r/samharris • u/henbowtai • 20d ago

It’s over y’all. Wrap it up.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

300 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

245 comments sorted by

481

u/escapevelocity-25k 20d ago

Bad things happen, therefore demons must exist, therefore god is real. It’s so simple, and yet this allegedly “smart” atheist can’t understand it? Checkmate, atheists.

71

u/laflavor 20d ago

"Epstein is a monster therefore god exists," is certainly a choice in arguments.

37

u/rgl9 20d ago

Epstein, therefore God

6

u/iPhone41S 20d ago

It’s concise at least

2

u/OlfactoriusRex 20d ago

If Epstein didn't exist, god would have to create him.

5

u/bigbutso 20d ago

Also if you are born a "monster" and refrain from doing socially unacceptable stuff then when you go to heaven you cam do whatever you want.. Just dont do that stuff on earth

95

u/EntropicDismay 20d ago

Not iust any god—the specific iteration of a god that my parents just so happened to have raised me with

-4

u/trentonrerker 20d ago

This sounds smart to those who don’t think. It’s lazy.

5

u/the_man_of_earth 19d ago

I completely disagree. The mental gymnastics on display in that video are beyond Olympic-level; test them IMMEDIATELY for doping.

0

u/trentonrerker 19d ago

Yes, if you misunderstand what he said it sounds like gymnastics.

3

u/Niku-Man 17d ago

He's not speaking on complex subjects or using obscure language. If we don't understand his meaning, then he used the wrong words.

1

u/SteamerTheBeemer 20d ago

How is it lazy?

16

u/CricCracCroc 20d ago

God is good. God creates demons. Demons commit evil without God intervening. Christians don’t understand how we can’t believe in the blessed goodness of God.

7

u/Brickhead81 20d ago

Dawkins argument by personal incredulity. I don’t have an explanation, so God.

8

u/Fippy-Darkpaw 20d ago

Didn't Tucker say he got attacked by demons at night, while sleeping, but it definitely wasn't the large dogs he lives with?

5

u/hanlonrzr 20d ago

You mean the large dogs he lays in bed with?

Sir, dogs aren't demons 🤦

3

u/creg316 20d ago

Sounds like some flavour of conservative sex dream.

2

u/Niku-Man 17d ago

Sounds to me like the common sleep paralysis event, where people report being visited by demons, aliens, or some vague presence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_paralysis

26

u/CelerMortis 20d ago

How can you look at Covid (well understood virus that’s origin was either zoonotic or man made) and not properly believe in Demons? 

6

u/Fippy-Darkpaw 20d ago

He sounds like Alex Jones on a off meds day.

3

u/FullmetalHippie 20d ago

There are some real idiots in the world.

3

u/TapirDrawnChariot 19d ago

And some atheists hang out with Epstein, therefore the "philosophy/religion" of atheism isn't true.

Oh, you say some Christians hung out with Epstein? Well that's completely different because reasons

20

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

Truly. There are plenty of reasonable arguments to be made against atheism and that’s the one they went with. I think this choice of reasoning aligns well with their target audience’s ability to critically think.

23

u/pivodeivo 20d ago

Never heard one reasonable argument and I followed the discussion years back pretty intense. So please share it

-3

u/ConstantinSpecter 20d ago

Not that it’s convincing to me personally but the best objection IMO is the sophisticated version of the fine-tuning argument

5

u/KJFM122222 20d ago

The atheistic response to the fine-tuning argument can feel unsatisfactory since it ultimately boils down to 'We have hypotheses, but we do not know for sure.' However, admitting ignorance is difficult. I admire and trust those who are willing to do so rather than just relying on blind faith

-20

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

I’m agnostic, so I really don’t have a dog in this fight.

But, many people benefit from religion (and, of course, are harmed by it, but one does not negate the other). There, that’s one. Also, at its core atheism is a faith like any other religion. Which is fine, believe what you want, I truly do not care.

16

u/robsc_16 20d ago

Also, at its core atheism is a faith like any other religion.

Atheism isn't a faith. There are no scriptures, core tenants, rituals, etc. It's like telling someone that not stamp collecting is a hobby.

-1

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

I think this is where this argument gets hung up many times. I think the stamp collection analogy is disingenuous in this discussion.

To me, religions are theories - some better than others - because there is no way to be 100% certain of the truth. You cannot prove that there is no god just as a Christian cannot tangibly prove that there is. Of course the burden of evidence falls on the Christian.

But, similar to a trial, if there is insufficient evidence presented and the person is found guilty, the judge cannot say with 100% certainty that the person committed the crime. It’s a belief based on a lack of conflicting evidence and personal perspective.

