Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • Moments Moments Moments, current page.

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
SamHarrisOrg's profile
Sam Harris
Sam Harris
Sam Harris
Verified account
@SamHarrisOrg

Tweets

Sam HarrisVerified account

@SamHarrisOrg

Author of The End of Faith, The Moral Landscape, Waking Up, and other bestselling books published in over 20 languages. Host of the Waking Up podcast.

samharris.org
Joined February 2010

Tweets

  • © 2018 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    Sam Harris‏Verified account @SamHarrisOrg Jan 10

    Sam Harris Retweeted Chance Diaz

    Look at it from the other side: Try to get to an "is" without obeying a few "oughts" (logical coherence, respect for evidence, etc.) This IS/OUGHT divide is a fiction.https://twitter.com/ChanceDiaz/status/951309644751777792 …

    Sam Harris added,

    Chance Diaz @ChanceDiaz
    Replying to @rubenjrod @SamHarrisOrg
    No. It is the case that you can’t get an ought from an is. There is no “therefore” that follows. Other than maybe “you look like a fool trying to derive an ought from an is”
    8:34 PM - 10 Jan 2018
    • 46 Retweets
    • 411 Likes
    • Catarina Thestrup Predrag Stojadinović Steven Gussman Dan Rebecca Jones Aaron Propp Randy Rae Liberal Hawk Robert Jansen
    92 replies 46 retweets 411 likes
      1. New conversation
      2. Tom Swiss, royal jester to the court of Norton I‏ @tom_swiss Jan 10
        Replying to @SamHarrisOrg

        We adopt the rules of reason as axioms not because they "ought" to work but because, empirically, they do. That's much more "is" than "ought".

        2 replies 0 retweets 12 likes
      3. Tom Swiss, royal jester to the court of Norton I‏ @tom_swiss Jan 11
        Replying to @tom_swiss @SamHarrisOrg

        It's not the case that we "ought" to be logically coherent, but it is the case that logical coherence lead us to success in our endeavors. And those who succeed survive, they remain "is" (to mangle grammar), while failure leads more often to "is not".

        1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
      4. Tom Swiss, royal jester to the court of Norton I‏ @tom_swiss Jan 11
        Replying to @tom_swiss @SamHarrisOrg

        (That's not to say that "is" is better than "is not", that's non-demonstrable. I happen to feel that existence is better, but that's an "is" statement about my nervous system.)

        0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
      5. End of conversation
      1. Biruck‏ @BiruckAnmaw Jan 10
        Replying to @SamHarrisOrg

        Biruck Retweeted Richard Oliver

        The best possible ought, is.https://twitter.com/reticentrich/status/951303487173857280 …

        Biruck added,

        Richard Oliver @reticentrich
        Replying to @BiruckAnmaw @SamHarrisOrg and 2 others
        If “ought” is the choice conducted by experience derived from “is”, then ought = is. There is no distinctive ought. It’s just the inevitable choice made by a deterministic universe.
        0 replies 1 retweet 7 likes
        Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo
        Undo
      1. New conversation
      2. Brett Hall‏ @ToKTeacher Jan 10
        Replying to @SamHarrisOrg

        Why does admitting you can't get "is" without obeying "oughts" in your favor? It seems to me to make the case there *is* a "divide". They are different. Really. Not fictionally.

        1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
      3. Evan O'Leary‏ @EvanOLeary Jan 10
        Replying to @ToKTeacher @SamHarrisOrg

        but there are also divides between different is statements. They don't all imply each other. Reality is unified, so there's no fundamentally unbridgeable divide

        1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
      4. Brett Hall‏ @ToKTeacher Jan 10
        Replying to @EvanOLeary @SamHarrisOrg

        Yes. But that introduces some slippery thinking. Sam sometimes has "science" meaning "rationality generally". A definition so elastic as to be useless as I try to say here: http://www.bretthall.org/the-moral-landscape-challenge.html …

        2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
      5. Brett Hall‏ @ToKTeacher Jan 10
        Replying to @ToKTeacher @EvanOLeary @SamHarrisOrg

        Reality and hence knowledge is a unified whole. But this doesn't mean science is not different from mathematics or morality just as females are not males. Unified reality doesn't mean "zero distinctions".

