Not so much for Integralists specifically perhaps, but Harris does have a sizeable following. He’s one of the top Anti-Thiest Rationalists. Perhaps a postmodernist.
Lefties might have their own divisions, but from a Christian/ Thiest perspective his ideas and followers have a sizable Venn diagram overlap with most Transhuman, Postmodern, Super Rationalist Ubermenschs.
You’ve just popped my ego. I’m going to call my Shrink for a bedtime session, then cry myself to sleep.
So you’re saying he’s Debating from an Orange wolrd view - more on par with Jordan peterson, but without the religion.
I suppose that’s the only division you tend to see? Religious and not religious?
Transhumanism - Makes me think of Elon musk. Again, not really Green but more orange if we are discussing Integral Theory.
Postmodern Super Rationalist - aren’t these completely opposite things? It seems to me that you tend to just toss up words in the air without actually stopping to think if what you are saying makes sense.
Ubermenschs - I see this as just name calling? Does it actually mean anything?
I thought it a tasty Kamala Salad. Tangy, spicy, crunchy and oh so salty. Mmm…
Nietzsche is foundational for Integral Theory, as with many other Leftist shades.
Nietzsche’s Ubermensch, or Nietzsche’s superman, is a creative individual who does not merely follow or obey the laws of others, even the laws of God . The Ubermensch’s meaning, then, is a meaning of creation, both the creation of self and of the world.
Harris is absolutely transhumanistic. I.e. Man replacing that defunct washed up literal mythic abusrdity called “God”.
Harris has a hefty Venn Diagram overlap with Integral even though he doesn’t use the lingo.
I do like Sam Harris and have been a long time follower of his podcast since the days of the Intellectual Dark Web appearances on The Rubin Report. When the interviewer is flabbergasted and calls him out on the varsity of his position he could have said that was in jest and of course hyperbole, he didn’t.
When you watch him stammering and babbling it’s obvious he’s uncomfortable and his tweets and podcast explanations clearly show it was not in jest.
Sam Harris lost a lot of credibility but he also attracted a lot of new followers in the process. I know many in my social circles agree with Sam 100% … probably many here do too.
The Gad Saad book reflects and dove-tails perfectly with Any Norman’s Mental Immunity book that @raybennett referenced above. Gad is very funny and uses satire that is very much on point. If you’re sensitive you might find him offensive, he’s a lot like Bill Maher snarky and sharp. I like them both very much.
Gad shows clearly that this insanity is on both sides of the political extremes. I for one certainly see that too. Both sides accuse the other of insanity. Sadly, I don’t see this toning down any time soon as this Civil war rages on.
I anticipated as much. It is, however, disturbing, because what it suggests is that a great many people share the Harrisonian view that “democracy is fine, unless you elect someone whom I object to, and then it’s not fine.” They completely miss the point of what a democracy and its constitutional constraints are all about. I hold little hope for the future.
Hyperbole is quite different from jest. He wasn’t jesting - he was taking an extreme and unrealistic position to show a point. But obviously if he was in fact show pictures of dead children on Biden’s laptop he would of course backtrack. It’s just like trup saying he could murder someone on the street and he’d get away with it. Of course if he actually murdered someone on the street in broad daylight, he does not reallyu thing he would get away with it nor is he actually thinking of actually murdering someone on the street in broad daylight.
I think that is the times we are in on both the left and the right. People who consume the most media are most likely to be attracted to extreme messaging. It’s kind of hand in hand. While people who are least attracted to extreme messaging are least likely to consume (listen to) the entire message, and also are less likely to be suceptible to advertising messaging to click the next link to the next lower level of the internet rabbit hole.
The key is to recognize both on the left and the right when they are going down a hole and not follow them wihtout complete 100% awareness that you are going down a hole.
I guess with Gad I’d have to look past that Jordan Peterson was chosen to write the forward. Jordan is definitely a polarizing force drawing people more apart than together, so his choice to write the forward is to me significant. He is definitely on one particular extreme side of the culture wars, and one of those people who loses credibility as he gains followers.
Well, if you are lumping all philosophical and intellectual progress of the last 300 years into one big bag and calling it all “Progressive” and therefore bad and hoping and waiting for humanity to regress back to the 17th century you are out of luck, lol.
Essentially all I can get from your raving is something like “Kamala = Nietzche = Sam Harris = Communism = Biden = Integral = Atheist = Ubermensch = Anti-Theistic Rationalists = Transhuman = Coredevos = four legs good two legs bad = transgendered = whatever group you decide next Tuesday.”
