UKC

I listened to a truly enthralling podcast this evening. It was Sam Harris talking to Dr Jordan Peterson and it's entitled Meaning and Chaos.

It has quite a bit of relevance to the religious conversation we were having on here last week, before it got nasty, when a certain adherent of a certain sect started throwing insults around.

The podcast discusses the origins, psychology and philosophy of consciousness, morals and religion. It's a bit heavy going in some parts, but for those interested in that sort of thing it offers a lot of extremely thought provoking concepts that will be of interest to both believers and those who are not so.

Their previous attempt got somewhat bogged down in semantics, but was still worthwhile if you're in to concept of truth, but happily it led to this one, which was really good. It's nearly 2 hours long, but would be good on a long journey or a quiet evening. Enjoy.

https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/meaning-and-chaos

P.S. I really like Sam Harris' podcasts. I would be very appreciative if anyone could steer me towards similar ones of a deep and insightful nature. Apparently, he's doing one with Steve Pinker soon, which should be awesome. Thanks in advance.

In reply to Hugh J:


Just to make it clear. I've listened to nearly all of Sam's podcasts, so I'm looking for different authors (podcasters ???).

In reply to Hugh J:

I second the Sam Harris podcast. It is very good.

If you are looking for other podcasts that are both deep and entertaining then try:

You Are Not So Smart (Varied)
Freakonomics (Economics)
Planet Money (Economics)
Peak Prosperity (Economics)
Generation Why (Murder and Crime)
Stuff You Missed In History Class (History)
Stuff You Should Know (Varied)
The Anthill (Varied)

Of course there are loads of BBC programs worth downloading - In Our Time, More or Less, Infinite Monkey Cage, Inside Science etc...

In reply to Hugh J:

Here's a few favourites:

http://verybadwizards.com/ (I have to skip through lots of the dross in these)
http://www.radiolab.org (start with 'Blame' - really memorable)
Cracked podcast (through soundcloud etc)
Inquiring Minds

Definitely check out You Are Not So Smart.

In reply to Hugh J:

Not a blog, so you will have to go to the effort of reading a book, but very interesting nonetheless.

"The Righteous Mind" by Jonathan Haidt, subtitled :

"Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion".

Haidt is unusual in that he is a self-confessed "life long, instinctive, liberal" (he explicitly says he is using the distorted, loaded American sense of the word, i.e. a left-winger, not a classical Liberal), so may be sympathetic for you to read, but is capable of self-questioning. What will probably be somewhat less enjoyable is his approach and many of his conclusions. First, while recognising the tendency to political and religious tribalism ("all those wicked Tories/Shias/EU philes are stupid/vicious/ignoranant/evil" - fill in your own pet bogeyman group as required!), he tries to move beyond tribalism, including his own, admitted biases. He actually sets out both to understand and also to RESPECT views (and as far as possible, those upholding those heresies), different to or even radically different to his own, and to acknowledge that good, sensible men and women can consider the same evidence and come to strikingly different conclusions as a result.

He looks into things like cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias and the like, particularly as general human traits, not the characteristics of any given (normally opposing), religious or political sect or faction. Interestingly one of his main questions, as a "liberal" is why are liberals so continually getting beaten in popular polls, why is their intellectual and political hegemony seeming to be in the process of progressive collapse, and, as an ancillary question, why do they have so little idea how to adjust to or learn from repeated defeats, but rather tend to reinforce failure and repeat errors. As I point out, this is Haidt's slant, not mine - he WANTS "liberals" to act and speak in a way that will be more effective and successful, but fears that they will not, that their self-destructive habits are too ingrained and knee-jerk. So he remains a liberal, albeit a rather more than usually thoughtful and chastened one.

The style is pleasant as well, not so infused with arrogance and the impression of absolute certainty that permeates some such works, where the initially interesting thesis is wildly overextended as an explanation of everything, despite its obvious limits and flaws. "The Black Swan" and "Guns Germs and Steel" I would put into those categories.

You may not find it comfortable reading though.

In reply to Simon4:


Surely no one needs to go to those kinds of lengths: Haidt has done tonnes of podcasts on Righteous Mind (including Sam Harris' maybe). Great bloke.

