Now become a Ricochet member for only $5.00 a month! Join and see what you’ve been missing.

There are 7 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Lazy_Millennial Member

    Regarding Charles Murray being called “KKK” for saying there are differences between genders- I watched the livestream of his appearance. It seems like the “KKK” chant was already “teed up” and came in reply to Murray daring to speak, not the specific contents of his speech.

    • #1
    • October 12, 2017, at 1:20 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  2. George Townsend Inactive

    Two things, one near the beginning of the Podcast and one near the end…

    God Bless Jay! He tries really hard not to give in to Political Correctness: Why must we say “gender”, instead of sex, nowadays? Even conservatives do it!

    Regarding tattoos: I never liked them either, even the small, innocuous one. And when women sport them, it offends me. I used to work for an insurance company, for over 30 years. I had many women managers, which was fine. I actually liked most of them more than a couple of men I had. But I had one, who sported a little flower on her ankle. I never understood it. I always wanted to go up to her, and say, “Why do you have that?” But, given the mentality of the day, I might have been fired!

    • #2
    • October 12, 2017, at 2:13 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  3. JuliaBlaschke Coolidge

    I gave the Waking Up with Sam Harris a listen on your recommendation. The one with the Dilbert fellow and I agree that Sam won that one easily. However it was a chore listening to Harris on climate change. Not sure I can take any more about how it wasn’t about the accord not doing anything, it was about bringing countries together to do stupid things that won’t change anything that is so important. That is the problem with the left, even a fellow like Harris who at least is willing to debate on most things. He has his lines he won’t cross and debate over climate change (which he dismisses as “people who read a few blogs online vs. scientists” is one of them. Makes me reluctant to hear more.

    • #3
    • October 12, 2017, at 2:43 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  4. George Townsend Inactive

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):
    He has his lines he won’t cross and debate over climate change (which he dismisses as “people who read a few blogs online vs. scientists” is one of them. Makes me reluctant to hear more.

    Thank you, Julia, you saved me the trouble of listening. People who disagree with me, fine. People who are so arrogant, no thank you. And that line about blogs and scientists is stupid and a put-down. Like there are no scientists questioning the doom-sayers!

    • #4
    • October 12, 2017, at 5:11 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  5. Mona Charen Contributor

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):
    I gave the Waking Up with Sam Harris a listen on your recommendation. The one with the Dilbert fellow and I agree that Sam won that one easily. However it was a chore listening to Harris on climate change. Not sure I can take any more about how it wasn’t about the accord not doing anything, it was about bringing countries together to do stupid things that won’t change anything that is so important. That is the problem with the left, even a fellow like Harris who at least is willing to debate on most things. He has his lines he won’t cross and debate over climate change (which he dismisses as “people who read a few blogs online vs. scientists” is one of them. Makes me reluctant to hear more.

    I agree with you that he was tendentious on climate change. But, boy, when he takes on the politically correct treatment of Islamists by western liberals, he is on fire. I don’t believe that subject came up in the discussion with Adams, but it often does in his other podcasts.

    The key thing, from my point of view, is that he is willing to be swayed by new information. Thus, he is not an ideologue. He was even willing to acknowledge, in a podcast with Charles Murray, that he had misjudged him, believing that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” How many people are willing to admit that? We all jump to unjust conclusions about others. Few of us are so honest. So while I’m not going to agree with Harris on many subjects, including climate, I treasure him as a voice of reason.

    • #5
    • October 13, 2017, at 4:50 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  6. George Townsend Inactive

    Mona Charen (View Comment):

    JuliaBlaschke (View Comment):
    I gave the Waking Up with Sam Harris a listen on your recommendation. The one with the Dilbert fellow and I agree that Sam won that one easily. However it was a chore listening to Harris on climate change. Not sure I can take any more about how it wasn’t about the accord not doing anything, it was about bringing countries together to do stupid things that won’t change anything that is so important. That is the problem with the left, even a fellow like Harris who at least is willing to debate on most things. He has his lines he won’t cross and debate over climate change (which he dismisses as “people who read a few blogs online vs. scientists” is one of them. Makes me reluctant to hear more.

    I agree with you that he was tendentious on climate change. But, boy, when he takes on the politically correct treatment of Islamists by western liberals, he is on fire. I don’t believe that subject came up in the discussion with Adams, but it often does in his other podcasts.

    The key thing, from my point of view, is that he is willing to be swayed by new information. Thus, he is not an ideologue. He was even willing to acknowledge, in a podcast with Charles Murray, that he had misjudged him, believing that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” How many people are willing to admit that? We all jump to unjust conclusions about others. Few of us are so honest. So while I’m not going to agree with Harris on many subjects, including climate, I treasure him as a voice of reason.

    Perhaps I will reconsider my not wanting to listen to him. Mona and I agree on so much that I believe her counsel is always worth listening to.

    Her point about not many people willing to admit they misjudged someone came home to me recently, here on Ricochet. I wrote a piece detailing some reasons why I could not vote for Trump, one being his lack of understanding of American Exceptionalism. One of my antagonists wrote that I was wrong. Trump did understand, and was trying to get back to it. I wrote back, telling him, in detail, my thoughts on the phase, and how he was wrong. Never heard from the guy again!

    • #6
    • October 13, 2017, at 6:59 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  7. George Townsend Inactive

    Mona Charen (View Comment):
    I agree with you that he was tendentious on climate change. But, boy, when he takes on the politically correct treatment of Islamists by western liberals, he is on fire. I don’t believe that subject came up in the discussion with Adams, but it often does in his other podcasts.

    The key thing, from my point of view, is that he is willing to be swayed by new information. Thus, he is not an ideologue. He was even willing to acknowledge, in a podcast with Charles Murray, that he had misjudged him, believing that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” How many people are willing to admit that? We all jump to unjust conclusions about others. Few of us are so honest. So while I’m not going to agree with Harris on many subjects, including climate, I treasure him as a voice of reason.

    Hi, Mona!

    I just want to report something to you about Sam Harris, and give you my take.

    I’ve been listening to something called The “After-On” interview, in which he was a guest on another Podcast. They talk a lot about religion. Now, I know he is an atheist, of course, and am not bothered by his views, being secure enough in my beliefs. They are a little complex, by the way, since I do not believe in organized religion, for myself, but do have a firm belief in God. What troubles me about him is the way he, matter-of-factly, puts down the beliefs of others, saying that the Bible contains nothing we can learn as a guide to living the good life. According to him, the Bible is only about killing people who stray from how to worship God. Now, he says these things in measured tones, as I say. But they are deeply offensive. I will proberbly listen to other shows of his, because he does seem to be respectful towards others when it comes to viewpoints. But this lack of respect for religious people seems to fly in the face of his otherwise decent respect for people. I simply do not understand why he doesn’t see this – to me – deplorable contradiction!

    Just wanted to share my thoughts!

    • #7
    • October 14, 2017, at 5:55 AM PDT
    • Like