Race & Reason: A Conversation with Coleman Hughes (Episode
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 02. 2024
- Sam Harris speaks with Coleman Hughes about race, racism, and social justice. They discuss the ideal of "color blindness," race and crime, Coleman's experience at TED, LatinX, the confusion of the elites, Ibram X. Kendi, affirmative action, class differences, poverty, single-parent families, the death of George Floyd and the trial of Derek Chauvin, mob rule, Candace Owens, Christopher Rufo, guilt by association, John McWhorter, Glenn Loury, reparations for slavery and Jim Crow, immigrant communities, evidence of discrimination, Martin Luther King Jr., and other topics.
Coleman Hughes is a writer, podcast host, and musician. He has written for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, National Review, Quillette, The Spectator, and the City Journal. Currently, he is a contributing writer at The Free Press and an analyst for CNN. His latest book is "The End of Race Politics: Arguments for a Colorblind America."
Website: colemanhughes.substack.com/
Twitter: @coldxman
February 11, 2024
SUBSCRIBE to gain access to all full-length episodes of the podcast at samharris.org/subscribe/ OR become a channel member to access episodes on CZcams. For those who can't afford the full subscription price, we offer full and partial scholarships www.samharris.org/subscribe/s...
Subscribe to the YT channel: czcams.com/users/subscription_c...
Follow Making Sense on Twitter: / makingsensehq
Follow Sam on Facebook: / samharrisorg
Follow Sam on Instagram: / samharrisorg
For more information about Sam Harris: www.samharris.org - Věda a technologie
![Eminem - Houdini [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/22tVWwmTie8/mqdefault.jpg)
Sam, I have listened to you for years and you are reasonable and honest. There are people who aren't going to like you because you criticize Trump or Islamic Jihadists or wokeness. Those three groups are very often not honest or reasonable. When I would read the comment section after your videos they often don't have any relationship with what you are saying. You have a legacy of thoughtfulness going on for years so you are right to not pay attention to other peoples agendas.
God I just wish up he would be more open to questions from the more left wing members of his audience, I think he could learn a lot
@@radscorpion8Well I wish he steer the car off of the RIGHT side of the cliff, as the view on the way down is more scenic.
@dhschneider7945 It's always been my opinion that Sam is a very genuine human being. His trouble is that he refuses to pander, therefore everybody hates him for something. I kind of feel like Sam's rational, lets fix it attitude has passed its use by date though. It seems to me that the vast majority of people are not trying to solve the problems, but declare which side they are on for the coming unravelling. 😞 Not Sam's fault of course. We are a broken species.
@radscorpion The trouble with left wing types, is that they aren't as good at expressing ideas as they are regurgitating dogma. Sam tried several times to bridge the gap between the centre and the left. It was a disaster every time.
Sam Harris is way past his sell by date.
Apostate prophet, David wood and Christian prince are also good on the issue.
Watch them it's really funny and it's not like the mental Jiu jitsu that Sam Harris likes to pull.
Passive aggressive move by Rory
Anyone that uses "Islamaphobia" is right off the bat not wanting criticism or debate. Should I call them Atheistaphobic because they don't agree with my world view? It's so frustrating hearing that word thrown around like "hate speech". It just shuts down conversation and says there are certain ideas, no matter how abhorrent, are off limits.
Since when did Athiesm become a worldview?
@@tcorourke2007 Since when did atheists claim atheist phobia?
@@tcorourke2007 Since when is Islam? I think your belief and/or lack of belief tend to color your worldview, people, how you interact with people, your laws, rules, etc.
Is a rational fear, based upon an obvious danger, a phobia? Islam-awareness would be a better term.
@@dravenlee4473 Are you sincerely asking, "Since when does belief in a set of claims, values and rules constitute a worldview?"
Rory is a pure case of competing loyalties. Otherwise intelligent people who become acquaintances with controversial cultures, in Rory's case, Muslims, have to bend their values and logic to keep an idealistic bridge to these cultures they feel indebted to in some way. This phenomenon illustrates how hard it is for people to separate ideas from identity. We are not our ideas, we are our actions. Ideas are only important when the form the impetus and reason for action.
If you read Sam's book, The End of Faith, he makes a compelling case that ideas cannot not lead to action, insofar as the ideas are actually believed. The ideas (if they are believed) must cause behavior, or else they are not held sincerely.
Cultists.
"Controversial cultures, in Rorys case, Muslims"?
Please explain. This seems an egregiously patronising and biased and pompous remark, sans elucidation.