In reply to Hugh J:

I've listened to all of Sam's podcasts and love them/him. I've not found anything quite as interesting, though I listen to a LOT of podcasts. Tim Ferris has some interesting ones, as so does Joe Rogan if you cherry pick the guests. Sam Harris, Jordan Peterson, Jocko Willink etc.

In reply to Hugh J:

Thanks Shani, Jon, Simon and Chris, looks like some interesting stuff to pass the hours of boredom on nightshifts.

Simon, I love reading too, so don't mind books, but thanks Jon for seconding Jonathon Haidt. I seem to remember Harris doing something with him too.

Keep them coming folks.

Cheers.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


He may have done, but to get the full thesis, reading the book is necessary. In fact, I need to read it again, although the written style is fairly easy, it is still information dense.

His use of parables like the ring of Gyges (a magic ring that allows you to be invisible and/or inaudible, so that you can steal what you want, hurt or for that matter sexually molest who you want - who THEN acts in a moral way?) or talking of elephants and riders is very vivid, while his scholarship of ancient philosophy and other matters is profound, but still worn lightly.

In reply to Hugh J:
The upside of Haidt is his openness, his willingness to look objectively at sacred cows including his own. Also, as I mentioned, he does not make the common claim in such popular science/new theory books that this is the theory of everything, it can fit every situation.

The downside (IMHO), is that he is over-reliant on psychological and sociological questionnaires, the sort we often see people here asking us to complete in order to "submit their thesis". These are self-selecting, so tell you little about the people who refuse to take part in such activities. Very like opinion polls and focus groups, they tell you reasonably accurately what the opinions of the sort of people who are willing to take part in polls and focus groups are.

It is the increasingly difficult and misleading process of extrapolating that to the opinions of the general population that is the devilish detail.

In reply to Simon4:


I'll make it my next non-fiction. I hope it is uncomfortable reading, as one of the problems with investing the time in non-fiction is that it can just bolster views one already holds. I'm reading something about free will at the moment and I just agree with it all so far, making it a pretty pointless exercise and I probably won't finish it.

In reply to Jon Stewart:
Well maybe I should look at some of Sam Harris output, similarly hoping to be challenged intelligently. There is no difficulty to be challenged abusively or aggressively, there are so many people coming out with dogmatic confrontational statements of their position. What is more challenging is people who can actually make you question your own dogmas, normally in a non-aggressive way. Assuming you are flexible enough mentally to accept such a challenge that is.

Preaching to the choir is so common that it is hardly worth remarking upon, certainly those who preach to their own particular choir are hardly worth listening to . Completely ineffectual or counter-productive as a method of persuasion of those genuinely of a different view of course, but the real goal of those who engage in such expressions is not to persuade their opponents but to confirm their own sense of virtue and nobility. Comfort thought, rather like comfort eating.

The fable of the wind, the storm and the sun trying to get a man's coat off applies.

Hi Simon,

A good philosophy there.

Sam Harris' stuff tend to fall into 3 groups.

1. American society, i.e. politics, gun law and his distaste for far left and right fascism. This maybe "preaching to the choir" for you. It is for me, but I quite like a bit of "comfort thinking" from time to time. His thoughts on gun-control might surprise you, he's not anti-gun, just against the fact the wrong people have guns or people have the wrong guns, but his arguments are sound.

2. Religion. I would describe Harris as a polite Dawkins. He was very anti-Islam and thought that anyone who followed the word of the Q'ran was bound to be anti-anything non-Islamic. I know this irritated Jon to a great extent. I would say, following his collaboration with Maajid Narwaz, he has somewhat toned done this rhetoric. He is still very anti-religion, but now sees that secular Muslims are the key to any chance of the Western World living in harmony with Islam. His podcast with Maajid is good, though Islamist and far-left loons see Maajid as an "Uncle Tom", which he definitely isn't. However, the one with Omer Aziz is desperate. He left it unedited (well over 3 hours) and called if facetiously "The Best Podcast Ever". Again, this stuff maybe "preaching to the choir" for you.

