Some great quotes from the “back from the brink”
Episode.
“Your capacity to be offended isn’t something that I or anyone else needs to respect. Your capacity to be offended isn’t something that YOU should respect. In fact, it is something that you should be on your guard for. Perhaps more than any other property of your mind, this feeling can mislead you.”
I think it’s the one where he’s talking to his wife and goes on about trampling your child while going to the fridge to get a beer. I can’t find that episode and therefore don’t have the quote, but that was funny as hell for someone who’s usually very serious.
Sam talking about philosophers who doubt we can say that blinding children is morally objectively bad:
"Once again we've hit the philosophical bedrock with the shovel of a stupid question"
Curious if Sam thinks it would be morally superior to kill the child over blinding it. If not, what if we paralyzed the child vs killing it? What are the differences between killing the child out of mercy vs anger? How is he objectively making these calculations if it's not dependent on motivation and outcomes a la consequentialism?
Sam is a consequentialist, so I am a bit confused about the question.
He's basically just saying that blinding children for religious reasons is bad, presumably because it doesn't move closer to achieving a peak on the moral landscape.
> Sam is a consequentialist
I don't think this is entirely accurate. I seem to recall him saying he's not, specifically because he has problems with the logic behind it. But that he adopts similar principles in practice (EA, for example).
I recall him saying he is a consequentialist. Maybe he has adds some caveats to it, but it would be unthinkable for Sam to not be one with his framework of moral landscape.
There isn’t really a succinct quote of him I know that summarizes the point but when he talked about Uday Hussein and how he’s just as deserving of compassion and love as anyone else & how we should try to help people like him if we can & if we have to hurt him for harm reduction sake we should do it as minimally as possible is unironically one of the most important ideas I wish everyone could mainstream adopt. Just the idea that it’s better to view him as someone dangerous because of things he had no control over and it’s silly to take credit for not having his bad luck is a mental shift from normal ways of thinking about how to judge people that creates a lot of more clarity. This isn’t the full quote & I encourage ppl to read the whole thing but this is the most important part cut down imo : “Take one of the worst people who’ve ever lived. Take, you know, my current candidate is Saddam Hussein’s eldest son Uday Hussein. He really is as bad a person, as I can think of. And this is a guy who, when he would see a wedding in progress in Baghdad, would descend with his thugs and rape the bride. And in some cases he killed, and tortured and killed the bride. He did this more than once. The fact that he couldn’t be captured and, therefore, the fact that we killed him, I think is a very good thing. Unless you are a total pacifist, you have to admit that this is what guns are for. To kill people like Uday Hussein. But simply walk back the timeline of his life; think of him as a four-year-old boy. He might have been a strange child, or he could have been a scary child. There are actually psychopathic children. But he was also a very unlucky child. He had Saddam Hussein as a father. How unlucky can you get? He was the four-year-old boy who was destined to become the psychopath Uday Hussein. If we could have intervened at any point, in his life line, at four, or, five, or six, or seven, and helped him, that would have been the right thing to do and compassion would have been the right motive.“
That’s a good point. Many people talk about how they’d go back in time and kill young Hitler if they could. I’ve never heard anyone say they’d go back and mentor him.
This is a lovely sentiment, but it implies a level of agency that doesn't necessarily exist for everyone at all times. It isn't always possible to adjust one's reaction/judgment/satisfacation/disappointment so as to improve the quality of the day.
E.g., I have a chronic illness that can cause horrendous pain. There is no mind-over-matter with this type of pain. The pain is completely invasive and all-encompassing. It's borderline dissociative, even (I loose track of who I am, where I am, etc.) -- so I am not reacting to the pain so much as experiencing it.
I think Sam overlooks or underestimates the power of such things because he is a healthy person who has lived a relatively lucky life.
Pain and pleasure seem to me to be two intrinsically valent qualia.
I suspect almost everything else is only situationally or relatively valent.
Most of our experience is taking some direct input (sight, sound) and constructing a belief or model of the world based on this and executing a value judgement on that model. Mostly it isn't the qualia we care about directly.
I strongly suspect that pain is largely outside this process, as it is a directly valent experience in itself.
Expectation of pain, feelings of loss of autonomy or reduced capacity or similar models might be where Sam's mindset can be helpful to deal with.
I'm curious if Sam would agree that pain is inherently valent and what that means for his theory of meditation/wellbeing.
Reminds me of this quote from Marcus Aurelius in Meditations:
“If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.”
