This kills the Sup Forumstard

this kills the Sup Forumstard

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=0taTSaUO2hM
twitter.com/samharrisorg/status/375095760947142656?lang=en
youtube.com/watch?v=IPMSwKbY5ms
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

He was BTFOed by Dilbert man because he couldn't muster up any logical arguments and was reduced to intellectual screeching

>neo con
>smart

>fakes dissertation participation so he can call himself a doctor

wew lad

No. Brilliant guy, but ultimately fucks up his shit on bridging experienced truth and absolute truth. Not edgy enough to deny all strange phenomenon, but too edgy to ever delve far enough. You skeptic community faggots need to tone it down.

Also he looks like your prototypical satanist.

>Not edgy enough to deny all strange phenomenon, but too edgy to ever delve far enough.
Since when has believing in ghosts or souls been considered edgy?

>shill thread
>posting some dude nobody has heard of in order to drive search results when people google him to figure out who the fuck he even is

2017 pol is such fucking shit

>posting some dude nobody has heard of

Really now?

>posting some dude nobody has heard
u are fucking stupid burger

Really? So it's not ethical to kill muslim terrorists who want to create a world wide caliphate?
Wow

>TFW a cartoonist blows you the fuck out

He went full retard on trump. also claiming white supremacy is the worst form of supremacy. kike line.

never fucking heard of this irrelevant asshole and I've been on Sup Forums for 10 years. shill thread.

also trips

this makes me hide your shit thread

He's just an advanced skeptic, which is like being a tall midget.

Dude got his ass turned inside out by fucking Dilbert-man because Adams realized pressing the Trump button made him take retarded and untenable positions.

>he's justifying his own murder and a real holocaust

Nice quads. The guy was relevant when he was criticizing Islam.
Now he showed his true neo-con face and his narrow mindedness when it comes to information.
Ie CNN guy.

I liked him in the Night at Museum

his content is boring now though

Harris will never BTFO Islam as hard as this guy :

youtube.com/watch?v=0taTSaUO2hM

>I've been on Sup Forums for 10 years.
So you're a nobody. Thanks for clarifying

why anyone is shilling this asshole at 5 AM eastern time US is the real question.

assuming you are paying for this garbage to be posted, what do you actually expect? most of the country is asleep. just starting the campaign early?

I'm not too familar with Sam Harris, but wasn't he talking about Muslims in this quote?

From the little I've seen of him: He's an athiest cuck that still defends Christian identity, and hates on Muslims. Don't know much more about him.

Yes, a true intellectual:
twitter.com/samharrisorg/status/375095760947142656?lang=en

I hope your being sarcastic

You sounds paranoid, seek help

kek my sides

...

jew

kek
in that case, the man makes a solid argument

bro like a third of the threads you see on here is paid content via marketing firms. I'm not paranoid.

Autism is the world's most powerful force but even it cannot explain the threads we've been getting lately.

paranoid weirdo.
take a break from Sup Forums, seriously

>t. paid shill

take a break man, I'm worried about you

not even the same person.

have fun managing your poo in loo shitpost Sup Forums spammers in some Hyderabad suburb slum office park

Wut? What did he do? What did I miss?

It's hilarious that you think I'm getting paid.
On top of that if I were getting paid you're doing exactly what i want you to do, that is replying to me.
btw here's a post of mine from before, critisizing sam harris, the man i'm ''shilling'' for. I mean it when I say get help.

roach

if you are paid, presumably it's in curry powder, toilet paper, and anti-malarial drugs. Sup Forums has been nothing but spam for the last eight months or so and it's around the clock.

>I mean it when I say get help.
this isn't fucking reddit, we don't believe in therapy around here. And yes I'm replying to you and it's because I'm bored.

Oh yes, Sup Forums never has spam or pure meme posts.
I mean how could a thread like this possibly be made!
It's not like anyone can shit out a thread in 5 seconds, there is no possible way someone just made a shit thread, it had to be SHILLS!