3. Morals and neuroscience. This is where he really excels, not really surprising as he's a neuro-scientist. There's all sorts of stuff, from the benefits of meditation, free-will, ethics around AI, origins of morals, even subjects like the concept of the multiverse. He also has some great counterfoils including; Daniel Dennet, Paul Bloom, Max Tegmark, Richard Dawkins, Jordan Peterson and Jonathan Haidt (which is podcast #31, where they discuss "Evolving Minds"). The last one with Jordan Peterson (#67) that I highlighted in the OP is possible my favourite yet and though their first discussion didn't go too well, it is none the less a tour de force into the semantics of truth.

Enjoy. I'm gonna listen to Sam talking with Mr Haidt again, then check out some more of Jonathan's stuff. Thanks for the tip!

In reply to Simon4:

I listened to podcast #31 "Evolving Minds", with Jonathan Haidt again, whilst working away in the small hours. It was excellent. They'd obviously had a spat about some issues in the past, but I felt in this conversation they both gained some really good learning from each other and came to agreement or common ground on lots of stuff - philosophers and semantics eh!

Definitely, one of those "the storm and the sun trying to get a man's coat off" types of discussions of yours, but always civil.

Perhaps it would be a good point for you to start as you know a bit of what makes Jonathan Haidt tick? You might want to skip the first 20 minutes as it's Sam talking about his failed conversation with Omer Aziz, which ironically he published on the very next podcast. I will definitely be checking out some more of Jonathan's stuff. Some very interesting counterpoints to Harris on the value of religion, especially considering it was coming from a fellow atheist.

In reply to Hugh J:

Powerful Joe Rogan

In reply to Simon4:

"Letter to a Christian Nation" and "The End of Faith" are both worth reading.

In reply to tbhDuppy:


Yes, there's some good stuff from Joe, it's very good for the layman, but as someone else pointed out, you need to be a bit selective.

Gad Saad is also does some good stuff.

In reply to Thrudge:

I've read "The End of Faith" which was beautifully written, but a little bit of a rant and have recently bought "The Moral Landscape". I'm wondering whether to read his stuff in chronological order though, so "Letter to a Christian Nation" would be next.

In reply to Hugh J:
Glad they got it sorted, I found their first attempt extremely frustrating, but was interested nonetheless and look forward to hearing take two. Love Sam Harris, don't agree with him on everything but I feel he speaks my mind often and has an intelligent approach

Edit: would second the rightous mind aswel, an extremely valuable book which made me think twice about the necessary relationship between conservatives and liberals, and indeed opened my eyes towards the existence of conservative morality at all

In reply to Hugh J:

The odd thing about America and guns is that the image that both Americans and especially Europeans have of the USA as being a wild, free almost wild West country is incredibly far from the truth. It is actually quite a highly regulated society, with lots of rules for all sorts of innocuous things, just that in certain parts, people are allowed to freely buy military grade assault weapons. This is on the basis of the most self-evidently ludicrous and anachronistic arguments, while they quite strictly enforce things like obliging you to have a fire alarm in your house.

But then all countries have their untouchable sacred cows, which from outside seem obviously absurd, catastrophic or outdated, even in countries which are for the most part reasonably well run. In America, it is guns, in the UK it is the idea that the NHS is the envy of the world and the finest possible health care system. In France it is that the state must regulate virtually everything and intervene everywhere, I don't really know other countries well enough to be sure in each case what their irrational obsession is, but I am sure they all have one.

I will look over some of the other stuff you refer to.

In reply to Simon4: "But then all countries have their untouchable sacred cows, which from outside seem obviously absurd,"

Swiss fondue springs to mind...

In reply to Hugh J:


Don't get me started. He's the king of horribly skewed, fallacious arguments that never, ever seem to be challenged. I've only heard him speak to people like Sam Harris, Dave Rubin, Douglas Murray (and f*cking Milo!) and on certain topics (you know the ones) they all believe essentially the same things. Listening to them sit around telling each other how right they all are is utterly infuriating. The only person who ever presents the flaws in their thinking (successfully, unlike the just-as-bad on the other side TYTV crew) is Kyle whatsit on Secular Talk.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Re: Gad Saad.