@Mock_Turtle_1805 Have you not listened to Sam's episodes all islamic cultures? Have you not been an observer of the 21st century? Suicide bombing via martyrdom. Anti-alcohol and frivolity. Male chauvinism and oppression of women. Little to no scientific achievement. Corporal punishment. Terrorism abounding. Brutal infighting and slaughter of fellow Muslims because of doctrinal differences. If you can't see the discrepancies between Muslim majority countries and the industrial liberal West, then go away.
I think this is likely exactly it.
holy shit he actually laughed @ 13:08
Legendary moment
the laugh of exasperation
They're driving him crazy 😭
@@emuccino He's intelligent but his own intelligence is driving him insane.
„Fucking hopeless!“ 😔 Not in your control…
Thank you for what you do!! Please don't give up, no matter what anyone says. Your work is important to many, many people!!
I was pretty offended when Rory Stewart, on the Coleman Hughes podcast, said that the Taliban did not attack any Americans in the lead up to the withdrawal so our presence was effective and we should not have withdrawn. The Trump Administration made an agreement with the Taliban that we would leave on a certain date UNLESS they attacked us in the interim and that's the only reason why they weren't attacking us. Extremely disingenuous.
Agree - it really was a situation where breaking from that immediately would've escalated. And by escalated, I mean head back into the 20-year go-nowhere quagmire we had been involved with for so long. Obama should've said "we won" after bin Laden (I don't care if it makes sense) and gtfo.
I think the centrist-y spheres Harris and Hughes hang around in (not falling into far-right crankery, but willing to criticize left wing ideas mainstream orgs don't touch) can be so useful on so many issues, but they can be way too easily persuaded by foreign policy blob types.
Interesting
Rory Stewart gave a very political relativistic explanation of the link between jihad, martyrdom, doctrine and theocratic expansion as well.
@joeberg3317 Not sure what you're saying, but... Afganistan was a better place for its residents a year before the withdrawal than it is now. So many of the gains squandered, and the biggest losers are the Afgan people.
@@joeberg3317If we trust the CDC and the FBI, we should trust the pentagon and foreign policy experts
If you've ever seen these two in person, they have nearly the EXACT same external disposition, hand gestures, everything. White Coleman Hughes and Black Sam Harris, love it
i think it's because Coleman is such a big fan of Sam that he has adopted his mannerisms, rhythms of speech, hand gestures and all
Is EXACT base upon scientific evidence?
@@ThePaulaon1uncannily similar?
We'd be hitting levels of housekeeping that shouldn't even be possible...
@@danzwku No, he's definitely the black Sam Harris.
Great timing, Harris.
Go Coleman! He’s having a big week out in the public eye
Is he still doing his podcast?
Regarding Rory - I think he's decent guy, interesting and very charming, but I think you got a bit of a rosy picture of him on your podcast.
It was cloying, I think I have diabetes.
I could not get through Rory's drivel and I find it refreshing he as revealed himself a hypocrite.
I've seen Rory in conversation with others, other Leftists mainly, and I was troubled when Dam had him on.
I think Sams analyse was accurate though. Rory just fell into a trap of overstatement when in the compony of Leftists. Let's hear him out.
He's a Tory, he's not decent.
@bertrandrussell894 You know Rory is a conservative right
Your point is totally understated. Rory is most certainly a Tory, but - like many Tories - is now anything but conservative.
Stewart is so eye-wateringly wealthy and correspondingly self-regarding, that every utterance is curated and selected solely for its benefit to himself and his landed family.
He is most certainly NOT a decent guy, and NEVER was.
Regarding your intro on the misrepresentation of your views by Rory Stewart and Konstantin Kisin, the explanation is the following. Some people (including podcasters) may not have a spine (or gonads) of steel, and so they tend to lean, in their conversations with other guests, towards the views of those guests, or what they think they are going to like. Hence, they present you in a less than optimal light when together, for example, with a Muslim that complains of "Islamophobia". Another possibility, since it is difficult to underestimate the solidity of Rory Stewert's spine or gonads (given the environments he lived in) is that your guests, out of politeness (or hypocrisy), pretend to believe or understand your arguments, but they actually have a covert conviction that you do not really believe what you say (to them) you believe. Probably both, in some cases.
Konstantin certainly pushed back on Harris during his appearance. And rightly so.
You know, the one that "got clipped" by "right wing trolls" and burned his career to cinders.
Well Rory is effectively a politician and he still very much has political ambitions. He's also now a member of the media in the 21st Century. And there's so much intersection between both of those now that they're practically the same career. Playing to the crowd is just the way the brain works for most of those people or people in general, really.