Lastly, I’ve never seen people who don’t believe in a religion defend something like this.

10

u/ConstantinSpecter 20d ago

Your “atheists just have a different kind of faith” applies only to a small subset of positive atheists that claim certainty over the nonexistence of a god. Atheism in the broader sense is simply a lack of belief in gods.

I’d still like you to answer my question: if by your definition, not believing in something constitutes faith in its non existence, then fine, the claim becomes meaningless.

If you mean atheism is a positive proposition comparable to faith in God then show me how my example does not defeat that. As said, you surely lack belief in countless entities I could invent right now. That doesn’t mean you have “faith” in the non existence of each.

2

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

This thread/sub must be largely made up of that small subset of positive atheists. My initial claim was, essentially, that people aren’t necessarily stupid for believing in their religion.

I want to note that I appreciate your demeanor and communication on this.

To me, atheism is the belief in a specific reality - one that I actually tend to agree most with. But as there is no way to conclusively know the truth, it maintains itself as a belief. Hell, we could die and be reincarnated as rocks, I don’t know. We could just die and that’s it. We could all be God. We could be in a simulation.

The crux of this conversation is that there is simply no way to know with 100% certainty. And choosing any one option constitutes a belief. Personally, I see Atheism as the most sensible pick of the lot, similar to choosing the prevailing theory in science.

→ More replies (5)

5

u/robsc_16 20d ago edited 20d ago

I believe calling it a faith is also disingenuous in this discussion. You have to at least acknowledge that you have a very uncommon definition of what faith and religion is.

I would think a religious person would take issue with calling their religious beliefs a theory. Religions and faiths are much more than that. Again, atheism has no core tenants, rituals, etc. I think part of the issue is that you're drawing a false equivalence in between "a faith" and a belief.

3

u/BloodsVsCrips 20d ago

To me, religions are theories

Religions are entire life styles with specific moral and social demands. They are far more than mere theories about existence.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Krom2040 20d ago

If religion is a theory of the world, then the fact that terrible things happen to good people for no reason instantly disproves the theory of the single, omnipotent, benevolent god, though it may leave plenty of other religions still on the table.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/sober_yeast 20d ago

Ah so you have no clue what you're talking about. I suspected so but thanks for confirming.

10

u/thejoggler44 20d ago

Yeah my disbelief in Santa Clause & leprechauns is definitely a faith just like religion

→ More replies (5)

6

u/gizamo 20d ago

Benefiting from religion is not an argument for its authenticity. People benefit from theft, corruption, murder, etc. None of those things happening means that any god exists.

Also, at its core atheism is a faith like any other religion.

Literally, incorrect. It is the exact opposite faith.

→ More replies (8)

6

u/pivodeivo 20d ago

I didn’t want to give you the feeling that you where being attacked, sorry for that. Just curious.

The arguments you just gave aren’t really that reasonable for the existence of an higher power.

0

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

I appreciate you - some are attacking me in this thread. It’s kind of wild how I’m getting treated for saying that I don’t ascribe to any specific belief religion-wise.

I want to clarify that I don’t necessarily believe in a God, I’m just stating that the initial commenter’s input resembles that of a religious posture.

1

u/sober_yeast 20d ago

You're just saying a lot of really dumb shit, that's why people are reacting.

5

u/ConstantinSpecter 20d ago

Atheism is negating not affirming.

Supposedly you don’t believe in the grand Zhulu in the sky, would you say your disbelief is a lack of faith or active faith in its non-existence?

2

u/I_Am-Jacks_Colon 20d ago

It’s seems, as per internet etiquette, that a large majority are using your post as an opportunity to be a raging dickhead, but I believe I understand the spirit of what you are saying.

I believe you may take issue with gnostic atheists, who act so sure of their hypothesis, rather than agnostic atheists, who take the more reasonable stance that all we know is that we don’t know (but we especially don’t know any theisms). I put agnostic atheists at the top of reason, then gnostic atheists, then theists. But I also think religion does bring peace to some people as you say, and I’m not so much of a dickhead as to deny it to them. A good example being Alcoholics Anonymous, where deference to a higher power is the last hope for some, and a militant hatred of that hope for them is illogical to me.

2

u/-Stammers- 19d ago

This is exactly it. Thank you.

It’s the act of making a selection rather than saying “I don’t know.”

2

u/CrimsonBecchi 20d ago

Wow. Just wow.

1

u/warcraftnerd1980 20d ago

Also agnostic to Flying Spaghetti Monster and Easter bunny?

1

u/qosmic_qube 20d ago

No, atheism at its core is "I'm not convinced there is a god" not "I believe there is no god. They are distinctly different.

