Sam Harris-- Free Will Speech --- Argues for the very need for religion
LMAO!
Just heard this speech by Sam Harris, a neuro-scientist, a prominent anti-theist, may be even an atheist here is talking about how "free will" is an illusion. He obviously is a very accomplished neuro-scientist, so he knows the science he is talking about. The rest of it is actually something all of us can understand just based on pure personal experience.
After Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, I think Sam Harris completes triad/trinity of atheist god fathers for atheists world over.
Now he has written a book on free will which I need to read (I will soon) but purely based on this speech right here:
I actually will argue he is advocating the need for religion in society without he realizing that. He makes a very basic fundamental mistake in assuming something that makes his whole argument wrong about free will.
In fact this speech also ties in to the philosophy of Ancient Indian Astrology, if you understand what he is saying about the nature of "Free will". In fact there is so much he says that is similar to what the advaita school of teachers, especially my understanding of what my guru teaches me in his speeches.
I think everything Sam Harris is saying factually is correct, except there is a fundamental assumption that he makes throws him off the path of proving free will is an illusion.
Think, while I sum my thoughts up to back my argument up, I need to listen to this a few times to catch it completely.
Note: I still haven't completely made up my mind on free will, is it an illusion or not. But this speech at least is not making that case..... so far. I might recant this post if I feel i am wrong after I sum up my thoughts. But i thought this a good thing to ruminate over for a Friday evening.
Just heard this speech by Sam Harris, a neuro-scientist, a prominent anti-theist, may be even an atheist here is talking about how "free will" is an illusion. He obviously is a very accomplished neuro-scientist, so he knows the science he is talking about. The rest of it is actually something all of us can understand just based on pure personal experience.
After Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, I think Sam Harris completes triad/trinity of atheist god fathers for atheists world over.
Now he has written a book on free will which I need to read (I will soon) but purely based on this speech right here:
I actually will argue he is advocating the need for religion in society without he realizing that. He makes a very basic fundamental mistake in assuming something that makes his whole argument wrong about free will.
In fact this speech also ties in to the philosophy of Ancient Indian Astrology, if you understand what he is saying about the nature of "Free will". In fact there is so much he says that is similar to what the advaita school of teachers, especially my understanding of what my guru teaches me in his speeches.
I think everything Sam Harris is saying factually is correct, except there is a fundamental assumption that he makes throws him off the path of proving free will is an illusion.
Think, while I sum my thoughts up to back my argument up, I need to listen to this a few times to catch it completely.
Note: I still haven't completely made up my mind on free will, is it an illusion or not. But this speech at least is not making that case..... so far. I might recant this post if I feel i am wrong after I sum up my thoughts. But i thought this a good thing to ruminate over for a Friday evening.
Comments