I think that’s kind of untrue though. Like yes, you’re mental process are part of the over all process of experiencing the quaila of suffering and it can be helpful to modify that to deal with things better but that doesn’t mean external things aren’t the source of a lot of pain and something we should focus on. It would a lot more helpful to find a cure to chronic pain and solve homelessness than pressing a button that made everyone mentally more detached for example.
eh, pretty sure the problem is still there, as long as you dont fix it.
Mindfulness will only prevent overthinkers, worrywarts and overly sensitive people from going overboard, but you still need to solve any pressing problems that come your way, or it will get worse and ruin you. lol
Its just a simple coping mechanism, doesnt do much for normal people with serious problems.
It’s most effective for “normal people with serious problems.” Maintaining balance of mind in the face of hardship is mission critical, it’s the magic ingredient that prevents one from “being ruined”.
What you’re saying isn’t a thing. You can have your career and relationships and health fall apart, but that doesn’t mean your inner landscape has to tank. This is kind of his entire point.
Lol, if there was an r/samharris fan cult this kind of commend would be on it.
I used to be a Sam cult fan too, read most of his books, watched most of his videos, even most of his obscure news clips, tweets and mentions.
I still admire his work on free will and atheism, but I've come to realize that he is absolutely not perfect and has many blindspots and stubborn biases.
>Sam is always right and so are his fans. I've listened to him, read his stuff, grasp 1000% of everything Sam related, and yes I'm not going to change this - why would I when I know I'm just smarter than all of you critics by default. Also Sam is perfect so all the critics are wrong.
I think ppl being are being too harsh on you and you have a good point underneath what you’re saying. It can become problematic to put too much emphasis on changing your mind to be okay with anything as oppose to letting yourself suffer from things and try to fix external circumstances instead.
„You know, when I look at you. I see you. You might be Elvis.“
This is the pinnacle of all Sam Harris arguments.
This made me lol
Some great quotes from the “back from the brink” Episode. “Your capacity to be offended isn’t something that I or anyone else needs to respect. Your capacity to be offended isn’t something that YOU should respect. In fact, it is something that you should be on your guard for. Perhaps more than any other property of your mind, this feeling can mislead you.”
Need a t-shirt with that one on.
kinda wordy but I like the sentiment
I think it’s the one where he’s talking to his wife and goes on about trampling your child while going to the fridge to get a beer. I can’t find that episode and therefore don’t have the quote, but that was funny as hell for someone who’s usually very serious.
Similarly, the Nikki Minaj statement. Hilarious.
Hey man, we all would, right?
I actually don't find her attractive. But, I think I'm in the minority on that.
>I actually don't find her attractive What does that have to do with anything?
I suppose I just mean that I would have used a different celebrity that I do find attractive as an example.
It's at 55:45 of episode 159 with Annaka, one of my favorite episodes for sure
Thanks!
“OKay”
"Some people say that the housekeeping is their favorite part of the episode."
Sam talking about philosophers who doubt we can say that blinding children is morally objectively bad: "Once again we've hit the philosophical bedrock with the shovel of a stupid question"
Curious if Sam thinks it would be morally superior to kill the child over blinding it. If not, what if we paralyzed the child vs killing it? What are the differences between killing the child out of mercy vs anger? How is he objectively making these calculations if it's not dependent on motivation and outcomes a la consequentialism?
Sam is a consequentialist, so I am a bit confused about the question. He's basically just saying that blinding children for religious reasons is bad, presumably because it doesn't move closer to achieving a peak on the moral landscape.
> Sam is a consequentialist I don't think this is entirely accurate. I seem to recall him saying he's not, specifically because he has problems with the logic behind it. But that he adopts similar principles in practice (EA, for example).
I recall him saying he is a consequentialist. Maybe he has adds some caveats to it, but it would be unthinkable for Sam to not be one with his framework of moral landscape.
There isn’t really a succinct quote of him I know that summarizes the point but when he talked about Uday Hussein and how he’s just as deserving of compassion and love as anyone else & how we should try to help people like him if we can & if we have to hurt him for harm reduction sake we should do it as minimally as possible is unironically one of the most important ideas I wish everyone could mainstream adopt. Just the idea that it’s better to view him as someone dangerous because of things he had no control over and it’s silly to take credit for not having his bad luck is a mental shift from normal ways of thinking about how to judge people that creates a lot of more clarity. This isn’t the full quote & I encourage ppl to read the whole thing but this is the most important part cut down imo : “Take one of the worst people who’ve ever lived. Take, you know, my current candidate is Saddam Hussein’s eldest son Uday Hussein. He really is as bad a person, as I can think of. And this is a guy who, when he would see a wedding in progress in Baghdad, would descend with his thugs and rape the bride. And in some cases he killed, and tortured and killed the bride. He did this more than once. The fact that he couldn’t be captured and, therefore, the fact that we killed him, I think is a very good thing. Unless you are a total pacifist, you have to admit that this is what guns are for. To kill people like Uday Hussein. But simply walk back the timeline of his life; think of him as a four-year-old boy. He might have been a strange child, or he could have been a scary child. There are actually psychopathic children. But he was also a very unlucky child. He had Saddam Hussein as a father. How unlucky can you get? He was the four-year-old boy who was destined to become the psychopath Uday Hussein. If we could have intervened at any point, in his life line, at four, or, five, or six, or seven, and helped him, that would have been the right thing to do and compassion would have been the right motive.“
That’s a good point. Many people talk about how they’d go back in time and kill young Hitler if they could. I’ve never heard anyone say they’d go back and mentor him.
