religion,sam harris,atheism,theism,science Sam Harris vs. Rabbi David Wolpe

Sam Harris vs. Rabbi David Wolpe

posted by gwiz665

1 year ago • 1204 views

tags: religion, sam harris, atheism, theism, science

L
O
N
G

Sam Harris debates Rabbi David Wolpe about God and Religion. I think the debate is from 2006.

GREAT DESIGNS FROM VIDEOSIFT'S T-SHIRT STORE
Support VideoSift - Buy a Shirt! Use coupon code SIFTFALL09 at checkout to save an additional 20% now!
97 Organic Geek	VideoSift Online Video Quality Control	I Was Abducted By Aliens

Comments

*promote

written by Deano

| 1 year ago | CH

▲ 2 ▼ | flag spam (0)

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Friday, November 7th, 2008 8:43am PST - promote requested by Deano.

written by siftbot

| 1 year ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

I thought this was a great debate. Thanks gwiz for posting.

written by eric3579

| 1 year ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

*findthumb

Good chat, didn't watch all of it as I felt the Rabbi was getting a little silly after some interesting rhetoric. Saying there's no "evidence" that you can't "suspend" the laws of physics is just crazy. We know alot more about how the world works than we ever did which is probably why religion and science became progressingly distinct over the centuries. Fact is if religion disappeared tomorrow we'd all get on just fine. The arguments we have wouldn't end but they might be more interesting.

written by Deano

| 1 year ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

A different thumbnail image for this video could not be found for findthumb request by Deano.

written by siftbot

| 1 year ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

I always like Sam Harris. He's so calm and assured of himself, with no need to sort of force his view, like for instance Christopher Hitchens tends to do.

written by gwiz665

| 1 year ago | CH

▲ 1 ▼ | flag spam (0)

sam harris is awesome. he is a genuine atheist who speaks under pressure as well as he writes, unlike that hack christopher hitchens. if you listen to hitchen's interviews you can tell hes not really even an atheist hes just making a buck off the books.

letter to a christian nation ftw.

written by imstellar28 | 1 year ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

I'm not sure I agree with you regarding Christopher Hitchens, imstellar28. In any case, here is the debate between Wolpe and Hitchens http://www.videosift.com/video/Christopher-Hitchens-vs-Rabbi-David-Wolpe

written by gwiz665

| 1 year ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

^gwiz665,

have you seen this discussion:

http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Four-Horsemen-DawkinsDennettHarris-and-Hitchens

written by imstellar28 | 1 year ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

Oh yeah, it's great to see them all together. Hitchens is probably the odd-man-out in that setting. Dennett and Dawkins are more scientists, while Harris is a philosopher and Hitchens is a historian.

I like all four, but for different qualities. Dawkins is a great scientific mind, because he seems to have that inquisitive stance towards most things. Dennett is very knowledgeable and seems like a great thinker. Harris is very reasonable and down to earth, and able to cut through the crap. Hitchens bases his arguments in history and from the "dictatorship" angle.

(I think I'm gonna copy this comment to that sift too..

)

written by gwiz665

| 1 year ago | CH

▲ 1 ▼ | flag spam (0)

This is one of the best atheist vs. theist debates I've seen. The Rabbi articulates just about the only way one can justify theism, though I'm not sure it's a viewpoint that's entirely compatible with the religions of the Book--more with 19th century Transcendentalism or Theosophy. In reply, Sam Harris responds with fairly good lines of argument which follow more or less straightforwardly from an empiricist viewpoint.

The one thing I would like to see Sam Harris do would be to clarify that it's not science specifically which he's using to attack theism, but the philosophical position underpinning science--empiricism. The real substance of the disagreement between Rabbi Wolpe and Harris is a disagreement about the importance of empirically justifying one's beliefs.

Wolpe is correct when he says that belief in God is a philosophical claim. Harris could more effectively respond by showing how it is that philosophical claims fail when subjected to adequate philosophical attacks.

written by HadouKen24 | 1 year ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

I also enjoyed this debate as much, if not more, than any other such debate I've seen. Both sides made interesting arguments and were respectful of each other. Just that nobody tried to talk over the other was a huge improvement on most debates.

On the chance this goes dead at some point, here's a spare:
http://www.ajula.edu/Content/ContentUnit.asp?CID=1766&u=7037&t=0

written by xxovercastxx

| 11 months 2 weeks ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

Could you replace the embed with the one from here? http://www.ajula.edu/Content/ContentUnit.asp?CID=1766&u=7037&t=0 it doesn't have the annoying text over it...

written by spoco2

| 11 months 2 weeks ago | CH

▲ 1 ▼ | flag spam (0)

But of course.

written by gwiz665

| 11 months 2 weeks ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

not in the mood to participate in the discussion on the sift BUT I wanted to say that I enjoy the intellectual swashbuckling going on here
go sam harris!

written by JiggaJonson

| 11 months 2 weeks ago | CH

▲ 1 ▼ | flag spam (0)

I assume we can call this *dead

written by eric3579

| 3 months 3 weeks ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by eric3579.

written by siftbot

| 3 months 3 weeks ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

*notdead

written by gwiz665

| 3 months 3 weeks ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

This dead video has been deemed functional; it must have been accidentally declared dead - declared notdead by gwiz665.

written by siftbot

| 3 months 3 weeks ago | CH

▲ 0 ▼ | flag spam (0)

Submit Comment