Carl-Richard

Moderator
  • Content count

    15,015
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Carl-Richard

  1. When I was younger, I used to view people like Harris, Dawkins, Hitchens as logically infallible, undeniably good faith and generally argumentatively rigorous. This view kind of stuck with me after my worldview changed, explaining my change in worldview as merely a change in values, not as a change in logical capability. However, then I watched this young atheist criticizing Hitchens' flawed argumentation: I also rewatched a Harris debate with William Lane Craig and noticed that Harris completely derailed the debate into a pathos-fueled stone throwing match, using his speaking time to just shit on anything and everything about religion that doesn't fit his values, completely disregarding the debate format and Craig's good faith philosophical arguments. 58:35 I haven't done a deep dive on Richard Dawkins regarding these issues yet, but considering his general neopositivist disregard of philosophical sensitivies ("science, yay! - philosophy, boo!"), I have a feeling I won't be surprised. EDIT: Here Dawkins literally argues "don't read up on what you're criticizing." It initially looks like he concedes the point, but later he says "no it's actually not worth my time". It's really disappointing. 38:32 Then again, nobody is infallible. I think everybody engages in fallacious argumentation from time to time, but as mentioned here, the frequency and consistency of Hitchens and the absolutely malicious and sociopathic Chess move of Harris really surprised me.
  2. This goes into decades of research and theory behind the mechanism:
  3. It's the entire premise behind the scientific method.
  4. Many people initially feel very confused by psychedelics, then they might discover a new paradigm that is more able to articulate those experiences. You're always seeking coherence between beliefs and experience.
  5. Been stuck in Dark Night limbo since March 10th, 2020. Current strategy is to work on worldly foundations (interpersonal and occupational). Then hopefully it's up and out from there.
  6. or I assume so based on the stability of their worldview over the years. I haven't directly interrogated them about their ontological viewpoints.
  7. As an overarching point, I agree. It's a bit idealistic. However, at least in the discussion with Vaush, it's more complicated. The reason they picked the topic of pedophilia was really only because he and Destiny had just discussed the other topics they had to choose from a bit earlier. He also knew that Vaush had already 1. expressed well thought-out opinions on pedophilia, and 2. had made statements which he actually disagreed with (statements in favor of "ethical child porn"), so he expected to enter the conversation as the guy with the anti-pedophilia stance, but instead Vaush did a 180 and gave a vague PR statement to save his ass ("well that was only a spicy way to critique socially acceptable types of unethical commodity consumption..."). Then the whole thing ended with Vaush misinterpreting a joke and kicking him off etc. It was all just a trainwreck really.
  8. I've watched quite a bit of Mr.Girl by now, and there is no way he is intentionally trolling, at least not in the 1-to-1 conversations. He might come off that way, but it's actually just radical honesty. People are simply not used to somebody who doesn't excessively virtue signal when making ambiguous statements in ethically edgy conversations. He doesn't only talk about pedophilia either.
  9. All my friends have done a bunch of psychedelics, and they're still materialists.
  10. It's kinda spread out, but this is short and sweet: 3:09 - 3:24 He tends to only mention his past in passing, so you have to watch some of his stuff to get the whole picture. Nevertheless, you can quickly tell that he has a good understanding of Green. I like this one. It displays some of his Green literacy (and it's funny ):
  11. I meant that she is a modernist (based on the fact that she identifies as a conservative). Mr.Girl is a metamodernist. The difference is that he has a much more insider's understanding of Green (he has been through it), which becomes very clear when you listen to his story. My point is that many modernist ideals coincide with metamodernism, something which gets lost in postmodernism.
  12. Time is experienced through the change of form. Form and time vanished – experience did not. Experience of absence is not absence of experience. Sam's problem is that he doesn't have a subtle enough understanding of consciousness.
  13. Haha thanks What do you mean by that?
  14. Awareness has a formless and timeless dimension. People confuse awareness with wakefulness and awareness of form (inter-subjective sensory phenomena; sights, sounds, smells, sensations). Anesthesia is therefore analogous (but not synonymous) to deep sleep: awareness without wakefulness.
  15. God damn I actually knew most of those. That's what you get for taking a social psychology class
  16. She is doing a version of the Mr.Girl thing (creating dialogue between opposing views). Not saying they're equal, but it shows how metamodernism is in many ways a re-integration of modernism. Like Jamie Wheal says, the conditions for Game B were actually set with the founding fathers. They were just never properly implemented. "We're are not here to honor the dead, we're here to re-commit to the promise."
  17. Why do you pretend that experience is not absolute?
  18. He has already addressed these criticisms a while ago. Mr.Girl is late to the party.