Mr. Harris should not be wasting his intellect on spineless, hypocrites, covert 'not believing what you really say' (whatever that means...) who value vapid conversations (politeness) vs Facts. If you do not say what you mean articulately, concisely, strongly and with conviction then Making Sense is Not for you.
Yes, for how "objective" and "truth telling" the "alt-media" is supposed to be, many elements have proven themselves to be habitually two-faced because most of it is just staged as friendly "conversations" with little or no journalistic approach or standards to begin with. The goal is just controversy, not clarification, and to generate more clickbait content and "meta discussions" about was actually said in context. For the reputation that some of these people now carry, they're really nothing more than some dipshits with higher production values on a CZcams channel.
@@tcorourke2007 his career seems, fine
15:24 Start
Up to that point, all I can say is, Sam is about the most reasonable, knowledgeable and polite person I could hope to have an intelligent conversation with on about any subject. He is a voice of reason.
Thank you for putting yourself out there!
I'm conservative and I agree. Would love to pick his brain about so many things
Haters are going to hate Sam, just keep doing you. You’re the man!
I could see this coming from Rory. At one point during last weeks conversation, when Sam wanted to clarify the reason for his focus on Islam, Rory made a very telling snide remark of "Got something on your mind?" and it was clear by the tone the was insinuating Sam was some kind of Islamophobic bigot. I was a bit surprised to hear that coming from him. Sam had to have caught it too.
Sharp. Sam should never have given Rory a platform. He turned around and used it to attack Sam. Like a hypocrite.
Agreed. The whole thing feels very slimy.
Maybe Rory just can’t disassociate the kindness he’s received from individual Muslims from the violence of written Islamic ideology.
I noticed that, too. Also, I’ve heard him interviewed twice on podcasts and both times - just based on how he speaks and some of the disingenuous arguments he makes - he didn’t come across as a completely forthright, trustworthy individual.
@dmanson4649 it seems to be a common error. Sadly.
I wonder if Homo sapiens are evolved enough to handle the misinformation landscape that is social media. Science is evolving faster than we are, I just hope it’s not hopeless.
Homo sapiens aren't even evolved to live around strangers, much less EVERY stranger on earth, and that's not to mention the other 10,000 things which technology has produced for which we aren't adapted (after all, we're adapted to a very specific hunter-gatherer situation, which we've been living beyond for the last 10k years or so). But humanity has a special knack for adapting to that which it's not adapted to. Of course, the next thing could always be the one that destroys us (industrial tech > nuclear > computer > internet > Social Media > AI, etc.), but my bet is that the species will figure out and adapt to social media's dangers before too long. The sign that already EVERYONE on earth is aware of how bad it is, is a sign that positive changes are already in motion, in my opinion.
Also consider the fact that billions of dollars have been spent to do everything possible to hack the human brain.
"Man is an exception, whatever else he is. If he is not the image of God, then he is a disease of the dust. If it is not true that a divine being fell, then we can only say that one of the animals went entirely off its head."
G. K. Chesterton
Isn’t it pretty god damn obvious that we CAN NOT handle disinformation…?
I just hope we're evolved enough to defeat those who propose that censorship that only they can be trusted to employ is the solution to the "problem"
Excellent little snippet of what I imagine is a great full conversation.
What is sad is that if Rory had a disagreement with Sam he should have confronted Sam directly during the interview instead of making nasty comments about Sam on another broadcast. I think Sam makes a mistake in having Rory back on, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice its on me!
Having someone on the podcast again to discuss where they disagree/more to clarify Sam's actual position so that it can represented properly doesn't seem like a waste of time to me. People are allowed to make mistakes, I don't know if you've listened to Rory on anything else - he seems a genuine person who wouldn't want to mis-represent people. I imagine the conversation will be worthwhile listening too - Sam Harris obviously has a similar thought process here.
@@Alex-yv4vr People who seem "genuine" are the most treacherous. Sam has a blind spot here, he was painted as a bigot by Rory on a separate podcast and he should not further platform Rory who while appearing charming and agreeable, so characterizes Sam behind his back.
Exactly. It must be hard for Rory to walk without a spine.
@@whatsdoin2392 unless you know them personally, which you can’t when it comes to podcasts. Everyone either seems genuine, or seems like a liar. I’d rather go off having listened to this guy numerous times, as oppose to some strange opposite rule, whereby I assume everyone that comes across as genuine is dishonest. Otherwise I wouldn’t be able to listen to anyone online - even Sam Harris
@@Alex-yv4vr No strange opposite rule. Always judge people by including in your assessment all aspects of what you know. Rory was indeed sweet, charming and wonderful in his broadcast with Sam, but when I see how he characterized Sam afterwards I fully appreciate that I am dealing with someone who is treacherous. It is scary because Rory is a very charming man.