Pic mandatory in every Harris thread.

God i love this so much.

Sam Harris will decide what we get to think

I'm still 6 inches taller and probably have a bigger dick.

Also sage and report this kike slide thread

damn that bitch is cute, mind if I save the image?

I should care about some neo liberal kike that can't even wrap his head around the fact that reality and truth are nuanced?

...

>He's just an advanced skeptic, which is like being a tall midget.
So, what's better than skeptic? Holding beliefs without evidence?

Cenk Uygur already owned Sam Harris

Because inductive reasoning never establishes absolute certainty on which one can ground ethical decisions. At the moment you decide to act on your judgment, inevitably without discounting everything that could go wrong with your decision, you have taken a leap of faith, you've gone beyond your skepticism.

No one would claim that there's no place for skepticism in modern life, specially in science, but to apply this mindset in other realms without understanding its severe limitations, which happens quite often these days, leads to analysis paralysis, excessive doubt, insecurity.

Conjectures are all we have about the future. But we still have to live.

>constantly talks about how we should avoid simplistic and unproductive rhetoric
>in his talk with dilbert man he literally compares hitler to nazis
>scott adams claims "Should I just declare victory right now?"
>Ben stiller's retarded brother responds "No it's okay to use nazis in this situation because I want to."

He also conflates 'truth' with 'facts' which isn't healthy.

Dilbert man is a walking joke though.

Nice radical Muslim propaganda. They sure like to quote mine infidels that don't bend over to their religion of peace.

Trump to nazis* I've been brainwashed to believe Trump is literally hitler so I accidentally type his name sometimes.

Sam Harris has advocated for a preemptive nuclear strike on the Arab world, for profiling stereotypical Muslim in airports and he even wrote an article in defense of torturing Muslim prisoners entitled "In Defense of Torture".

If it walks like a duck...

Can you refute any of these arguments?

Yes.

Nuking the arab world right now is on its face insane

Racial profiling like that is immoral and ultimately ineffective. A blonde, clean shaven young man can be a Jihadi and would dance on by the screen.

Same answer as first for torture, that isn't what we do in the modern west

Keked

>Nuking the arab world right now is on its face insane
That's not what Sam is argunig for. He's talking about a scenario where someone like ISIS would get their hands on nukes themselves.

>Racial profiling like that is immoral and ultimately ineffective. A blonde, clean shaven young man can be a Jihadi and would dance on by the screen.
It's about risk management and resource allocation. The vast majority of muslim terrorists are brown skinned males - that's just a fact. So targeting this group more than others would probably lead to more overall terrorism prevention.

>Same answer as first for torture, that isn't what we do in the modern west
I haven't read the article but based on what I've heard him say about torture, he's likely again talking about extreme situations, where not torturing could have horrible consequences, like thousands of people dying.

Could be a goose

>I understand that race and IQ are real but we should do nothing with that knowledge
>Ignorance is our strength

>That's not what Sam is argunig for. He's talking about a scenario where someone like ISIS would get their hands on nukes themselves.

That would still be an inconceivable choice. Also note he only has this thought experiment about one fundamentalist ideology.

>It's about risk management and resource allocation. The vast majority of muslim terrorists are brown skinned males - that's just a fact. So targeting this group more than others would probably lead to more overall terrorism prevention.

So then ISIS gets wind of this and sends through a radicalized Swede, beating the filter. As well as that, instead of random checks being spread over all people, including some lets say Japanese families, and all Muslim families would be checked and have their privacy violated.

>I haven't read the article but based on what I've heard him say about torture, he's likely again talking about extreme situations, where not torturing could have horrible consequences, like thousands of people dying.

His specific example was to extract information on a terrorists whereabouts in order to avoid hitting him with a drone without being sure of the target. It's straight from the mouth of people like Rush Limbaugh.

I dont like Sam Harris, but everything you said is a misrepresentation of his comments. He never directly said any of those things.

Is he the result of Ben Stiller and Bradley Cooper using the same teleporter at the same time?

