punishment is a much more effective way of controlling people than a set of laws. That same set of laws can be changed at will since there's nothing to base it upon.
So then why would an atheist society be more prosperous if people have a need to cope with heaven and the afterlife? Soviet Russia, China, Nazi Germany, Mexico, etc are/have been majority atheist societies.
Where are any of your links aside from hypothetical defeatist scenarios?
As I said in my first post, I don't bother writing a scientific paper right now, so I relied on arguments of philosophy, and if you are interested in the science you can simply google it. But I am happy to keep it philosophical, since the question of free will can and has been solved philosophically, without the dependance on scientific experiments.
again i am talking about a hypothetical machine we cannot possibly create with current technology.
none of this is an argument for god or proves that there is a god. it happened to be effective in the past because humans were really fucking dumb like 2k+ years ago. we also are living in the most peaceful and most prosperous times ever and the world has become much less religious since then.
people like the idea of heaven existing. people like the idea of an afterlife. i didn’t say people needed to cope with religion, i said that they still do currently.
I never argued for the existence of God. I only argued for a society that believes in God and is built on God-given values. If a large amount of people need to cope with religion, then how would an atheist society be more prosperous?
i didn’t assert that an atheist society would necessarily be more prosperous either.