I'm from India. I came across your videos while exploring into atheism-related topics. Since then, whenever I seek clarity on any subject, I turn to your videos. Your content encourages critical thinking, so I appreciate the great work you're doing.
It truly is a hallucination machine well said
Clips without context is a major tool of both sides.
Thank you, Sam, for being the ultimate truthteller of our time. Everyone else has seemingly gone insane.
Great talk. Thanks, guys!
13:28 Amen
Crazy... After seeing Coleman Hughes on Real Time on Friday night, I was literally just thinking that he'd be a great guest on Sam's podcast. 🤠
You are no bigot. Thanks for setting us straight. Thanks for being brave in this life.
Great episode, thanks for continuing to provide real conversations for people about topics like this.
Sam Harris & Coleman Hughes!? Wow! I can’t wait! Possibly two of my favorite people ❤️
I listened to coleman a few years ago and its really interesting to see how he's developed personally and professionally in the meantime listening to this podcast. Proof that if you focus on one thing you become a lot more knowledgeable and articulate about a subject. This is an issue with the podcast world as a whole, there are too many podcast hosts who make comment on all sorts of subjects and they're simply not qualified to comment
Lol i am absolutely going to call social media a "hallucination machine" from now on. That's exactly what it is.
As an Englishman I can shed some light on Rory Stewart. He is basically seen as a political and intellectual lightweight who thinks his gap year-style trek across Afghanistan makes him qualified to comment on a whole bunch of issues. The fact he even interviewed humza yusef , who is widely regarded as a total disaster for Scotland, heading up a party that has now been revealed to be a totally corrupt single issue radical leftwing woke party, shows that he prefers more idealistic interviewees than something more challenging like Sam Harris.
Who is this "humza yusef" that is a total disaster for Scotland?
@@jmc5335the leader of the Scottish nationalist party, they are radical left wing who's sole aim is to break up the UK.
@@maynardgent6708 I am Scottish and know of no such person or radical left wing nationalist party here
I am so grateful to those people on the left and on the right who are still talking to each other, respectfully, thoughtfully, listening to each other, debating and disagreeing on certain things, but agreeing on the civility of a public discourse as a foundational value of our society, while what seems to be a majority on both sides resorted to shouting and screaming, without any interest in the opinions or valid arguments of the other side. I am so fed up with those who shout, in order to stay in power or make more money.
I feel like Sam has been one of the only voices that has remained consistent and is clear when a data point has shifted within his paradigm. So it's pretty funny that people misrepresent his opinions so often.
sam you is the man. I am grateful that you share your "lived experience(s)' 🙂
Yes ! I'm such a big Coleman Hughes guy !
great guest !
Sam, Rory was not putting you in a paper cage in saying you were trying in many ways to get him to see your side of events in the Muslim world. You are a very influential person who has sailed the seven seas of religiosity and know the subject inside out of what every organized religion's structural steel views are and Rory probably was a little thin-skinned in thinking that you were trying to bend his perspective to wrap around what you see as the nitty gritty of what is really going on in the Muslim world. What's good is that he (Rory) speaks his mind and it will actually help in a future conversation with him, because he did not skate around what he felt you were trying to do and this will make it easy for you to fry this fish in an open and firey discussion knowing what he said was heard by all and he'll have to defend it.
No, the idea that Stewart didn't "skate around" arguments by only raising his objection to them in one venue but not another doesn't wash, as does the idea that he bravely "speaks his mind" when it's now far more in question as to what he really thinks. It's questionable at best, cowardly at worst and unnecessarily muddies the water.
Rory revealed himself to be a muslim apologist, hypocrite, spineless coward. Sam owes him Nothing.
Backstabbing move by Rory. Really gross.
@@georgekleinfelter7041Backstabbing? Were they supposed to be buddies or something?
@@kg356 No. I had inaccurately surmised that Rory Stewart just wasn't a snake in the grass. It's not only your friends whom you're supposed to treat with a modicum of decency. But maybe that sort of behavior after a seemingly honest and forthright conversation is what you're used to experiencing all the time. Sort of sounds like it.
As my old Mum used to say “You can please some of the people some of the time but you’ll never please all of the people all of the time so stop caring and just please yourself”. Ignore it and keep speaking YOUR truth 🙏
38:14 Contra Hughes, there is no reason to limit non-color blindness to "serious" situations involving violence. For example I have been over the last several months dealing with a woman in the call center at Kaiser Permanente who hangs up on you rather than putting you through to Podiatry if you say you don't have your medical record number. I've never seen her but she has a "black" accent. I don't. I don't think it's at all wrong of me to hypothesize that she may have a "hate whitey" attitude. I shouldn't CONCLUDE that without further evidence, but saying I shouldn't entertain that entirely reasonable hypothesis is to put hobbles on my brain. And I refuse to do that.