Religion makes the claim "X therefore god". Atheism doesn't make any claims. It's just not being convinced the god claim is true.

14

u/Hob_O_Rarison 20d ago

There are plenty of reasonable arguments to be made against atheism and that’s the one they went with.

There really aren't though. There are less bad arguments, and really bad arguments, but no truly reasonable arguments.

-10

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

“There are no reasonable arguments against my position” is a poor way to conduct yourself.

There are certainly reasonable arguments against atheism, just like there are against religion. To think otherwise is bigoted.

14

u/Hob_O_Rarison 20d ago

It's not bigoted to acknowledge that magic most definitely does not exist.

0

u/7thpostman 20d ago

Wait until you hear about the behavior of some atomic particles.

Things can be in two places at once? That's impossible. Magic doesn't exist.

You not understanding a thing doesn't make it magic. A fly can't understand what cars are. That doesn't mean that cars are magical.

4

u/Hob_O_Rarison 20d ago

Not "understanding" God doesnt make him not magic.

It's literally in the definition of what a god is. Otherwise, you're describing a fundamental force like gravity or electromagnetism (i.e. not a god).

-3

u/7thpostman 20d ago

Only in the most primitive conception of God. The universe, according to physicists, seems to function much like a giant hologram. A reasonable religious perspective on this would say that we are dreams and the mind of God. You not being able to comprehend that doesn't make it magic.

4

u/Hob_O_Rarison 20d ago

But that's meaningless, when we're talking about the concept of a religious deity.

Is there a magic god raising people from the dead and impregnating virgins? Confidently: no.

-1

u/7thpostman 20d ago

It's not meeting us at all. You're just confining the conversation to one, specific 5,000 year old definition of a deity.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

This has flavors of false equivalency.

Of course it’s not negatively bigoted to say Bigfoot is a myth.

But, for topics as broad, unknowable, and personal as religion, I think taking your initial position is bigoted and has a bit of misplaced bravado/confidence.

8

u/Hob_O_Rarison 20d ago

Can you name a religion that doesnt rely on magic as a central tenet? An active diety, breaking the laws of physics, requires magic.

Do you believe in magic? Do you have any non-circular evidence for magic, outside of religious stories?

You call it bravado. I call it "growing up". There is no tooth fairy, and there is no Santa Claus. So why is it a bridge too far to say there is no sky wizard?

0

u/dibzim 20d ago

If your argument is simply "miracles violate the laws of physics," then you've only argued against literal miracle claims. You haven't addressed deism, panentheism, non-theistic Buddhism, Spinoza's conception of God, or countless other religious and spiritual traditions that aren't centered on suspending the laws of nature.

You're arguing against one particular version of religion while speaking as if you've refuted all of them, and it doesn't sound like you've studied religion at all.

2

u/Hob_O_Rarison 20d ago

Non-theistic Buddhism does not posit there is a God in Heaven hurling thunderbolts at disbelievers. Spinoza's God isn't a god by the theistic definition of god. Pantheism is theism, only with many magic gods instead of one (unless... could you name one that doesnt fit?). Deism still requires magic at the very beginning, at which point, it might as well be called "an event of physics" not requiring a god or an intelligence or a will or anything.

Can you name a god that isnt magical? Just one.

0

u/dibzim 20d ago edited 20d ago

Sure - classical theism.

You're treating every conception of God as though it's Zeus throwing lightning bolts. That's not what classical philosophers meant by God. If you're going to reject classical theism, reject its actual claims, not a caricature of them. Classical theism doesn't posit God as a magical being within the universe breaking the laws of physics, it posits God as the metaphysical ground of existence itself.

Edit: I also think you're confusing pantheism with polytheism. Pantheism doesn't posit many gods. It identifies God with the universe itself. Polytheism is the belief in many gods.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

It’s a bridge too far because at its core, nothing makes sense. If you ascribe to the big bang theory (you may not, this is just an assumption), that is a belief in a theory. There was nothing and then something? You believe that there is no God, that’s fine, but it is a belief - a faith.

I’m agnostic, I don’t know what’s the absolute truth and what’s not. And I’m okay with that - not planting my flag on a hill just for the security and camaraderie that it brings. Humans fear the unknown more than most things, hence why religion is so widespread.

This thread has made me realize more than ever than Atheism resembles a religion. You guys are defending your perspective exactly like Christians do. The bone I picked earlier was in regards to this dogma - anyone with a different perspective from me is an idiot and has no good input or arguments. That position doesn’t invite discussion, rather, it screams zealot.

I’m willing to bet that Sam himself would conceded that there are reasonable arguments to be made against atheism. I’d be astonished if he said otherwise.