But Enquiring minds want to know - are you still confident of the Red Wave happening in November? Seems a year ago you placed all your hope in Republicans overwhelmingly taking both the House and the Senate.
What do you think about Alaska electing a Democrat? Are you going to go with Alaska chose the wrong way to elect leaders, lol? Democracy was working in Alaska last week when it was Republican but now there’s something wrong because a Democrat was elected?
I’m curious what intellectual contortions and crimes against reason you will come up with.
I wouldn’t “equate” on thing for another. It’s more a view of the Venn Diagram for each ideological shade have overwhelming overlap with the others.
Transhumanist, Anti-Theist, Marxist, Woke, Integralism perhaps 85% overlap with each other. And i know each would argue that it’s that 15% that’s different that makes each special.
On Alaska, I think Palin is a very divisive MAGA candidate so not surprised she lost to a First Nations opponent. I also think the Democrats with their monolithic win-at-all-costs-existential-survival culture are somewhat better equipped for a Ranked Choice voting system.
One House seat is hardly a harbinger of wave or no wave. Or do you see something I’m missing?
I thought you weren’t so concerned with Sam Harris’ thoughts so why have you become the Uber Apologist for him?
I know you’re proud of your jest vs sarcasm vs irony vs hyperbole vs sincerity vs makin-schizzle-up discernment, but how do you know that it was simply hyperbole for example’s sake?
You are far too biased to really read anythihng I was saying about Sam Harris. You even follow it up with your own hyperbole about me - “uber apologist”. This is another example of how I see that you are 90% dogma and so I am usually safe ignoring 90% of what you type.
Am I trying to apologize about Sam Harris or merely seeking a comonality with @excecutive on a topic? Or do you hold a firm opinion that Sam Harris was jesting and for me to say it was hyperbole is somehow offensive to you?
@FermentedAgave what exactly is your point besides just trying to tit-for-tat with me to such an extremen that you lose track of what you point is?
Was he laughing or smiling? Usually when people jest they are smiling. Unless they deadpan and it wasn’t deadpan, lol.
Yes - I do like to find examples of these kinds of thins in real life. It cuts through all the fat of an agrument like a hot knife.
I’ll give you another one - “begging the question”. What is your question or point exactly? You quite often get tied up in knots in your own points and counterpoints.
Is it your point now that Sam Harris was making a joke?
Or are you merely going against anything I type? lol
If I were to ask @raybennett for an example, I’m sure you’d confabulate some weird rationalization, so I won’t bother. Nonetheless, I can counter your unsupported rationalization with an accurate one that correctly depicts the current situation:
“The Bidenistan view is that democracy is fine, unless you lose to those whom you hate, in which case you can just steal the election from them, your Stasi can raid their homes for no reason at all, while the cocaine-addicted, hooker-indulging first son with that laptop never gets raided or indicted for anything, and all that’s just fine and dandy too in a two-tiered justice system.”… They completely don’t care what a democracy and its constitutional constraints are all about - that’s all just fluff and smokescreen to set everybody up for the Big Scam.
There’s something happening here and what it is abundantly clear. There’s two man growing in fear telling us we’ve got to beware. Don’t you think it’s time we stop hey watch both sides nobody knows how this is going down?
There’s battle lines being drawn. Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong. Crazy conspiracies swirling around. Getting so much reply from the opposing side.
The FULL BLOWN CIVIL WAR is underway. Notice how this messaging in response to Biden’s fear mongering parallels the very same themes and tones.
Here is the thing.
By way of analogy - let’s say a crazy man comes up yelling at me in the street - the way @steljarkos is doing in here, ranting and raving. As long as it’s on the internet in a forum it’s all just words. blah blah blah more conspiracy theory whacko nutjob “stolen election” alluminati conspiracy theories.
Where I get some degree of a feeling of safety and optimism. is that when these nutjobs do actually commit crimes and acts of violence, they still face the rule of law - as Trump is doing now. Maybe they get off maybe they don’t, but they still have to face down the law of the land. They can yell and kick and scream all they want about civil war - but if they start to take actual action, then they will face severe consequences. Currrently about 400 people are facing such consequences for their assault on our nation’s Capitol and attempted insurrection.
So to all the people talking about Civil War - I just want to tell them “do it and see what happens”.