No, I recognize the similarity of my recognition of reality to the comment by Jesses Jackson. Hughes and I are using slightly different definitions of color-blindness. But the confusion is inherent in the term. It simply shouldn't be used. Find another.
My two favorite modern day intellectuals! Anybody know what happened to Coleman Hughes podcast though? He hasn’t had a new episode in 2 months.
I was wondering the same thing. Maybe he’s just too busy promoting his book at this time
I just checked. He’s posted 2 videos which are timed “a month ago”.
Coleman's amazing! He is so wise beyond his years. I've been saying for years that we simply need to stop talking about people's race (including if they're white). It just does so much more harm than good to the society.
“It is fucking hopeless” 😭😂😂
Can someone provide more info about the Konstantin Kisin-Tom Bilyeu conversation about Sam that Sam is referring to here, e.g. date and time stamp?
Tom Bilyeu posted the clip on his channel a few days before this released. So just go right to his channel and it’s like a 12 minute clip
I’d like to hear the clip on Rory’s podcast where he said basically, “Sam won’t let it go” . I can’t find it and wonder if he has edited it out realizing that it was an mis characterization. I kinda hope so.
Guys like Konstantin are basically just a step removed from Dave Rubin in terms of being "more audience capture than man", thus whenever they have to discuss an apparent friend who also happens to be saying something that strikes at the heart of their worldview (and income streams, because unlike Sam their careers depend on shilling), their cognitive dissonance becomes palpable. They have to somehow resist their knee-jerk cult response of "TDS!" and you can see the extent to which it strains their brains. But of course, at bottom the issue is that they themselves are simply too cowardly to NOT be firmly on one side or the other: the demented idiocy of Biden and the amoral narcissism of Trump must NOT be talked about by their respective cults. However, to be bashed by BOTH sides is always an occupational hazard in the pursuit of truth.
yeah, the problem is not getting rid of racial bias, it is that people who say "I am color blind" usually say some racist shit afterwards. or at least it is something you can say if you want to defend for example a claim that people from Somalia are stupid, or something like that. the concept of leaving behind race as a category used in policy or thought of as important in the way we think, is a good concept, i think if you press people, most people who would characterize themselves as anti racist, or even against the concept of colorblindness would agree with it. that is because the perception of what is meant, and what some people who say something like that they are color blind mean, is not that but rather a defensive negation of efforts to remove an effective bias in society. which is understandable, but it is also completely backwards. i think most people on either side, that are not actually racist would agree that we should refer less to race in policy and in decision making, but i think most color blind people also want effective biases that work against minorities to go away, whether that is some socio-economic differences, or racism by actors in someones private or public life. i think the disagreement is mostly in method and rhetoric.
NOT BORING AT ALL.... these are things we need to talk about and make people aware... thanks a lot guys love it, keep it up. I learn so much through these conversation great job MR. SAM HARRIS :)
No discussion on hollywood's and medias influence on race fear. No discussion on male violence against females.
I just can't take anyone seriously who uses the phrase "Islamophobia" without a sense of irony. There are plenty of rational reasons to worry about Islam. Rory left his spine and his brain in Afghanistan apparently.
Plenty of rational reasons to be leery of any group, that doesn't mean people can't also have irrational fears about them.
@@kg356 Islam is pretty obvious in its desired outcomes.
@@Tired-hm4tw the vast, vast majority of Muslims live peaceful lives like any other person. To think otherwise us irrational fear/hatred. We're talking about 1.8 billion people here.
Two humans that make sense to me.
Right on, Sam! I too have come to the conclusion that I simply cannot care anymore about what people think of my perspectives. To continue doing so, is to constantly be trying to reason with people who are entirely unreasonable. Far better things to do with one’s time.
Interesting how Mr. Harris suddenly came to that conclusion when he was overrun on every platform by unrelenting pushback to his tone deaf "dead children in Hunter's basement" ode to fascistoid censorship. He then retreated to the safespace of the echo chamber which his podcast has become where he only invites guests who can be relied upon to confirm his biases.
No, the irony is that Elon Musk's brain has turned to goo.
getting no more than four hours of sleep a night and consistent ketamine use will do that to a person.
Thank you. Please keep talking.
Happy to hear the relief in Sam's voice as he laughs at the situation of his public representation by others. That sounds like a good place to be at the moment. Elon is beyond lost and I expect him to either fall into irrelevance within a decade or something far worse. Shame about the others who struggle to define Sam by a narrative and yet keep trying.
