Comments by "bj0rn" (@TheLivirus) on "Nobody Understands Poor Sam Harris" video.

  1. Cenk again fails to distinguish between the conclusion a philosopher is forced to arrive at by rigorous logic and an his opinion. Philosophers are paid to report their conclusions, not state their opinions. The concepts are kept wide apart for the sake of objectivity. If Cenk has any objections to Sam's conclusions he should formulate a solid counter argument, not shame him for arriving there.
    490
  2. ***** and Kjass Aylo I'm not trying to argue from authority, I'm putting his statement within the context of his profession. In other words: you can cease the character assassination and instead get busy countering his arguments.
    11
  3. XX xx XX It is well known within game theory that it is in the best interest of a state to obtain nuclear weapons, because rational players will never make a first nuclear strike on another player if they fear retaliation of equivalent force. Sam is developing this discussion by exploring the options for a rational state that is up against non-rational oponents, i.e. up against a state that is not discouraged by the prospect of being nuked in return of launching a first strike. Game theory is useful to inform us what the best option is from a strategical perspective and to predict the moves of other players, it does not tell us what is right.
    5
  4. .
    1
  5. Nick Anand What I meant was that stating your opinion is not philosophy. If you want to twist that into something else you are free to do so, but I know what I meant.
    1
  6. XX xx XX Islamic States are not by default irrational players.
    1
  7. Ricardo Hernandez _"99.9% of all the terrorism is islamic"_ I challenge you to find a source that indicates the number is even remotely close to what you suggested.
    1