• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Sam Harris believes is psychics?

Humes fork

Banned
Humes fork
Joined
Jul 9, 2011
Messages
3,358
From The End of Faith, page 41:

There also seems to be a body of data attesting to the reality of psychic phenomena, much of which has been ignored by mainstream science. The dictum that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" remains a reasonable guide in these areas, but this does not mean that the universe isn't far stranger than many of us suppose. It is important to realize that a healthy, scientific skepticism is compatible with a fundamental openness of mind.
Click to expand...

It seems Sam Harris has a rather lot of spooky beliefs.:boxedin:
 
Limbo said:
Or maybe it's a lack of disbelief. :/
Click to expand...

Or maybe he is wrong about why it has been ignored by mainstream science due to the false assumption there is anything to see in the studies, aside from how research can go wrong.
 
I believe in psychics.

I don't believe a word they say, but I believe they exist.
 
Can someone please show me something that Harris said that was particularly interesting and intellectually stimulating? I haven't read any of his books, but from his interviews, lectures and blog posts I haven't seen any evidence of his supposed brilliance. Quite the contrary, he so far has given me the impression of being no more than an average thinker with a very good academic record. I'm baffled. And now this nonsense.

Maybe I'm missing something important in a similar way Harris is/was missing something important about the supposed body of data attesting to the reality of psychic phenomena? Ok, I'm open minded. Where's the data? And where's Harris' brilliance?
 
That book was published in 2004. You missed the reference footnote 18 explained on page 232. Maybe he was repeating someone else's thoughts from one of those books that he didn't question enough.

Actually, he didn't say he believes but says there "seems to be a body of data". That body of data is not proof or proven correct.

If you were to ask him today, he would probably say he doesn't believe in psychics.
 
Dani said:
Can someone please show me something that Harris said that was particularly interesting and intellectually stimulating? I haven't read any of his books, but from his interviews, lectures and blog posts I haven't seen any evidence of his supposed brilliance. Quite the contrary, he so far has given me the impression of being no more than an average thinker with a very good academic record. I'm baffled. And now this nonsense.

Maybe I'm missing something important in a similar way Harris is/was missing something important about the supposed body of data attesting to the reality of psychic phenomena? Ok, I'm open minded. Where's the data? And where's Harris' brilliance?
Click to expand...

His statements about that beliefs in propositions should be scaled by the evidence for them are sound and rhetorically well done. But the idea is hardly unique to him, and it didn't originate with him either.

Something else, what is Harris known for, except as a new atheist (nothing wrong with that)? Dawkins and Dennett have contributed to their fields.
 
Humes fork said:
Something else, what is Harris known for, except as a new atheist (nothing wrong with that)? Dawkins and Dennett have contributed to their fields.
Click to expand...


He has co-authored papers on neuroscience.

I don't know how important or groundbreaking the research is.
 
halohms said:
If you were to ask him today, he would probably say he doesn't believe in psychics.
Click to expand...


Just like he would have said back when he wrote The End of Faith. He just wasn't familiar with the evidence, here's a part of Sam's exchange with Randi:

http://www.randi.org/jr/2007-06/062907.html#i5

... I have never said that I believe in PSI, reincarnation, etc. I have taken a position that there seems to be data on these subjects which should be evaluated. You may think that the claims of Radin, Stevenson, et al. have been thoroughly vetted and demolished. If so, please tell me where this demolition occurred. (I remember the back and forth in Nature with Brian Josephson, which did not seem to lay the matter to rest).

In any case, there has long been a clarification of my position on these and other controversial matters on my website: samharris.org/site/full_text/response-to-controversy2/ The relevant excerpts are these:

My views on the paranormal—ESP, reincarnation, etc.:

My position on the paranormal is this: While there have been many frauds in the history of parapsychology, I believe that this field of study has been unfairly stigmatized. If some experimental psychologists want to spend their days studying telepathy, or the effects of prayer, I will be interested to know what they find out. And if it is true that toddlers occasionally start speaking in ancient languages (as Ian Stevenson alleges), I would like to know about it. However, I have not spent any time attempting to authenticate the data put forward in books like Dean Radin’s The Conscious Universe or Ian Stevenson’s 20 Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation. The fact that I have not spent any time on this should suggest how worthy of my time I think such a project would be.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Humes fork said:
Oh I see. I stand corrected.
Click to expand...

To be fair, that research was done during his PhD which happened after he published End of Faith. It does not appear that he is still doing research, although I suppose he may get involved again at some point through his foundation, but his research is not what he is known for.
 
ThunderChunky said:
To be fair, that research was done during his PhD which happened after he published End of Faith. It does not appear that he is still doing research, although I suppose he may get involved again at some point through his foundation, but his research is not what he is known for.
Click to expand...

Known for it or not, does it pay for a living? What does the man do to make a living? He seems to be quite affluent, and surely his books don't sell that well? He also has a wife and a daughter.
 
Humes fork said:
Known for it or not, does it pay for a living? What does the man do to make a living? He seems to be quite affluent, and surely his books don't sell that well? He also has a wife and a daughter.
Click to expand...

His first book was on the new york times bestseller list for 33 weeks. All three of his books have been bestsellers.

So yes, his books do sell that well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom