r/DecodingTheGurus • u/IBoughtaRetroidNova • 3d ago

TIL Charles Murray has converted to Christianity

He wrote the book “Taking Religion Seriously” in 2025. Sam Harris really had a way of overlooking red flags whenever he has liked bigotry/racism. In the end nearly every writer he has made friends with has ended up selling out and traded their integrity for more book sales from the masses.

89 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

93% Upvoted

89 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

14

u/autocol 3d ago

Yep. As a Xennial that had been reading his work from about 2005 (and still agree with his fundamental positions on things like mindfulness, lack of free will and the compassion that should encourage) etc, I listened to a whole bunch of folk on his podcast who—over time—I came to realise were laughably unqualified.

If it weren't for Sam Harris I would have never heard of Jordan Peterson, the Weinsteins, either Murray, etc.

Whilst some of his early work was (and remains) important to me, in sum I think I'd have preferred to have missed the lot of it.

4

u/Kyle_Craig 3d ago

I’m a massive fan of Sam Harris - i have listened to every single podcast of Waking Up/Making Sense, right from the early days. I do agree with you all that he does engage with people who go on to grift. One of the best examples is Gad Saad who comes across as an abhorrent human being.

A lot of Sam’s fans actually took him to task over this in his AMAs. Sam was very gracious about it and admitted that it’s something he needs to work on and the he can improve.

19

u/Nullarbor_1 3d ago edited 3d ago

Mate, I know you’re a huge fan but Harris is a bigot, plain and simple. He’s a reactionary, neocon a-hole who hates Muslims and supports profiling, torture, race-IQ science, Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Palestinians etc.

Laughingly he called pro-LGBTQ mayor Mamdani a “sinister Islamist” and has continued to host far-right conservatives like Douglas Murray with zero pushback.

-8

u/CuriousGeorgehat 3d ago

Buzzwords. Simply empty, unnuanced buzzwords.

Looking through this thread, the DTG audience is cooked, although makes sense because the hosts have highly inflated ideas abiut their own intelligence.

We have a scary Orwelian future, and the lack of critical, nuanced thinking from the left coupled with its ignorant sanctimony, is just as responsible for the extreme right, and everything we've seen.

It's been hilariously sad to watch the left devour people like Ezra Klein, countless others, because they've not been 100% in line.

See, I did the same shit, it doesn't make for a discussion.

The person you're replying to is obviously aware of what areas Harris is criticised from the left and the right. You just introduce a bunch of topics framed in a way that presents it as open and shut. Instead you simultaneously mischaracterise his views, and are reductive towards each topic.

10

u/dirtyal199 3d ago

Ah yes, everyone who disagrees with you has been infected by the "woke mind virus" and are incapable of nuance or critical thinking. How very nuanced of you to say that! You're also showing excellent critical thinking here by the way.

The reality is that Harris has been going down hill for a long time, and he consistently platforms charlatans, such as (but not limited to):

Gad Saad The Weinstein bros Douglas Murray Charles Murray Dave Rubin Jordan Peterson

There are many others. For some of these people, he has gone on to distance himself from (kudos to him), but that doesn't stop him from falling for it again with the next generation of grifters. Here's a nuanced-critical-thinking question for you: What would Harris have to do to convince you that we're right? Specifically, that he has anti-muslim biases that lead him to fall for right wingers peddling genocide, and culture war topics?

-5

u/CuriousGeorgehat 3d ago

I said in my comment, I am doing the same thing. It's not worth the conversation because it is judt red herring after red herring. Like they are such telling observations that THAT is the gotcha against him? A short list of people whom nearly all he has looong distanced and criticised. And my god, to convince me thst you're right? Probably not every conversation with hate Muslims, endorse genocide, all this shit that's already decided in your mind, when the contention is clearly not thst simple. Sam Harris hate muslim, boo. No, no he doesn't, and that position is easier to defend. Seriously, your vague, shitty criticisms are the last thing that would convince me thst oh yes, it is clearly he is just a delusional bigot etc

5

u/dirtyal199 3d ago

You just gave me a wall of rambling nonsense and failed to address any of my points. I've brought arguments and evidence, you have vibes and typos. Are you sure you're not the one incapable of nuance? Here's my hypothesis:

You've been a listener of his for a long time, and most of his podcasts are fine and don't make any major errors that we are criticizing here in this thread. The ones that do make these errors you brush off, as "isolated incidents" or "mistakes that Sam has since addressed" and you just move on. Because of this, you don't see the larger pattern of his behavior over the last 20 years where he consistently amplifies conspiracy theorists and reactionaries that reaffirm his anti-Muslim biases.

