Peterson, Harris, etc....

[Dir Wangem]

Seems like a problem that's rooted everywhere these days. From the media, to social media, to activists, to political talking heads it's just a big game of outrage ping-pong. I wouldn't say any one group is worse than the other either.

I'm not gonna discuss which side is worse, but regardless: just because there are some idiots on the other side, it doesn't mean that Shapiro has to act like an idiot himself. It's a bad excuse, and frankly it's people like him that makes it difficult for outsiders to take American politics seriously. He's essentially just a well-spoken, sophisticated, high-pitched version of Trump. A polished turd is still a turd.

 

[Halftrack]

I think he made interesting points about the lack of clarity in that gender pronoun bill from a legal point of view but his underlying theme seemed so angry.

While I believe that he was genuinly worried that the language wasn't clear enough, I got the feeling that stemmed from him not being clear on what changes were being made. As far as I can tell, the changes were just adding "gender identity and expression" to the Canadian Human Rights Act and the relevant parts of the criminal code, formalizing the protections they already had under the prohibition on discrimination based on sexual orientation. Basically, f it wasn't against the law before, it's not against the law now.

 

[2 man midfield]

It is a pathetic argument. Akin to that stupid t shirt Kenny Daglish wore in support of Suarez.

?

 

[entropy]

?

What’s so confusing?

 

[2 man midfield]

What’s so confusing?

I'm not sure how it's the same.

 

[entropy]

I'm not sure how it's the same.

yeah that was my initial reaction too. When you made that Suarez comment. Seemed lazy and daft.

 

[2 man midfield]

yeah that was my initial reaction too. When you made that Suarez comment. Seemed lazy and daft.

Ok

 

[entropy]

It's almost like Ben Shapiro has no damn clue what he's talking about.

 

[2cents]

It's almost like Ben Shapiro has no damn clue what he's talking about.

The first bit is correct. The second bit is every bit as much nonsense as what Shapiro said.

 

[Theafonis]

 

[Mister_Stubbs]

I like Ben.

 

[2 man midfield]

I like Sam Harris as well. Why is he apparently now part of the Klan?

 

[Welsh Wonder]

I like Ben.

Was the post above yours not a turn off at all?

 

[hobbers]

I like Sam Harris as well. Why is he apparently now part of the Klan?

Anti theocracy is no longer a fashionable opinion on the left.

 

[Drainy]

Harris actually wasn't saying that Muslims should be specifically profiled, simply that since we already have overbearing security checks at airports that 'low risk' passengers should be reverse profiled. He actually included himself in the group of people who wouldn't be in the low risk category.

His point on 'killing muslims' was a philosophical and highly hypothetical question that if ISIS controlled nukes, given that they cannot be categorised as 'rational actors' if intelligence was stating that they were going to use it, would it be an action that would lead to the least overall harm to preemptively strike them.

Harris wrote a book on whether morality can be determined by rationalism (as that is a common criticism of Atheism in the US) and his world view is very much that morality is taking the action that causes the least overall harm- and he tries to apply this to some of the most troubling issues we face today. You can agree or disagree but it doesn't make him a clan member.

 

[Randall Flagg]

Was the post above yours not a turn off at all?

Did you watch the panel or just taking the tweet at face value?

 

[Mockney]

This thread looks worse and worse by the day. Literally everything I see of this guy now is something horribly twatish. And not even charismatically twatish like a Hitchens or Galloway or God forbid a Clarkson! The wet snivelly twatishness of the least popular member of the Slytherin debate team, who told the teacher on you for smoking at break and probably kept a scrapbook of Cheerleader’s hair.

There are few popular (supposed) intellectuals who are so unappealing and slimy in both their views and persona to genuinely make me think less of a person for liking them, but he’s definitely one. Horrible little dead eyed twerp. Treating serious political discourse like some Harvard fraternity mock trial. The political philosophy version of thinking the first rock record you hear with swearing is cool.

If you agree with the odd ad hom argument, fine, whatever, but if you consider him an impressive or even admirable person, I genuinely worry for you, and your continued interactions with human kind. Guy’s a villain. Obviously.

 

[Kaos]

Shapiro is a bigoted scumbag. A pseudo intellectual narcissist who relies on strawman arguments to feign any sort of substance in his debates.

The fact he's a Breitbart champion is enough to label him for what he truly is.

 

[2cents]

The fact he's a Breitbart champion is enough to label him for what he truly is.

He resigned from Breitbart last year I think and is now a vocal critic. Obviously doesn't necessarily make him any better.

 

[Tarrou]

Harris actually wasn't saying that Muslims should be specifically profiled, simply that since we already have overbearing security checks at airports that 'low risk' passengers should be reverse profiled. He actually included himself in the group of people who wouldn't be in the low risk category.

His point on 'killing muslims' was a philosophical and highly hypothetical question that if ISIS controlled nukes, given that they cannot be categorised as 'rational actors' if intelligence was stating that they were going to use it, would it be an action that would lead to the least overall harm to preemptively strike them.

Harris wrote a book on whether morality can be determined by rationalism (as that is a common criticism of Atheism in the US) and his world view is very much that morality is taking the action that causes the least overall harm- and he tries to apply this to some of the most troubling issues we face today. You can agree or disagree but it doesn't make him a clan member.

He has said that in the past though.

 

[Welsh Wonder]

Did you watch the panel or just taking the tweet at face value?

I haven't watched the panel, but Shapiro has tweeted before about Arabs living in open sewage. I was lazy in referring to the post above rather than his actual tweet for which I apologise but my actual point still stands.

