Navigation
Page Summary
chaource - (no subject)
timelets - (no subject)
chaource - (no subject)
leblon - (no subject)
chaource - (no subject)
timelets - (no subject)
chaource - (no subject)
timelets - (no subject)
chaource - (no subject)
timelets - (no subject)
chaource - (no subject)
timelets - (no subject)
chaource - (no subject)
timelets - (no subject)
clovis3 - Trump's lies?
timelets - Re: Trump's lies?
clovis3 - Is this it?
timelets - Re: Is this it?
Style Credit
- Base style: Fluid Measure by
- Theme: Sand and Seaweed by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-21 05:27 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-21 08:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-21 11:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 02:07 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 02:46 am (UTC)As for Sam Harris, I think he takes a serious stance and is fully capable of reasonable debate. Here is an example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQ35AATHGTI where Harris talks to Ben Shapiro without resorting to any personal attacks or emotional vitriol, even though Shapiro is right-wing and Harris is left-wing politically. But they did not discuss anything related to Trump in that debate.
(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 06:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 08:53 am (UTC)If you were arguing in good faith, you would have seen right away which parts of the video I'm talking about - the passages where he mentions Trump, there are only two such passages, - and you might then have some arguments to show why Harris either was not hateful towards Trump, or that Harris was not emotion-driven and over the top in maligning Trump.
For the record, here's what Harris said about Trump (emphasis mine):
"...the most harmful aspect of his presidency is a complete ruination of any standard of honesty... I have not yet accepted that this is even possible... he [Trump] lies more than any person has ever lied in human history... his supporters delight over his [destroying] any expectation that a public figure would be honest..."
(speaking about the backlash towards political correctness) "...hence the rise of the orange monster we call Trump..."
He basically describes Trump as Satan incarnate ("the father of lies"), accompanied by a coterie of lesser demons.
(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 02:06 pm (UTC)Now, let's get back to the contents and the context of Sam Harris' interview/discussion. He states the obvious fact that Donald Trump has a well-documented track record of lying and cheating: in his private life, in his public statements, and his business deals.
You interpret Harris' words in religious context: fervor, abomination, Satan incarnate, demons, etc. This is not reasonable because Harris is not a religious man. Moreover, as a scientist he's interested in secular truths and it's natural for him to call our powerful secular liars, such as DJT.
(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 06:08 pm (UTC)Harris did not say "Trump has a well-documented record of cheating in business and in personal life". Harris did not say "Trump lied about X and Y, which allowed him to discredit his opponent NN when they were discussing ZZ". Harris did not say "I disagree with Trump on policies X and Y and I think they are bad for our country because of reasons A, B, C". All that would have been normal, non-TDS discussion. Instead, Harris literally describes Trump as an inhuman abomination.
Actually, it would appear that a TDS-free Sam Harris should have agreed with Trump about resisting the Islamic ideology, because Harris has quite negative views about the political Islam. Here is a discussion about Harris's views on immigration,
https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/comments/6rah3j/what_exactly_are_sams_views_on_immigration/
So, a TDS-free Sam Harris would have said something like "I agree with Trump that we should not allow Sharia law to rule over any part of our country, and we need to revise our immigration policy in view of the social dangers of Islamic fundamentalism. But Trump also enacted other policies X, Y, Z and they are very bad, for reasons A, B, C." Had he talked like this, he would have demonstrated the absence of TDS.
(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 06:27 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 06:36 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 07:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-22 08:53 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2018-09-23 07:29 am (UTC)Trump's lies?
Date: 2018-09-23 07:07 pm (UTC)Re: Trump's lies?
Date: 2018-09-23 07:52 pm (UTC)1. "Trade wars are good and easy to win."
2. "Attorney-client privilege is dead!"
3. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1036681588573130752
Is this it?
Date: 2018-09-23 08:59 pm (UTC)2. ... if FBI can raid attorney's office and take all documents from there.
3. This is a statement of fact: both indictments were made so close to the election that there was no time to challenge them in court.
And these are the most glaring lies you could find? How about anything on the scale of "If you like your insurance or doctor then you can keep it"?
Re: Is this it?
Date: 2018-09-23 09:11 pm (UTC)