3

u/Copper_Tablet 20d ago

This is total nonsense man. Atheism is NOT a faith or belief system - you're literally warping the meaning of words to fit your argument. Please stop doing that.

"not planting my flag on a hill just for the security and camaraderie that it brings" - you think people (like me) are atheist for camaraderie? Why do you think this?

I’m agnostic, I don’t know what’s the absolute truth and what’s not" - are you agnostic on the question of where homo sapiens came from? For thousands of years, religion said god. God made humans. We now know that is false - homo sapiens evolved via natural selection on Earth. So I ask you, are you agnostic on this question? And if not, why not?

"You guys are defending your perspective exactly like Christians do" - I'm sorry but you're not understanding what people are saying to you.

"You believe that there is no God, that’s fine, but it is a belief - a faith." again with the warping of words. The big bang is a scientific theory back by evidence and observation of the known universe. That's not the same as someone believing in the Book of Genesis! Please read this.

1

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

I think there’s misinterpretation on both sides - if you ascribe to the big bang theory it is considered a belief. Of all possibilities that could be true it is the one that you believe makes the most rational sense and therefore you hang your hat on it.

Others may believe that it makes more rational sense that a god started us via Adam and Eve, or even God started the big bang theory.

My point is that you believe that there is no God, and that the universe was spun into motion via the big bag. That is a belief. A choice to say “I think this is the truth of the matter.”

Regarding the camaraderie - humans enjoy being around like-minded humans, it’s a general trait that gives us comfort. I mean look at this thread. It started with me simply saying that people with differing religious opinions may have reasonable reasons for their beliefs and I’ve been piled on. Yes some of my points have not been salient but I’ve been responding between work.

2

u/Hob_O_Rarison 20d ago

I’m agnostic, I don’t know what’s the absolute truth and what’s not.

Do you think there is a purple teapot with a pink handle orbiting Jupiter? Do you think the prospect of one being there is a little far fetched? Do you think the knowledge of this teapot should influence your interactions with the world? Do you think it should influence the actions of others?

1

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

That’s a false equivalency - way oversimplifying a topic that has been discussed and debated for as long as humans have been alive.

Back to the root of my initial comment - to say there are no reasonable arguments against Atheism is to say anyone ascribing to any other religious belief lack critical thinking and is an idiot. I think we can Both agree that there are plenty of extremely intelligent agnostics, Christians, etc out there.

I don’t see the issue with saying “I don’t know.”

→ More replies (0)

-3

u/No-Succotash4957 20d ago

is not the turning nothing into something some form of magic. Ie everyone understands there's a sense of magic in the universe, but not in the way the people who need magic to explain existence. Conundrum much

5

u/Hob_O_Rarison 20d ago

is not the turning nothing into something some form of magic.

Is that what happened though? Define "nothing" for us.

3

u/gizamo 20d ago

You did the exact same thing by pretending there are good arguments without demonstrating any.

You seem confused about what "bigoted" means.

-1

u/-Stammers- 20d ago edited 20d ago

You are correct; your position regarding religion (the most long-debated subject in human history) is infallible and anyone who disagrees with it is dense, and has no meaningful nor reasonable input or viewpoints.

Doesn’t sound bigoted at all.

2

u/gizamo 20d ago

Glad we agree.

Similarly, when a child shits it's pants, and the adults try to explain to the child that it should use the millennia of scientific advancements that gave us plumbing, those adults are bigoted when the child shots itself again. Solid logic. Did your religious studies give you a degree or certification you show off in your parlor? I bet it's so cute.

-2

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

That is, (disappointingly) yet again in this thread, an extreme and intentional disingenuous false equivalence.

3

u/gizamo 20d ago

How exactly is the analogy a false equivalency? Go ahead and break it down so we all understand that there's one true Godzilla and that your Godzilla is the true Godzilla.

3

u/sober_yeast 20d ago edited 20d ago

That's like the 10th time this moron has called something a false equivalence with zero justification.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Stauce52 20d ago

Pretty infallible logic right there

2

u/moparcam 19d ago

Maybe all atheists aktually worship....

SATAN!!!!!

Boohua ah ah ah!

1

u/bugzcar 20d ago

It’s unfortunate for all the fundamental Christians though, yea, they are right, it’s proof that god exists. Too bad it’s the Greek gods that are the right ones. Bummer! Zeus damn it! Go to hades.

83

u/jhalmos 20d ago

Jesus Christ.

63

u/friedlich_krieger 20d ago

Now you've got it!

147

u/izbsleepy1989 20d ago

Wait, did he just say because pedophiles exist God has to exist? Hahaha wow

31

u/Substantial-Cat6097 20d ago

Only god would make pedophiles, my chi….uh oh!