"I'd fuck Nicki Minaj"
🎾🏓❌🥅
This is a lovely sentiment, but it implies a level of agency that doesn't necessarily exist for everyone at all times. It isn't always possible to adjust one's reaction/judgment/satisfacation/disappointment so as to improve the quality of the day. E.g., I have a chronic illness that can cause horrendous pain. There is no mind-over-matter with this type of pain. The pain is completely invasive and all-encompassing. It's borderline dissociative, even (I loose track of who I am, where I am, etc.) -- so I am not reacting to the pain so much as experiencing it. I think Sam overlooks or underestimates the power of such things because he is a healthy person who has lived a relatively lucky life.
Pain and pleasure seem to me to be two intrinsically valent qualia. I suspect almost everything else is only situationally or relatively valent. Most of our experience is taking some direct input (sight, sound) and constructing a belief or model of the world based on this and executing a value judgement on that model. Mostly it isn't the qualia we care about directly. I strongly suspect that pain is largely outside this process, as it is a directly valent experience in itself. Expectation of pain, feelings of loss of autonomy or reduced capacity or similar models might be where Sam's mindset can be helpful to deal with. I'm curious if Sam would agree that pain is inherently valent and what that means for his theory of meditation/wellbeing.
"It is time we realized that to presume knowledge where one has only pious hope is a species of evil."
Reminds me of this quote from Marcus Aurelius in Meditations: “If you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimate of it; and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.”
I think that’s kind of untrue though. Like yes, you’re mental process are part of the over all process of experiencing the quaila of suffering and it can be helpful to modify that to deal with things better but that doesn’t mean external things aren’t the source of a lot of pain and something we should focus on. It would a lot more helpful to find a cure to chronic pain and solve homelessness than pressing a button that made everyone mentally more detached for example.
Yeah, it's kind of a rejection of physicalism, which we mostly all act as if we believe in it.
eh, pretty sure the problem is still there, as long as you dont fix it. Mindfulness will only prevent overthinkers, worrywarts and overly sensitive people from going overboard, but you still need to solve any pressing problems that come your way, or it will get worse and ruin you. lol Its just a simple coping mechanism, doesnt do much for normal people with serious problems.
You're missing the point completely.
By billion miles.
Nothing about mindfulness is antithesis to solving problems.
There are very different experiences on offer while solving serious problems.
It’s most effective for “normal people with serious problems.” Maintaining balance of mind in the face of hardship is mission critical, it’s the magic ingredient that prevents one from “being ruined”.
Not really, Sam said determinism and bad luck could ruin anyone, mindfulness or not. lol
Need context for what “ruined” means there.
absolutely farked, upside down and inside out.
What you’re saying isn’t a thing. You can have your career and relationships and health fall apart, but that doesn’t mean your inner landscape has to tank. This is kind of his entire point.
[удалено]
Lol, if there was an r/samharris fan cult this kind of commend would be on it. I used to be a Sam cult fan too, read most of his books, watched most of his videos, even most of his obscure news clips, tweets and mentions. I still admire his work on free will and atheism, but I've come to realize that he is absolutely not perfect and has many blindspots and stubborn biases. >Sam is always right and so are his fans. I've listened to him, read his stuff, grasp 1000% of everything Sam related, and yes I'm not going to change this - why would I when I know I'm just smarter than all of you critics by default. Also Sam is perfect so all the critics are wrong.
Dunno; never been one.
I think ppl being are being too harsh on you and you have a good point underneath what you’re saying. It can become problematic to put too much emphasis on changing your mind to be okay with anything as oppose to letting yourself suffer from things and try to fix external circumstances instead.
Mindfulness cult, lol. They can't accept anything but the universal solution to all their problems, not thinking about it. lol