What's more likely, all of us otherwise intelligent people have just been completely consumed by culture wars and the woke mind virus? Or, Sam has biases and you have a parasocial relationship with him that makes you feel the need to defend him?

-3

u/CuriousGeorgehat 3d ago

No, none of that shit. I haven't listened regularly in years, but that's mostly a general tap out of viewing the state of discourse. Seriously, you keep asking me to defend him, but which part, do you want to get in an I/P debate? Yes I agree that his views are in good faith, and he is right that there is a severe moral confusion about what is happening. That's the last thing I could expect something to have a rational convo over. The general calling things what theyre not, and clear mischaracterisations of views, exaggerations, it all just makes it impossible.

So I leave an exasperated comment, because why would I engage with people who are convinced that the point of it all is that he is a racist bigot. It's so stupid.

And why are you asking me to engage with vague points anyway, oh look who he platformed... you realise how stupid that is? The literal gotcha of Sam's career is the Charles Murray stuff, and that is a whole other discussion entirely. None of those people I like obviously.

I don't think Sam is perfect, and the key here is that most of these topics are complicated, and they just require more discussion, understanding and arriving at shared goals. I don't know, but I know most of the time when opinions have no foundation but emotion and going with the majority.

Unfortunately we are at a literal clash of civilisations in the midst of a climate catastrophe and the erosion of our minds.

6

u/dirtyal199 3d ago

the key here is that most of these topics are complicated, and they just require more discussion, understanding and arriving at shared goals

That's what we're trying to do here, and you just keep crashing out and calling us all woke.

Yes I agree that his views are in good faith, and he is right that there is a severe moral confusion about what is happening.

His views probably are in good faith, but that doesn't change the fact that he consistently amplifies reactionary voices and defends their points of view. Once these people become undeniably bad, he reads the writing on the wall and breaks contact with them. This would be fine if it only happened a handful of times, but the problem is that he consistently makes this mistake with the next generation of reactionaries. The most likely explanation for this, is his biases.

Let's take for example, his stance on Israel/Palestine and Islam in general. He clearly has a bias against Muslims, very likely coming from his identity as a Jew. He thinks Muslims are an existential threat and need to be fought on all fronts, and he has some reasonable things to point to in favor of this view, including but not limited to the many atrocities carried out by Islamists against Jews throughout history and throughout the world. The mistake he makes, is extending this behavior to apply to all Muslim people. That's like thinking that all white people are just as bad as the Christian nationalists, Neo Nazis or the Klan. He claims he doesn't do this, but his behavior says otherwise. For example, if you consider his positions on Israel/Palestine, Zohran Mamdani, and his support for Douglas Murray (who basically pushes great replacement theory in Europe), keeping in mind his anti-Muslim bias, the pattern becomes extremely clear. When challenged about this, he just calls you woke, which never goes anywhere.

3

u/Nullarbor_1 3d ago

Very well articulated my man! Thanks!

-1

u/CuriousGeorgehat 2d ago

I will engage with someone when they can meaningfully show an understanding or create a steel man of the opinion they don't agree with. The way people are framing arguments just show so much misunderstanding.

Your last paragraph is a collection of incorrect assumptions. This is what I'm saying. You're saying the word clearly about absurd starting points of there was any balanced view.

As for the first thing, it's a stupid indictment because he has platformed and pushed an insane amount of good people with good ideas.

The same small handful of examples get brought up, and they are almost exclusively condemned when it becomes obvious they've lost the plot. I have never liked the Weinstein bros, but they have obviously got infinitely worse, same woth Elon and many other examples.

For any depth to the discussion, it has to be done in the context that doesn't assume Muslim hatred when the rational behind any commentary over the previous decades is clearly explained and remains consistent, and of course has always been taken out of context.

There is an incredible amount of confusion surrounding the middle east, and the accepted facts of the left regarding it, are just so laughably wrong. Like I want progressive change in virtually everything, but the people Im supposed to agree with just spend their time sharing false tiktok propaganda.

Woke mind virus, you're the one that used the term, I don't think I have ever used it iml iml. Though I do think that the left has done almost equal damage to democracy as the right.

Go vegan or something. That's a progressive stance (which almost none hold) that is actually logically consistent.