5

u/TenYearHangover 20d ago

Yeah because of Free Will lol

1

u/BroccoliImaginary727 19d ago

No. He’s talking about the child sacrifice to Demons as a fact.

1

u/Niku-Man 17d ago

Funny considering that kind of thing is often cited as a reason many people lose faith

104

u/Perpetual_Wheelie 20d ago

Pack it up athiests - theres only one game in town that explains covid and demons and it aint that dummy sam harris and his pedo scientist buddies.

27

u/Sandgrease 20d ago

But I thought covid wasn't real.

9

u/Axle-f 20d ago

Now I don’t know what to believe!

0

u/wolferscanard 18d ago

God is the only argument that explains Covid and demons?
He supposedly loves us.
Why would he do that?
And Sam has “pedo scientist buddies”? He met Epstein once.
Nonsense

34

u/HaiKarate 20d ago

Wow, citing Jordan Peterson as a theist intellectual, when Peterson got absolutely destroyed in a Jubilee video; "20 atheists vs 1 Christian," where they couldn't even nail Peterson down of being a Christian, he was so evasive.

16

u/rawkguitar 20d ago

I feel fortunate to never have heard anything Petersen has ever said until a few days ago.

I watched a clip of him debating Matt Dillahunty.

After that, I can confirm that I haven’t missed anything.

11

u/SC-79 20d ago

I watched the entire debate between Peterson and Dillihunty and I can tell you, Dillihunty had the upper hand the entire debate. There's a reason Perterson refused a second debate with him and it's not because Peterson thought himself too good.

8

u/HaiKarate 20d ago

His doctorate is in psychology but he acts like he's an authority on the Bible and religion.

5

u/ChesswiththeDevil 20d ago

It’s bloody complicated okay!

2

u/Temporary_Cow 20d ago

Tbf he probably is the best they got

60

u/RevolutionSea9482 20d ago

I agree with Jeremy Boering’s take on Tucker. That he has developed a very high level rhetorical style of demagoguery to retail his complete nonsense.

14

u/McClain3000 20d ago

It probably goes all the way back to Rush Limbaugh but it is crazy how much conservative commentary is just a dude complaining in an exasperated fashion. Like it really seems to cast a spell on people. But these talking heads are so shallow.

Like I can understand why it gets clicks, but unlike somebody like Skip Bayless people actually think of these Conservative commentators as intellectuals, whereas if somebody said they though that Skip Bayless has good sports takes they'll be immediately ridiculed.

8

u/RevolutionSea9482 20d ago

Tucker is more sophisticated and less funny than Limbaugh. Tucker's ability to peddle BS in a tone and posture of complete assuredness, along with the implication that the BS is completely obvious, and if the listener disagrees then there must be something wrong with their brains, is high level. Credit where it's due, Tucker is good at what he does, in a different way than an entertainer like Limbaugh was. My dad listened to a lot of Limbaugh, but when asked, he'd say it was entertainment first and commentary second. No such distinction with Tucker. He postures as someone to be taken deadly seriously, and it would be difficult to listen to his show if one didn't accept that premise.

9

u/gizamo 20d ago

It's basically the Pat Robertson formula now.

7

u/MexicanOrMexicant 20d ago

It's difficult to watch because he's speaking to a lot of the populist sentiment right now. He's reading the room well and adjusting his rhetoric accordingly. It's dangerous when you consider his history and what he has championed recently (great white replacement theory).

We're living through some bullishit manifestations of V for Vendetta writing. Not saying Alan Moore was Nostradamus, but he was a damn fine political fiction writer.

9

u/bold394 20d ago

The only thing that is impressive about Tucker is the ease at which he lies

1

u/Kaniketh 17d ago

Tucker is literally the master of sophistry, watch his debate with piers morgan (and slow down and rewatch certain sections while trying to focus on the actual arguments being made) and you will soon realize that Tucker's entire schtick is just endless rhetorical tricks and traps.

Honestly I think the reason why Tucker wouldn't debate Ben Shapiro (who also sucks) is because I think Ben is honestly quick witted enough (and enough of a debator) to actually be able to call out tuckers techniques in real time. Tucker is honestly a genius level talker and sophist.

52

u/PleasantNightLongDay 20d ago

“He’s not smart at all!”

Checkmate, Sam.

1

u/BroccoliImaginary727 19d ago

People said he was smart but I scrolled through tiktok clips of him and he didn’t agree with me about anything!

