Sure. Besides the doggedness of his adherents, which is quite striking, he seeks to define a moral frame outside the religions he so abhors, without really outwardly recognizing, much about the concurrent evolution in philosophy, tradition, politics, empires, and chance.
why? there is a difference between superstition and spirituality.
-
-
I never was raised to believe these things, as surely as a Christian or Muslim of various denominations, sects, regions, and times believed very different things. It was a birth lottery outcome.
-
That seems like a bad epistemic stance. You assume that spirituality refers to the objects of blind faith. That's not what people like Sam Harris mean by it though. You can examine it empirically and decide for yourself.
-
That's not what I assume. I'll tell you what I do assume: there are few practical rationalist systems of reasoning for much of human affairs. Spirituality works for some people. For me, I ascribe beliefs to chance and the birth lottery. I don't see a justification to proselytize
-
...one over another.
-
But perhaps that is the indifference with which my acquaintance spoke. Maybe limitation, or is it? So it goes.
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.