The tweet, for reference:

 

[Drainy]

He has said that in the past though.

I've not seen it. If he has then fair enough but when I've seen Harris in his own words he believes that 70 year old couples in shorts should have lighter security checks because the risk that they are terrorists are so low.

 

[Tarrou]

I've not seen it. If he has then fair enough but when I've seen Harris in his own words he believes that 70 year old couples in shorts should have lighter security checks because the risk that they are terrorists are so low.

I've seen him say it plenty of times. And saying people who don't look like muslims shouldn't be profiled is tantamount to the same thing anyway. Even if he's managed to censor himself enough to not use the word anymore - we all know what he's talking about.

I just find it quite ridiculous to focus so much on muslims in the States when the vast majority of terrorist attacks are carried out by locals with a gun fetish.

 

[Mockney]

Even Harris has more charisma and tangible humanity than Shapiro, and Harris has the persona of an alien trying to approximate human form and behaviour with only Ben Stiller films and a Sat Nav for reference.

 

[Drainy]

I've seen him say it plenty of times. And saying people who don't look like muslims shouldn't be profiled is tantamount to the same thing anyway. Even if he's managed to censor himself enough to not use the word anymore - we all know what he's talking about.

I just find it quite ridiculous to focus so much on muslims in the States when the vast majority of terrorist attacks and carried about by locals with a gun fetish.

When I saw him talking about it he included himself in the 'profile'.

Basically the risk group for attacks are men aged 15-40 - I actually don't agree that there should be varying standards, we're all individuals and I think that we should be treated neutrally. However, the resources that spent doing security checks on everyone is mainly focused on that group of people and to someone who is viewing it from a lens of hyper-rationality could argue that it would be more efficient and effective to be more scrupulous towards risk groups. Everyone should be checked, but depending on the historic risk factor would determine how thoroughly- not just age and sex, but behaviour - looking nervous or travelling alone etc . I can see the argument for it - and as long as it isn't based on racial lines I don't think it would be unethical.

 

[Minimalist]

I haven't watched the panel, but Shapiro has tweeted before about Arabs living in open sewage. I was lazy in referring to the post above rather than his actual tweet for which I apologise but my actual point still stands.

The tweet, for reference:

Possibly one of the most racist things you’ll ever read.

Him and Katie Hopkins should have dinner.

 

[Kaos]

At least Hopkins is unapologetic about being a cnut, this Shapiro leper and his fans genuinely believe him to be some intellectual powerhouse using the objective power of sheer reason and debate to destroy the 'leftists', which makes him all the more insufferable.

 

[Sweet Square]

Even Harris has more charisma and tangible humanity than Shapiro, and Harris has the persona of an alien trying to approximate human form and behaviour with only Ben Stiller films and a Sat Nav for reference.

 

[Eboue]

 

[Raoul]

Shapiro is like a rogue AI project that went horribly wrong

 

[Minimalist]

Shapiro is like a rogue AI project that went horribly wrong

I don't know how the Shapiro train didn't die here. If you can barely argue well against fecking Cenk, you're not doing too good.

 

[Nipower888]

I don't know how the Shapiro train didn't die here. If you can barely argue well against fecking Cenk, you're not doing too good.

The comments are full of people saying he destroyed Cenk so I dont the Ben Shapiro train will die any time soon.

 

[Minimalist]

The comments are full of people saying he destroyed Cenk so I dont the Ben Shapiro train will die any time soon.

Did you just use YouTube comments as an argument?

Although to be fair, you're right. He has an audience - half of them are anti-semitic bizarrely enough but still, he's got them.

 

[Raoul]

I don't know how the Shapiro train didn't die here. If you can barely argue well against fecking Cenk, you're not doing too good.

Thought it was a pretty even debate. Cenk's yelling offset Shapiro's annoying android-like delivery. I think I now know how top chess players feel when they're up against IBM big blue.

 

[parkthebuslads]

Shapiro is like a rogue AI project that went horribly wrong

Probably not the best example of how awful Shapiro is, given how much worst Cenk is.

The worst thing about Shapiro is that he appears smart, at least initially (he's well spoken)
. But how smart can a man be whose incapable of challenging his own religious and political dogma?

 

[Nipower888]

Did you just use YouTube comments as an argument?

No its more like his followers are brainwashed and always think he will win thanks to his manipulative debate tactics.

 

[Minimalist]

Thought it was a pretty even debate. Cenk's yelling offset Shapiro's annoying android-like delivery. I think I now know how top chess players feel when they're up against IBM big blue.

Well, that's what I'm getting at. Shapiro fans thought he would DESTROY Cenk. The fact he didn't (Cenk's truly awful at getting his points across), sums up how naive his followers are.

 

[Minimalist]

No its more like his followers are brainwashed and always think he will win thanks to his manipulative debate tactics.

Ah sorry my bad!

 

[Raoul]

Well, that's what I'm getting at. Shapiro fans thought he would DESTROY Cenk. The fact he didn't (Cenk's truly awful at getting his points across), sums up how naive his followers are.

I think Shapiro generally comes out ahead in many debates because he spews out stream of consciousness talking points in machine gun fashion, which puts whoever he is debating on the back foot immediately. Only person who I've seen do well against him is Harris.

 

[Nipower888]

I think Shapiro generally comes out ahead in many debates because he spews out stream of consciousness talking points in machine gun fashion, which puts whoever he is debating on the back foot immediately. Only person who I've seen do well against him is Harris.

I hate that this works and it makes a lot of people think hes a good debater.