If the Frequently Answered Questions (FAQ) is not available for your board (the link to the FAQ is shown always below each post whilst reading it), send one to Shrewd'm using the contact link
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 5
Speaking of Richard Dawkins, I saw the following note in a recent podcast episode of his "The Poetry of Reality" podcast. Looks like a last chance to see him in person west of the Atlantic.
Tickets available at
https://richarddawkinstour.com/ I shall be spending the whole of September, and the first week of October, in North America, speaking in ten different cities from Dallas to Vancouver. I am 83 years old, and travel is more irksome than it was. The maxim, "Quit while you're ahead" has recently received a welcome boost, and I anticipate that this will be my last American tour. My swansong. My final bow. There'll be a Q & A at every event. And I'Il be signing any or all of my 19 books, including The Genetic Book of the Dead, which will be just published. This will probably be your last opportunity to tell me how profoundly you disagree with everything I've written and said. Or the reverse if that is the case. Either way, I look forward to seeing you.
No. of Recommendations: 2
I was largely unaware of Sam Harris, Dawkins, and Hitchens, until around 2010. Don't know why - guess I just wasn't looking for them.
We lost Hitchens soon after, and Dawkins is now up there in age.
Who do people like out there, akin to a Sam Harris, that they enjoy as a read or listen?
It seems like sort of a lost art to be an intellectual. I didn't always agree with his views, but I enjoyed watching older debates of William F Buckley, for example. Alan Watts is easy on the ears as a listen as well.
We just don't have that anymore. It is all just polarizing "they are weird" sort of lame diatribes now vs any meaningful discourse. Unless I have been overlooking some hidden gems out there?
thanks,
Dreamer
No. of Recommendations: 4
I stumbled onto that community when a fundy coworker was trying to convince me there was scientific evidence to confirm the bible, and that the logic of a deity was irrefutable. I did my due diligence, showed the science was not supportive of the biblical account (of pretty much every claim the bible makes), and even I saw the logical fallacies (some of them) before I found Harris and Hitchens.
Today I sometimes view Matt Dillahunty (for rigorous logical arguments), and AronRa for the more scientific end (he is trained in phylogeny and anthropology). But I really got most of what I needed from Hitchens, LivingDinosaur (a scientist), and a few others, years ago. I don't need to reinvent the wheel. Not unless the science changes, or the rules of logic.
Matt is good for logic, because he is very rigorous with formal logic. Sometimes it's a good exercise to see how he tears down an argument to expose all its fallacies.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Thanks for those suggestions - will check them out.
Agree on Hitchens being timeless (in a way so is some of Emerson, Thoreau, Plato, etc... I guess I just like hearing the takes on current topics. Grandfathered into Sam Harris Marking Sense/Waking Up content, so I enjoy his updates for the most part. Alan Watts still fairly new and he has a ton of content out there. Vernon Howard was the 1990s for me. Harder to get audiobooks of his, but plenty of video and books out there.
Hitchens used to talk about how he was friends with one of the religious figures he debated often, and I feel like that is how things used to be a bit; spirited dialogue without paralyzing polarity.
Dreamer
No. of Recommendations: 6
Dinesh D'Souza. Hitchens and he were friends, and agreed on a few issues (like abortion).
There really isn't anything new in terms of arguments. The theists recycle (and occasionally repackage) the same arguments they have used for centuries. They were fallacious then, and they are fallacious now. Their tomes don't change, so their arguments don't change. The science does change, and never in favor of the theists.
Hitchens could be very biting, especially if his debating opponent was a moron. I really liked this particular debate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87omFVl_o6kVery civil, very calm, and the rabbis were politely eviscerated. :-)
A lot of his "God is NOT Great" tour produced some really good content. Still relevant today.
Matt Dillahunty is a beast in debates. He will attack the syllogisms, and the content.
AronRa isn't as good at debating, but he does know the phylogeny, anthropology, and paleontology. He also knows his bible (as does Matt...Matt was on his way to becoming a preacher before he realized the arguments for xianity were fallacious), and did a series where he read the Koran and had guests familiar with the Koran talking with him about it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcuGBTYWJdM&list=P...Matt is doing a debate project where he poses a question and then goes through it logically. But he engaged in many live debates as well.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=matt+...
No. of Recommendations: 1
a quick view of Dillahunty view scrolling on his X posts finds him quite a bit more liberal than Sam Harris...am I reading that wrong?
Clearly an atheist, but kind of parroting some of the liberal views on Harris or for example railing on Tractor Supply for cessation of DEI policies, etc...
I find intellectually honest folks can agree we have a couple horrible POTUS candidates on both sides. I don't care which "side" you vote for, I guess I just prefer a more centrist view that I feel Harris evokes these days at least.
Still appreciate the referral and will continue to check him out.
thanks,
Dreamer
No. of Recommendations: 3
He is from Austin, one of the few "blue" areas in TX. He actually doesn't comment much on politics. Socially, he is liberal (e.g. respecting LBGTQ rights, women's rights, etc). He's a humanist.
However, logic doesn't have a red/blue component. The syllogisms are pretty rigid, and the fallacies are generally pretty well defined. He just applies those to various arguments he encounters in his videos.
I do not have Xhitter, will never have Xhitter, and so have no idea what's going on over there. His YouTube videos (from all the way back when he was doing the call-in show "Atheist Experience") are generally non-political, arguing against theist positions. He also posts actual debates he has done, and often a post-mortem "debate review".
So I can't really compare him to Harris in terms of politics. Harris also is a humanist, so they have that in common. Harris does seem to like some eastern philosophies (e.g. Hitchens said he was "a bit of a buddhist"). Harris definitely comments more about politics than does Matt.
AronRa is anti-Trump, and will sometimes post commentary consistent with that. I'm pretty sure he is a Democrat. But he, too, spends most of his time countering religious claims and "logic".