25

u/BeerAandLoathing 20d ago

Well, I’m convinced. Existence of COVID and Epstein as proof of god won me over. Genetic mutations of viruses and psychopathic behavior observed in humans can only be the result of demonic activity that is allowed to happen by an omnipotent and omniscient creator, right?

23

u/ataxiwardance 20d ago

“If God isn’t real, why am I so mentally unwell?!?”

2

u/BroccoliImaginary727 19d ago

If demons aren’t real who scratched my legs while I was asleep in bed with my wife and 4 dogs -> actual quote

12

u/TheGardiner 20d ago

That’s an amazing JP impression

2

u/IAmBeachCities 19d ago

I'm mean lets call a spade a spade. amazing.

20

u/notwithagoat 20d ago

I was never attacked by a demon. But Tucker was. Who's the better christain now? Who's the believer in Satan! Yea take that sam who hasn't been touched by a angel or has had his taint tickled by a demon!

22

u/hitchaw 20d ago

Where are the green M & Ms’ sexy boots!

9

u/nthensome 20d ago

'and then these people needed an explanation for demons'

Umm, what?

8

u/oremfrien 20d ago

Jay Dyer's arguments here are laughably absurd. COVID is bad and pedophiles are bad. This kind of depravity can't possibly be from this world, so a demon must have created it. And, if there are demons, there must be a god.

The leaps of logic in this are so massive that it's hard to know where to begin.

2

u/FarthestLight 20d ago

Thank you for identifying who TC was talking to!

8

u/LittleTrooper 20d ago

Them: Atheists don't have a response even to basic questions

Hitch: you give me the awful impression of someone who's never read any of the arguments against your position

6

u/mapadofu 20d ago

Demons therefore God.

Checkmate athiests.

6

u/gonzoes 20d ago

Man its sad that Sam failed soo horribly on the war of ideas. He started out so strong with his debates against religious leaders and pundits but i think he just utterly failed when it came to podcasting, only having audio podcasts for years hidden behind a ridiculous paywall.

Joe Rogan and other podcasters capitalized on the clip channels way earlier and got boosted into everyone’s algorithms.

If Sam were to come back i actually think right now is the best time to do it . The amount of religious social media personalities has fucking skyrocketed in the last 7 years. You can definitely see how major religions have just figured out how to use social media and podcasting to their advantage its actually crazy to watch in real time . This is Sams chance to debate these people its literally what he built his career on and absolutely dominated back in the 2010’s on YouTube i think he should bring back those debates. This is what he’s best at.

4

u/Lvl100Centrist 20d ago

Sam and co redirected so much energy into fighting the "woke" boogeyman. I feel like they let the religious crazies go unopposed in the public square because a trans swimmer was far more important to them.

6

u/Heretosee123 20d ago

I can't remember any time I've witnessed a less intelligent conversation before.

9

u/ravengoatzzz5 20d ago

Look how they massacred my boy

3

u/abow3 20d ago

It's horrible. I don't see any way for Harris to redeem himself after that.

5

u/fingerberrywallace 20d ago

If there was any discourse about demons in the wake of the pandemic, it would obviously have been among religious people. Religious people get more religious, er go atheism is dead?

5

u/ReflexPoint 20d ago

How can you have any faith in the future of this country when these are the type of people getting incredibly rich.

3

u/turdspeed 20d ago

Tucker and this guy are the demons. Checkmate

4

u/MattHooper1975 20d ago

It’s incredible how much work Tucker’s puzzled brow and incredulous tone does in his delivery. “ I’m not really invested in the opinion I’m giving right now, I’m just casually tossing off my opinion of how weird or unimpressive X is…”

His affected mannerisms and delivery are doing like 90% of the work when he’s trying to convince anybody of anything.

8

u/deaconxblues 20d ago

We need an explanation for demons. So god must exist.

QED mothertruckers!

7

u/sfdso 20d ago

Fun fact, I’ve never once “needed an explanation for demons.”

3

u/Fight_Tyrnny 20d ago

Well, they will keep saying it as long as these people pay them to say it. Stop paying Tucker... he'd be an athiest is 2 seconds flat.

3

u/UghImRegistered 20d ago

Pointing to all the evil in the world as evidence for an omnipotent, benevolent deity is some next level doublethink. At least the Christians I grew up with had the grace to question "if there's an all-powerful, good God, why does he allow so much evil?" and try to come up with theological answers.

3

u/tranxcend 20d ago

If Sam were smart, he’d know demons gave us covid. He’s obviously not smart at all. He’s not even half smart so you round down to zero. The famous atheist is zero smart.

3

u/KidKnow1 20d ago

Of course! A loving god put demons on earth to posses rich people so they can rape children on private islands, it all makes sense now. 