        1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
      6. Evan O'Leary‏ @EvanOLeary Jan 10
        Replying to @ToKTeacher @SamHarrisOrg

        Can't you derive ought from is with the logic of CR? Some facts, like the stabilization of digital information, are unexplainable without physical counterfactuals (so they imply the reality of physical counterfactuals under Deutschian CR), which need arbitrarily good constructors

        2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
      7. Brett Hall‏ @ToKTeacher Jan 10
        Replying to @EvanOLeary @SamHarrisOrg

        No, you cannot "derive" any such thing. You might be able to explain by recourse to a bunch of other assumptions but "derive" is technical. It means something like "logically prove the necessity of".

        0 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
      8. End of conversation
      1. New conversation
      2. Adrian Lee Oliver‏ @AdrianLeeOliver Jan 10
        Replying to @SamHarrisOrg

        Breathing IS necessary if you want to live beyond the next three minutes. Do any of you find it difficult to derive what you OUGHT to do (if you want to survive) based on this IS? This isn't to say you ought to value survival, but insofar as you do; ought flows freely from is.

        1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
      3. Adrian Lee Oliver‏ @AdrianLeeOliver Jan 10
        Replying to @AdrianLeeOliver @SamHarrisOrg

        Making the leap to what you OUGHT to value based on what IS can be simple as acknowledging what you DO value. If it IS true you do value survival, you OUGHT to continue breathing. If you're waiting for it to be proven you can't derive an ought from an is, don't hold your breath.

        2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
      4. Adrian Lee Oliver‏ @AdrianLeeOliver Jan 10
        Replying to @AdrianLeeOliver @SamHarrisOrg

        On a global scale, either you value the survival of our species and habitat, or you don't. If you don't, you don't count; if you do, you must acknowledge that certain values will ultimately ascend as more conducive to that goal, and from that IS we can say what we ought to do.

        1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes
      5. Mike‏ @gorby82 Jan 11
        Replying to @AdrianLeeOliver @SamHarrisOrg

        Bravo. Well done👏

        1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      6. Adrian Lee Oliver‏ @AdrianLeeOliver Jan 11
        Replying to @gorby82 @SamHarrisOrg

        Aww shucks!!! :)

        0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
      7. End of conversation
      1. New conversation
      2. Kevin FitzMaurice‏ @k_fitzmaurice Jan 10
        Replying to @SamHarrisOrg

        "ought" is the polite "should" which is the weak "must"

        1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
      3. Kaden‏ @Kaden50048633 Jan 11
        Replying to @k_fitzmaurice @SamHarrisOrg

        I like the comparison. These are all varying strengths of conditional statements of the same category. I oughut to _ in order to _. I should _ in order to _. I must _ in order to _.

        1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
      4. Kevin FitzMaurice‏ @k_fitzmaurice Jan 11
        Replying to @Kaden50048633 @SamHarrisOrg

        You are correct. To make a longer list, we can add "I would prefer" before "I ought" as it is still weaker. Other variations would be "I would like, wish, want" but "I would prefer" nicely covers those variations.

        0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
      5. End of conversation
      1. M. David‏ @bolts55 Jan 10
        Replying to @SamHarrisOrg

        My thought is that people ought to look into it. #butthatsnoneofmybusinesspic.twitter.com/dtdYmaSdUZ

        0 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
        Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. Undo
        Undo
      1. New conversation
      2. Srijit Sanyal‏ @_Srijit Jan 10
        Replying to @SamHarrisOrg

        @ortoiseortoise somehow his arguments getting even worse

        1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
      3. Natalie Prescott Crawley‏ @Ferduke50 Jan 10
        Replying to @_Srijit @SamHarrisOrg

        Yep. He's now shifted gears to claiming there is no difference between what is and what ought to be. It's like he's been possessed by Jordan Peterson.

        0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
      4. End of conversation

    Loading seems to be taking a while.

    Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

      Promoted Tweet

      false

      • © 2018 Twitter
      • About
      • Help Center
      • Terms
      • Privacy policy
      • Cookies
      • Ads info