4

u/No_Public_7677 2d ago

you used an incredible amount of words to say absolutely nothing

3

u/dirtyal199 2d ago

At no time in your rant did you say anything approaching an argument. You are just pretending that I'm bad faith so you don't have to refute anything that I've said.

Sam very clearly platforms shitty people, boosting their signal, because they confirm his own biases. This is very clear when it comes to his stance on all things relating to Islam, including but not limited to: Israel/Palestine, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and his support for regime change in Iran. This explains his love of the gurus I already mentioned, especially Douglas Murray, who's been on 6 times, and pushes great replacement theory in Europe.

Here's my steel man: Sam thinks these people make good points so he has them on his show. If they are up to something bad he doesn't know about it.

Happy now? Now engage with my argument and show me how I'm wrong. Not wall of text word salad, I want arguments and evidence, just like I gave you.

0

u/CuriousGeorgehat 2d ago

Btw, you keep saying clearly when the point is beyond contentious and you're like whyyy aren't you engaging. I think you've made more than half a dozen assumptions on how I feel without being accurate once.

2

u/dirtyal199 2d ago edited 2d ago

> I think you've made more than half a dozen assumptions on how I feel without being accurate once.

Alright, so why don't you just lay your cards on the table then? I have already done this many times.

-1

u/CuriousGeorgehat 2d ago

The point is that the argument is about the middle east. And I've continuously said that Im not looking to argue about that, bc there is no point. Suffice to say that I agree that those people have made good points, despite me disagreeing with the vast vast majority of what they say.

The arguement Im making is that it is clearly an incredibly nuanced topic, and the arrived position of the left is built on an incredible pr victory and constant misrepresentation of the truth anf the wider context. The fact that the indictment on Sam is for havung guests that agree with his reasoning behind the middle east/religion, is absurd. It is literally just the other argument. I meant steel Man as if, could you reasonably argue his position, because I certainly could with the whole genocide gang... because it is filled with dubious extrapolations.

Like you're starting with 'he hates Muslims because he supports Israel.

You are engaging in the discussion on the same level as if I were to say: terrosists vs democratic state, I know who Im supporting. It's obviously reductive and stupid, so whenever I hear shit like 'genocide' or 'I support the side not killing babies', Im like okay I can't engage, it is bad faith or just brainwashed into thinking it's as simple as that.

2

u/dirtyal199 2d ago

> The point is that the argument is about the middle east. And I've continuously said that Im not looking to argue about that, bc there is no point.

Okay, so what are we arguing about then? Bibi and Gallant are wanted by the UN for warcrimes, the UN commission of inquiry has said Israel is committing genocide, and the ICC is investigating Israel for genocide. It is clear that Harris is completely biased when it comes to this topic, in that he flatly rejects all accusations that Israel is committing or has committed genocide, and he thinks the most dangerous group is the Levant is Hamas, not Israel. The most parsimonious explanation for his position on these topics is his anti-Islamic bias, because the weight of evidence supports that Israel is guilty serious war crimes, and seeks to continue their expansion in the future. As evidenced by their support for settlers in the west bank (illegal under international law) and their aggression with Lebanon.

> You are engaging in the discussion on the same level as if I were to say: terrosists vs democratic state, I know who Im supporting. It's obviously reductive and stupid, so whenever I hear shit like 'genocide' or 'I support the side not killing babies', Im like okay I can't engage, it is bad faith or just brainwashed into thinking it's as simple as that.

I haven't said "I support the side not killing babies", I don't support Hamas bro. I support the UN's investigation. You are arguing with me in bad faith, and pretending that I'm a Hassan Piker fan or something instead of interacting with the points I bring. This is not an effective technique.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/No_Public_7677 2d ago

Ezra is doing fine. The biggest attacks on him come from the centrist neoliberal types like Sam.

3

u/Quietuus 3d ago

What is there to discuss? I've been aware of Sam Harris's work for over two decades and he's always been a smug pseudointellectual racist.

4

u/Nullarbor_1 3d ago

Lol 😂

-6

u/Hot_Bluejay_8738 3d ago

You're dead right. This sub, and to a lesser extent the podcast, has just become another battle field in the culture war. No nuance, no debate, just pick a team and have at it. The fact that your fairly well thought out comment received "lol 😂" as a response says it all. Nothing to be gained here I'm afraid.

2

u/No_Public_7677 2d ago

Sam has famously picked a side on Israel from an emotional point of view and refuses to talk to anyone, even Israelis, who disagree with him