Good for you, Sam!
I think if we substituted the word racism with the word tribalism, it would help lead to better conversations about the issue.
It certainly would, as would using words like classism. The problem is that for those people who have the crusader psychology (wayward, psychologically unwell, socially isolated; need a cause to give their life direction & purpose), a word like 'tribalism' doesn't imply an enemy like the word racism does (except the enemy within us all), and thus is not specific and substantive enough to form a tribe around- the POINT of using words like racism is actually so that people can engage in the joys of external tribal conflict / in-group cohesion, for which humans- like chimps- have been designed.
Its just another example of how people actively avoid nuance and accuracy in our culture- because those things provide the dopamine rush that screaming your lungs out in the middle of a protest (albeit one founded on a fiction) can give
aaaaah! you are so agreeable!!
Dr. Harris, I have faith in you to make sense of things.
Thanks for this, Sam. Please take a look at Sheena Mason and her newest book, The Raceless Antiracist. Would love to hear your thoughts on Colorblindness vs Racelessness.
is there a chance for video materials?
The Rest is History podcasts are terrific
Sam is Krishnamurti of the West
Interesting. In what way?
@@EmperorsNewWardrobedude man discovered krishnamurti.
I bet what dude man meant was: ain't nobody got time for believing in bs.
(But wait! A detective needs a hunch. And a scientist needs a hypothesis. So we all need to proceed based on BS and explore around.)
Sam Harris and K. are both secular, in a sense.
Sacredness all around makes us all kind of secular.
You have my support, Sam. Thank you for all you say and do for the betterment of us all!
Not giving an F what idiots think is highly underrated.
It's also highly difficult.
Nice Roo material
Sam, getting others, or indeed everyone, to have the same understanding of things that you do is a fool's errand. As it'd be for anyone. But it sure is tempting (see this comment, for instance), as "evangelizing" seems to be a part of human nature. You can only help (in this area) those that seek assistance (in this area).
Excellent conversation once again, sir, thank you.
I believe that Sam doesn't necessarily want everyone to have the same views that he has on everything but to accept the same factual considerations and, therefore have a meaningful discussion of intuitions. What Sam has objected to for years was people misunderstanding his intuitions because they are importing different or contradictory factual considerations.
For example, the nuclear weapons case from the "End of Faith" is a famous one. (Sam says that, contrary to the USSR and USA which are both rational, terrestrial actors, a Jihadist state with nuclear weapons would not be deterred by mutually assured destruction.) Detractors argued that since Iran is often perceived as a Jihadist state by some in the right-wing space and since neoconservatives floated invading Libya and Iraq to stop their nuclear weapons programs, that Sam Harris was advocating a preventative invasion of Iran to prevent it from getting nuclear weapons. However, Sam never claimed that Iran was such a state or that these kinds of preventative wars are beneficial/necessary, so he wasn't making that argument and, so, he claims that they are not addressing his intuition (e.g. that deterrence doesn't work with Jihadists) but his factual considerations (e.g. that this is a theoretical question as opposed to a reference to a preventative war against Iran).
There can be a way to break bias in social media and reduce the power of people with large followers to influence opinion on social media platforms.
Similar to comments section, we can add a views (viewpoints or connections or context) section -
Where anyone can add any view related to the post and people can like and react to the view just like the post.
Context 1/ #keyword combo : specific context to the post in limited words like in twitter
Context 2 :
Most important part of the context section could be checking the balance b/w different context as a percentage or in a pie chart. This distribution could tell if the discussion is biased or balanced, majorititarian view or nuanced. Multiple inferences could be drawn from the distribution of context, views, sides or connections.
Glad you're not letting the haters bother you, Sam. Just remember, most of them have neither the courtesy nor the curiosity to listen to a conversation in context before making judgments. It's the Strawman mentality: "I'm right because I've done 5 seconds of research, you're a [insert bad word], and, therefore, I have nothing to learn from you and will discourage others from doing so."
I listened to the original podcast and really enjoyed the conversation with Rory. And I have to admit, it did seem that Sam was trying to get Rory to acknowledge that Islam or Islamism does play at least some role in the mess we see in much of the Middle East and its surroundings. I feel because Rory spent so long living with Muslims, especially villagers during his travels, but also interpreters during the British government role there, he sees "Muslims" first and foremost as ordinary people. Who happen to be Muslim. This wouldnt and doesnt mean Islam doesn't have the seeds of something that COULD be turned into something negative, but the same can be said about any culture. Including American or French, Buddhism or Christianity. Rory didnt want to acknowledge this. Thus he went back to politics or nationalism. And to be fair, he has a good point. I lived in Indonesia which is the second or even largest Muslim country on earth. And yet it doesnt have even 1% of the violence seen in the Middle East.