I can see what you mean. His conversation with Jordan Peterson is good though. It's always good to listen to alternative points of view to get a full understanding of where people are coming from, as Simon points out, it's not necessarily a good thing to live in an echo chamber. For example, I heard a very intelligent and coherent speech by Jacob Rees-Mogg about Brexit that made some very good points, even if I didn't really agree.

Kyle Kulinski is usually very honest in his assessment of issues. He calls out people from both the left and the right, though can be a little immature from time to time, but then he is only 29. He has an uncanny ability to be spot on most of the time. He also gives praise where it is due, for instance to Trump for his opposition to TTP.

TYT is a bit like the left version of Alex Jones, though not as batshit crazy!

There seems to be a lot of American stuff being mentioned, but does anyone know of any similar British output? (To be fair, I haven't yet been through all the links people have posted).

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


Couldn't agree more, bits of stale bread or potatoes in a greasy sauce made from a cheese that nobody would ever eat under any other circumstances. AND you get charged an awful lot for it in Swiss restaurants, despite the fact that you have to cook it yourself. Mind, you get charged a hell of a lot for everything in Swiss restaurants, pity they have the Lauteraarhorn and Aletschhorn in that rather peculiar country.

Very pretty country mind, really is chocolate box lovely in quite large parts. And the view of the Berner Oberland as we headed toward the Schreckhorn was absolutely breathtaking, striking the eye quite suddenly and with no warning at all as we turned a corner just outside Bern.

In reply to Hugh J:

If you haven't tried Cracked yet, start with this one, it's a cracker (hoho).

https://soundcloud.com/crackedpod/how-ann-coulter-and-milo-yiannopoulos-are...

In reply to Hugh J:

I listen to a British podcaster last night - Sargon of Akkad. What a prick! Anyone else got any views on this guy? Maybe I'm missing something?

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Cheers Jon, I'll check it out.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Hi Jon, I listened to the Cracked podcast that you linked. It was very good and made me think about how the information we receive is processed, the dangers of echo chambers and "fake" news or to be more precise, non-news and just how the fact that too much information can lead to something akin to apathy. It is indeed sometines very hard work to figure out how we should select the information that we recieve. It seems evident that mind games are being used both on the left and the right in politics and it's a blatant trick of both the "alt-right" and the SJW brigade to stop people thinking too deeply. Just give 'em a little snippet of something that will heighten their rage and the job is done. That's why Milo is so successful. It was also interesting that they picked up on how apathy is worse than hate. i.e. people get far more out of being hated than being ignored.

I also listened to the "Blame" podcast on Radiolab that you suggested. Wow. Very deep stuff. The story about the epiletic guy got me thinking about some of Sam Harris' concepts on free-will and exactly how culpability is reasoned. The story of the old man whose daughter was murdered was very moving and got me thinking about the concept of God in a new way. The old man's actions were almost Christ like in his level of compassion to the person who had ripped his family to pieces. Perhaps with a little more thought I might come to some theory about some kind of metaphysical God. Not something that exists without but possible within, but it definitely would not be something of religious conotations. The battle of good and evil in all of us (God and the Devil?). I have always thought that heaven and hell exist in for us only in our lifetime(when you're dead, you're dead and gone. However, it is the consequences of our words and actions that we must reckon at some stage in our lives. The old man showed his daughter's murderer the epitome of pity and forgiveness, but most importantly, a true comprehension of the hell that the guy was in. It was a hell of mostly his own making, but then his childhood past was also tragic.

Thanks Jon. Some really good stuff to exercise the old grey matter.

P.S. Do you have any views on Jordan Peterson?

In reply to Simon4:

Hi Simon. Like Jon, I with also add the "Righteous Mind" to my reading list.

Ta.

In reply to Shani:

Hi Shani, I will get to some of your recommendations this week hopefully and will let you know what I think. I'd forgotten about things like the "Infinite Monkey Cage" and the other BBC stuff.

Cheers.

In reply to Hugh J:

Thank YOU. After your review above, I'm off to listen to Cracked and Radiolab!