>Trump is a lying, unethical sociopath
>But I still don't think the Iraq War was a bad idea

Why do people take ethical cues from this man? Also he was completely disingenuous when he slandered Molymeme, Harris has no principles and nothing of interest to say outside of his field of study.

>but everything you said is a misrepresentation of his comments

This again. I challenge you to name one serious critic of Sam who hasn't been accused of misrepresenting him.

>So then ISIS gets wind of this and sends through a radicalized Swede, beating the filter
If the demographics change, the search patterns should change accordingly. Also, no one is arguing for exclusively targeting brown skinned males. The argument is, that disproportionately targeting those demographics will lead to a better overall terrorism prevention outcome.

>have their privacy violated
Who gives a fuck? Being racially profiled is at worst a minor inconvenience to these people. They aren't getting attacked or thrown into prison.

Do you want terrorism prevention to be ineffective?

Then you just wind up with a situation where stereo typically muslim people are all pulled aside and everyone else glides through. That isn't right. It would inevitably lead to that because the distinction of "anti-profiling" so again say not checking the Japanese families inevitably leads to checking the Muslim family. It's a politer way of saying it, talking about who you wont profile rather than who you will.

>Who gives a fuck? Being racially profiled is at worst a minor inconvenience to these people. They aren't getting attacked or thrown into prison

It's not a slippery slope I'm comfortable getting on. We also live in a world where many people are now thinking neo nazi = alt right = right winger = white person and that they are terrorists. People should be free on the same level and not face literal prejudice in their daily lives.

>that whole first paragraph
wut?
No one is arguing for exclusively targeting brown skinned males. I already said that.
Apparently you are incapable of not misrepresenting people you disagree with.

And, yes, if white males were disproportionally responsible for terrorism, that would be reasonable. But they aren't.

Think about it. Say you've got a group of 100 people, 50 have blonde hair and 50 have red hair. A man has to decide how to profile this group and has 50 he can choose. Statistically blondes have been the problem so he says ok we won't focus on the redheads. He is now focusing on the blondes.

In the airport not profiling people who don't look Muslim in reality means profiling people who do look Muslim.

It's not even a matter of proportion, I accept it is disproportionate, I just reject this McCarthyism. The majority of Muslims who pas through airports and wherever this idea who eventually extend are no threat and would get targeted every time they go through he airport instead of their fair, randomly allocated amount. If they can be a target, anyone can.

As to your last point, it isn't relevant. That is the narrative the MSM is getting behind. The logic or your opinion on it mean little.

>Cenk Uygur already owned Sam Harris

AHAHHAHAHAHAHA NIGGA WAT

Just type in "Sam Harris" to TYT search and watch every video. Here's a good one to start

youtube.com/watch?v=IPMSwKbY5ms

he's a jew, he can't bridge or acknowledge too much lest the goyim know

The best and exclusive way we should be combating terrorism is anyone committing a terrorist attack, their family is killed off out to the first cousins no matter where they are in the world. I can guarantee that would shut all this fucking Muslim Jihad nonsense down really quickly.

Fun fact: Sam Harris actually has credits in the film, according to IMDb.

Atheism is the least likely of all ideologies.

>real intellectual concerned with Truth
>"i don't like molymeme becuase he 'had an excited glint in his eye' when talking about race and iq
>"also, anyone who talks to people that i don't agree with his suspect due to guilt by association"

>Its another viral marketing episode

See you guys on "what do you guys think of ben shapiro" thread. Also Sam Harris is an idiot

Does he acknowledge that living around subhumans is awful? Has he interacted with them on a daily basis? What's his solution for them? How will he remove them from our countries?

Stick around, friend. Sam Harris' PR people make a threads about him on Sup Forums every day.

But if people don't have any free will, then indeed, nothing can be unethical.

True. If you believe that some innocent person deserves to die and it's necessary that you personally kill her and you're convinced you cand and you will, then you have to be put down.

Who?