People can recognize many things, recognizing a pattern is one of those things and that got nothing to do with racism. Period! And Colman you are intelligent young man. Don’t waste your carrier talking about race.
It makes me nervous when Sam laughs. Or shows any joy at all. He must be cracking up.
Even the chuckle in the intro sounded forced.
I would so love to become a member, but can not afford it. I am a 74 year old lady with no income except what my sons give me. I am from South Africa and the Rand to Dollar rate is ridiculous.
I was shocked to hear Rory's statement too. I had heard your podcast and did not hear any bashing. So sad tge misreprrsentarion of Sam happening.
Rory showed us who he is - not worth our time. Thank you, Next.
Did you hear the entire podcast or just the ~ < 30 minutes aired on CZcams?
Something that came up for me listening to the episode is what connections have been or can be made around racism and nationalism generally speaking. And why wasn't the term abolition ever mentioned in the conversation. Great episode tho
Can’t wait to hear Sam’s next meeting with Rory
If I were Sam I wouldn't bother meeting with him again seeing how shady he is.
I've got a feeling that Rory was converted to Islam while travelling and might even be radicalized…
❤❤😊
What would be wonderful is if there were more studies testing the various racial stereotypes believed by the population. Some stereotypes might be shown to be statistically significant, and some would not. At the very least, we would have more data upon which to base an honest conversation. There would be pitfalls of people assuming statistical trends are set in stone. Sociologically speaking, the exact opposite it true. We can and often do put the brakes on harmful social trends. But we have to know what if such trends are real before we can attempt to deal change them.
❤
Back yourself Sam your content is amazing
feeding the algorithm
I am color blind, in the sense that color informs me not at all about someone's character, capacities, or other qualities of a human being.
No, you are not thin-skinned. Of course not. Not even a bit. - What a "housekeeping"!
Interesting. I've heard about people being automatically unsubscribed from channels before. re-subscribed.
As Rory has been a prominent national UK politician (and may contain aspirations to be one again) I don't think it's surprising he publicly hold a position of "No, of course it's not Islam!" A mainstream political figure is yet to win government holding that position in US/UK/Commonwealth nations.
Trump, Johnson and Modi are pretty Islamaphobic.
I mean this total sincerely, if everyone is misunderstanding your views, including good faith actors & your friends (Konstantin & Tom), the problem may not them, but rather the way you, Sam, present and explain your views
Bollocks
I’m disappointed that Rory Steward acted all naive and cowed with Hamza Youseff. What a coward. Sorry to say but these stereotypes are largely true.
I enjoyed your discussion with David Packman, but I did have misgivings, because he did something similar to the Triggernometry guys.
They did a podcast together, where they differed, but seemed to be having quite a reasonable two sided discussion. Then afterwards, he used clips to paint them in a very negative light and almost mock them in places. This seems to be Packman's MO: he makes a polite face in the interview, but then uses (often misuses) people's statements, out of context, against them.
Triggernometry anti white
That first 14 minutes felt cathartic. How Sam's points land with people is often frustrating to see, the guys mentioned included. You almost have to deprogram them from this binary woke/unwoke world they inhabit before the actual conversation.
I would have to say, i do feel like you were badgering Rory on your angle with Jihad, it felt like you were really pushing for it. And he seemed to have a much more real world idea of it. I am a fan of you both though, just my two cents.
Listening to the part with Elon Musk was actually really funny, even though it shouldn't be, I almost feel bad.
Your intro is troubling…if one of the clearest speaking, patient, and thoughtful people I’ve ever heard has effectively given up on the idea of it being possible to appeal to everyone’s reason, then what does that say about the future of humanity? Are we doomed to forever misunderstand each other? Are some people simply unreachable? If so, what percentage of the population is that? Ten percent, eighty percent?
Glad to hear Sam thinks of Elon as a former friend. It makes me like Sam even more.
I think CH’s voice is a voice from the past, not the “future” as Sam said. His views line up with the liberal views of the 70s, 80s and 90s that I grew up with and still hold today. This is in stark contrast to today’s left, which is illiberal in large part and has regressed to the identity politics of the mid-20th century and earlier. I think that the educators, politicians, media, etc. who make their living off of identity politics have poisoned the minds of todays younger generations by exaggerating and manufacturing much of the racism that we have today without giving them the perspective of how far we had come during the late 20th century.
