That's not what defamatory means. Of course you shouldn't listen to me. Several phrenologists have said I have shifty low-class parietal ridges.
-
-
-
I'd be curious to get your Popehat-approved thoughts on this particular move among the intellectual giants of our era.pic.twitter.com/3jYxmM37c8
-
Very Alpha.
-
Sam Harris is interfering with my right to privately email him, thus chilling my free speech. So Much for the Tolerant New Atheist Podcasters.
-
OMG, these emails are hilarious.
@ezraklein tries to constructively identify the points of disagreement, but@SamHarrisOrg just keeps ratcheting it up. At this point, I started reading his end in anime villain voice. And then he just takes it right to 11. Pure poetry here.pic.twitter.com/M8con7SMgs
-
That's how I read it too. I couldn't understand why Harris thought this reflected better on him.
-
It's the same with when he released his email exchange with Greenwald; Harris just looked kind of crazy and uncontrollably angry
-
Ditto re his exchange with Chomsky. I was actually embarrassed for him.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
publishing private emails without permission. classy
-
If Sam did not have Ezra's permission, that is indeed incredibly lame. With precious few exceptions, I have little but contempt for people who publish private email exchanges without permission.
-
If you read the emails, the highlighted sentence is clearly a lie. He most certainly argues his position while also trying to set up the podcast.
-
It turned into that, sure, because Harris wanted Klein to defend the article's assertions. But he states repeatedly that the authors would be a more beneficial engagement. Than Sam compares him to a suicide bomber and here we are.
-
The first email of the exchange is by Klein and he mainly argues his position...
-
So if someone says "I don't want this exchange shared because reason" and the sharer disagrees with the reason, they should share? Focusing on "why" is a distraction from the question of intellectual consent. You've no reason to think Klein was being intentionally disingenuous.
-
Perhaps he phrased it in that way because he felt his defense was an inadequate representation of his views, due to his lack of expertise. Though personally I think he acquits himself well.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There is not one live person who’s intellectual work I respect as much as yours, but I also would like you to be as calm and as open as J. Peterson was on channel 4. And I think a civ o conversation betwn the two of you would be incredibly important.
-
While Vox is often the source of the leftist hysteria we hate, it also has some good articles, and approaches to certain topics. You have a chance to talk to someone, who otherwise respects you, and have the power to largly influence the left.
-
I think it is - and I don’t want to sound too corny here - duty to do your best to minimise the SJW abomination phenomenon. You are part of a kind of intellectual crusade, and you have a great opportunity. So take the buddhist pill, and have an honest and compassionate conversat
-
ion. We love you.
-
no we don’t
-
i love him, even if he isn't a pseudoscientific racialist
End of conversation
New 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.