@steljarkos If you actually believe what you say - then you are a coward for not takng up arms and defending what you think is right against what you see as evil forces that have taken control of the governemnt. Let’s get this over with - you go out and buy your combat gear, join your local militia that is one hamburger away from a heart attack and place your ass where your ideals are.
You won’t. Deep deep down you know you will never actually stand for what you believe in except from the safety of your desk.
@excecutive Conservatives like Ben Shapiro want to have it both ways, and it’s completey ironic the way Conservatives accuse Biden of acting the exact way that Conservatives have been acting since 2012. This didn’t start with Biden. It started with the radicalization of the Republican Party and their effort to do anything to get rid of Obama (and failure to do so). I actually could have voted for McCain - if he did not pick Sarah Palin for VP. That was the point (2008) when the Tea Party Whacko element started to take control of the Republican party. I’ve been saying since 2012 that the worst thing that could happen to Republicans would be if they actually got to be in charge - and we have seen that happen as Trump lost in 2018, 2020 and now is set to lose 2022 and 2024.
I don’t have time really to watch the whole 56 minutes of Ben Shapiro. A brief perusing of it I come away with these points:
Republicans have been alienating more than 50% of the population for a decade. That is why they lost in 2018, 2020, and will lose in 2022. If the majority of Americans felt included in the Republican agenda, they would be winning. So for Ben Shapiro to accuse Biden of this is pretty hypocritical.
The official color of the Republican party is red. It’s absurd to now equate Red with extremism just because Biden had a red backdrop. That also is hypocritical.
Trump said far worse about his fellow Americans every day since 2015 than Biden did in just one speech. Again, the Republican party has a long history of saying really bad things about the majority of Americans going all the way back to the 1960’s.
It’s all a narrative. The difference I see is that Biden’s narrative is calculated and controlled while Trumps narrative is like an out of control fire hose. Trump just randomly tweets out hate against the majority of Americans for 8 years on the regular and without any rhyme or reason. Biden did it at a very calculated time to goad Trump into saying worse and stupider things in Pensylvania. Of all the cities on the planet, the worst City to trash talk is Philidelphia while in Philidelphia, lol. Phillidelphians take that stuff hard like a real insult. So Biden said something about Trump and whackos - and in response, Trump insulted Philidelphia and probably lost PA for 2022 and 2024, lol.
Last - Ben Shapiro is engaging in a falsehood. He says Biden insulted and is against the majority of Americans, and this is false. The majority of Americans do not believe in “stop the steal” nor do the majority of Americans support Trump nor are they even Republicans nor even Conservative. It’s not even the majority of Republicans, lol.
Overall, nearly half (48%) of GOP and Trump voters think occurrences of election officials deliberately miscounting votes in 2020 were fairly/extremely widespread.
So that’s not even half of Republicans, much less half the country, lol. Biden insulted maybe 25% at most of the country who will probably be offended by anything Biden says anyway, lol.
My comment is that the extremes on both sides are equally committed to a full on battle … Your entire comment @raybennett is saturated with politics … if you’re the cool, rational and reasonable integral voice of sanity I’d say we’re headed for full-on Civil War.
Of c ourse a discussion on politics is saturated with politics, lol. When we discuss another nonpolitical topic sans Ben Shapiro then what I say may very well be free of politics.
It’s kind of absurd to post a link to Ben Shapiro being blatantly disengenuous and then say I’m the one who is politically saturated, lol. Ben Shaprio is one of the most polarizing figures in American Politics, and you posted him, lol.
I’ve already said I don’t really want Civil War, but I’ve been taking actual physical action to prepare myself since I saw the writing on the wall back in 2008.
Accepting the real possibility and taking actual preparatory steps generally mitigates the fear of a thing - just like I do not live in fear of Hurricanes or Tsunamis every year, but I am prepared because they are real possibilities.
As an example how absurd it is for Ben Shapiro to call out Biden - Trump actually did feature a man who supports an actual Nazi sympathizer, lol.
All this mellodrama of “how dare you call us Nazis” would be much more convincing if Trump did not give voice to actual Nazis and white supremacists.
Trump’s decision to feature a speaker highlighting such a case, when there are hundreds of other Capitol riot defendants to cite as examples, prompted a pointed response from Lofgren, also a member of the House Judiciary Committee: “Being a supporter of Adolf Hitler does put you in the Fascist category; there is no semi about it. I do think this is troubling.”