Surprised by how close you come to recognizing that the disproportionate involvement of black people in crime is linked to the social injustices they face, which can be addressed through policies. Yet, you consistently fall short of reaching that conclusion...
Then Coleman complaining that all of the academic papers are saying why color blindness doesn't work... it's like, if you don't like the current state of science, you go and study it with your own model, you go and study it and experiment and come with a robust explanation on why color blindness is the way to go, don't just come with an inspirational speech from half a century ago.
People’s problem with Sam is his level of clarity of thinking inaccessible to even the most intelligent of them.
...he typed, in a barely coherent comment.
Some people's problem with Sam is his support of genocide.
I used to consider Sam my hero or role model. He's so well reasoned and articulate. But, I can admit, a few of his takes are pretty bad. I can see why people who didn't particularly care about Sam initially, would let the bad takes define him in their eyes.
Sam has convinced himself of a psuedo-objective morality. His bad takes occur when he tries to apply that philosophy.
I don't think any concepts are inaccessible to anyone. I feel like everyone needs to understand that, people who don't agree with you, are not beneath you, mentally or morally. I really wish anti-zionists, and radical climate activists, or BLM folks could realize this. Until then, I guess I'll be the stupid immoral person whose thoughts are beneath consideration.
@@Perditions The problem with those bad takes is two-fold.
First, the ramifications are horrendous.
Second, he is comfortable lying to promote them.
For instance, if some scandal were to cause Trump to become ineligible to become president, Harris would promote it, regardless of veracity.
@@tcorourke2007 That's correct. The ramifications of objective mortality being, whatever maximizes good and minimizes suffering is objectively good, means that the ends justify the means. This means Sam would consider it morally good to lie, if brought about a maximization of good or minimization of suffering in the world. It's seems like a very flawed way of thinking.
I didn't read The Moral Landscape so I can't be certain he wouldn't convince me of his way of thinking. But I doubt it and I don't want to. Alex O'Conner and Rationality Rules agree, it's not objective morality. They didn't go so far as to say it was destructive. I think I'll see it their way. But Sam didn't start having bad takes yet at that point.
But it's not enough reason to discard Sam. Sam is genuine enough in what he says. He can explain himself, and I can disagree with him where he fails to convince. But in the modern times, I can't discount his honesty. Because I know, now more than ever, people aren't honest with themselves, much less anyone else. I've been a debate listener forever, and I'm keenly aware that Sam is still one of the best at not deluding himself, which is admittedly, contradictory, while we discuss the way he (probably) deludes himself. Delude seems like too strong a word if he can articulate his thought process.
But still, it's like how theists like to say that since atheists have no objective morality, they could justify for themselves any morally reprehensible thing. But the absence of objective morality doesn't mean atheists aren't moral people. In the same way, Sam's view would justify him to lie for the greater good, but that doesn't mean he does. You only know the severity of his TDS because he was honest enough to shamelessly express it.
Anyways, he doesn't need to be perfect, just better than others. But this is a good opportunity to ask if there's someone you can think of that would be better than Sam Harris at what he's does; a more worthwhile listen?
Every so often when Sam makes his episodes free, because he feels the subject matter is sufficiently important, his takes are the best. When he discussed the death of George Floyd, nobody had a more reasonable and balanced take. It's hard to discount that kind of thing.
I think most podcasters just go with the general leanings of their guests because they could never air a repeat of the first time you and Jordan Peterson spoke on your podcast and were stuck on a disagreement of the definition of "truth". There are a handful out there, you included, who are willing to have those fundamental disagreements, but for the rest of them trying to make a living doing this, I don't see them as any different than CNN or FOX in terms of incentive to focus on simply controversy and conflict over actual substance.
I've NEVER heard Sam laughing before
I don't know Coleman and I tried to resist the urge to google him to see his skin color, as I assumed that whole point of the talk was that it didn't matter. I failed and saw that he was in fact black. And he then in the opening laid out that we are in fact not colorblind (not yet anyway) exactly in the way that I was not. I don't know what to make of this in fact, but there you go...
You think there is a problem because your eyes sent the signal to your brain that Coleman is dark?
I said I don't know what to think. But I cannot see that it is a problem, yet it is in priciple a racist act that I wanted to know the color in an audio podcast. His ideas are colorless. I find this interesting and sense some wisdom here I just don't know what at the moment.
I feel for you Sam. I too employ the same logic, but probably more liberally then you do, although that might change with time.
Anyone named Rory is a suspect , at this point.
Sam, your vibe is at an all time low man, and I've been a huge fan forever. You seem to have polished your communication even further and everything just feels so empathic and wise yet not by loosing your teeth.