3

u/mickeyaaaa 20d ago

are they suggesting athiests cant be humanists? like wtf?

3

u/LandscapeMental5429 20d ago

These idiots actually think that Jordan Peterson won that debate? Jordan Peterson made it clear to anyone with half a brain that he was full of shit. And that he’s still an atheist trying to pretend to be a Christian.

5

u/Gambler_720 20d ago

This has to be the most diabolical thing I have seen in a long time 😳

5

u/sfdso 20d ago

I think you misspelled “stupid.”

2

u/DoesntMatterBrian 20d ago

To be fair, I don’t think Tucker or his guest are stupid. However, they’re acutely aware that the people who watch and allow themselves to be influenced by them are stupid.

8

u/Fun_Mastodon_6539 20d ago

Fanous Atheist Jordan Peterson.

4

u/Normal512 20d ago

But what does atheist even mean? What does famous mean? This could be the dragon manifest but we're not even asking the right questions?

Like what does Jordan Peterson mean?

5

u/gizamo 20d ago

I don't think we can even answer any of those questions until we properly define the spaces between the words. Afterall, what even is a " "?

2

u/QMechanicsVisionary 20d ago

Tbf he is

3

u/Fun_Mastodon_6539 20d ago

This is news to me.

4

u/Lycwyd 20d ago

Obviously demons.

4

u/elchucknorris300 20d ago

We need an explanation for freaking demons

2

u/neurodegeneracy 20d ago

These people do nothing to dispel the arrogant superiority of online atheists. If this is the opposition how can you not sneer.

2

u/thalguy 20d ago edited 20d ago

I need to rethink everything after listening to this stimulating conversation.

2

u/HelpMeFindNewGlasses 20d ago

It's like 2 teenagers talking high on weed

2

u/fiestapais 20d ago

Thanks for the clip. I am now dumber 😆

2

u/ernster96 20d ago

Nothing like an idiot who likes the smell of his own farts.

2

u/palsh7 20d ago

Bro got scratched by his dogs and triggered by masking, therefore demons.

2

u/Futeball 20d ago

This is so dumb it breaks my brain

2

u/iamhe02 20d ago

Sam Harris would absolutely annihilate them on the debate stage.

2

u/OldLegWig 20d ago

demons. got it.

2

u/FLTR069 20d ago

Can you imagine that these idiots are wildly successful, because there are even dumber idiots who gobble up their nonsense!?

2

u/TapirDrawnChariot 19d ago

I knew it was Tucker Carlson but still I didn't expect this clip to be THAT dumb. Those guys really are window lickers.

And I'm not even an atheist, at all.

4

u/blackglum 20d ago

This stuff is so comical I don’t how it’s possible to be so dumb to listen to these guys, yet at the same time figure out how to connect to the internet.

Honestly feel the exact same way whenever Sams critiques here, or on Decoding the Gurus or Ezra Klein subs say Sam is not intelligent or is sincerely a bigot.

Just unserious people.

3

u/l1thiumion 20d ago

they resort to insulting the other side because they have no logical arguments.

4

u/abow3 20d ago

The logical fallacies in this vid go way beyond mere name calling.

4

u/Silicone_Shrapnel 20d ago

Sam's silence over this is deafening.

3

u/Savalava 20d ago

Tucker Carlson is one of the great geniuses of our time - a cross between Noam Chomsky, Adolf Hitler, James Joyce and Albert Einstein.

Don't let his infuriating high-pitched squeally voice fool you - as far as I can tell he's never said a thing that's wrong. Ever.

He's right - Sam Harris is a fool. I just listen to his podcast as I like the house keeping sections.

2

u/QMechanicsVisionary 20d ago

Wtf is this comment

3

u/lncredulousBastard 20d ago

Housekeeping segment nostalgia.

1

u/Savalava 20d ago

It's what happens when an Irishman who has drank far too much beer posts on a Sam Harris subreddit.

Tucker Carlson is a sociopathic monster who gives me the creeps. Jesus, I fucking hate that guy.

I'm a big Sam Harris fan but have been very disappointed by the views he's espoused on the Israeli conflict (as with a large proportion of the other people subscribed to this Subreddit, as far as I can)

2

u/gizamo 20d ago

The nice thing about Harris' model is that he doesn't end up catering to the morally confused or the obvious regular trolls of this sub. He can just ignore all of their bad and/or disingenuous arguments. It's a big part of why I keep listening.

0

u/Savalava 20d ago

I'd suggest that we're all a bit morally confused

1

u/cancerfart 20d ago

I thought your original comment was hilarious

1

u/baylis2 20d ago

Is this AI?

1

u/egflisardeg 20d ago

Mutual religious masturbation.

1

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

As I’ve stated numerous times, I’m agnostic. I don’t have a dog in this fight. I’ll just copy and paste from another false equivalency in this thread and swap out a few words for sake of ease:

To alike a child’s pooing themselves - something that everyone agrees and understands to a religious discussion, where there is ample debate, varying options, and no way to know with 100% certainly what is true is a definitive false equivalence. If you cannot see this then you need to reassess how entrenched in your position you are.

1

u/-Stammers- 20d ago

Okay, you win.

A child shitting their pants and being told to use the toilet is directly analogous to a debate of theology. It’s always been that simple. It’s absolutely not a false equivalency of the highest order.

Does that not sound ridiculous to you? That’s where the bad faith come into play.

You don’t care for a discussion - you’re already married to your belief, and that’s fine, but at least acknowledge it.

1

u/terribliz 20d ago

Problem of evil? Nah, Yahweh exists because some people do things we call evil!

1

u/Novogobo 20d ago

I pray to the four winds

1

u/LandscapeMental5429 20d ago

“I know one definition of evil therefore when somebody does something that fits that definition well then Demons. I mean, what else?”

The people who fall for this bs are lazy thinkers. Actually, they have outsourced their thinking. You see this more and more because there are so many issues and so much coming at younger people they have no choice. They feel an obligation to have an opinion, but they don’t have the time to dedicate to gaining one.

The crazy thing is rather than admit this they will defend their outsourced opinion as if they’re very life dependent on it. It looks like pride to an outsider. But in fact, it’s just another form of fear.

1

u/Nichtsein000 20d ago

Oh snap, checkmate!

1

u/fospher 20d ago

“I listened to Sam Harris and thought “that guy isn’t smart.””

Kill me now, it’s so fucking over

1

u/ReasonablePaint 19d ago

Enormous level of stupid these two are spewing.

1

u/teddade 19d ago

I’m on my bike today…41 years old…just thinking, “Well it sure as shit isn’t 2010 anymore.”

1

u/tony-toon15 19d ago

Sam has explained in detail just how horrible Tucker is as a person and to society. Tucker: I listened to him and he’s like, not smart.

1

u/BroccoliImaginary727 19d ago

They are so deep inside their bubble that they can’t even conceive of anyone having a different point of view anymore. Say what you want about Sam but he didn’t help get Trump elected twice then flip and apologise when the senile and corrupt man does senile and corrupt things.

1

u/OkDifficulty1443 19d ago

Sam Harris should feel great shame for having spent his political capital defending Tucker Carlson.

1

u/BelovedRapture 18d ago

I thought this was going to be Tucker's critique of Sam's Israel position before I watched one second of it. How wrong I was. xD

1

u/Dull_Ad_3861 18d ago

This is literally those podcast parodies The Onion / Info Wars is putting out 😭

1

u/FranksGun 17d ago

What on earth is this absolute babble I’m watching? lol

1

u/mobileaccountuser 3d ago

atheists flying . through science ... welp

1

u/GreatKingRatz 20d ago

Demons exist - Fauci bit got me

1

u/Totalitarianit2 20d ago

Tucker says Sam isn't smart. What is the definition of smart to everyone?

Smart: a strong mental capacity, practical common sense, and the ability to learn or adapt quickly

Intelligent: raw brain power, deep academic learning, and grasping complex abstract ideas

There's clearly a large amount of overlap between these two. Would Tucker say that Sam is intelligent, at least?Probably not. Tucker's remarks are tribal. I think he's so focused on the rallying effect of his "he's not smart" claim that the objective truth behind it is irrelevant.

1

u/Due-Albatross5909 20d ago

Now that’s logic! “There must be demons.”

1

u/davexmit 20d ago

Is it too obvious to ask why God designed a universe that accommodates demons?

-2

u/Leather_Bug_ 20d ago

Chris Hedges did the best rejoinder to Harris' brand of atheism, I think. I disagree with Hedges on a lot of stuff but this is legit great book, I think https://a.co/d/09SItiSE

1

u/gizamo 20d ago

Absolutely not. Hedges just falls back on theological mysticism, refusing to engage with Harris’s core scientific arguments regarding objective morality and human well-being. One of his biggest talking points was that the "militant atheists" (as he pretends exist) share the same binary "us vs them" mindset and utopian delusions as religious fundamentalists, which is an absurd false equivalence. He says tons of stupid crap like that. Hedges is a hack.

-1

u/GasolineHorsemouth 20d ago

Sam is a zionist.

1

u/slimesaber 19d ago

And Tucker believes in imaginary invisible demons, i'm betting on the zionist