MeTo attacks Lawrence Krauss

I guess I don't know what you mean by group atheism.

He does argue against theists. Is that what you mean by group atheism? He is against all dogma. So if he argues against Kim Jong-Un controlling the weather, is that group atheism too?

If you mean pop scientist in terms of bringing science to the masses, I would agree that is what Pinker tries to do.
 
jeffk said:
I guess I don't know what you mean by group atheism.

He does argue against theists. Is that what you mean by group atheism? He is against all dogma. So if he argues against Kim Jong-Un controlling the weather, is that group atheism too?

If you mean pop scientist in terms of bringing science to the masses, I would agree that is what Pinker tries to do.
Click to expand...
The main issue I see is that usually as in every profession, when scientists try to act like history experts without any training in historical theories and historigraphies , they sound like high school teachers.

Things like " medieval men tought the earth was flat" " brunno was burned because he believed in science" " Galileo was persecuted because of his scientific views" " Constantine made christianity the official religion" " Hypathia was a science martyr" and so go on just makes them sound too foolish to be taken seriously. That and the positivistic view of time, but that also the fault of the American school system that still teaches that even here in Boston.
 
Caveat said:
This isn't true.



And neither is this.

I'm no fan of either guy, but at least do some cursory googling before making up claims please.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant details. Shermer's degree is still irrelevant and religion is not a significant part of Taleb's idealogy.
 
Fawlty said:
The one time Krauss set off the alarm bells for me was the way he said that teaching was seduction. It had a strange ring to it, like he was trying to rationalize predatory behavior by passing it off as a high-minded idea. You can never tell from something like that, but on the other hand it's not surprising.

There's also a significant problem with misogyny and other predatory behavior in the skeptic movement as a whole (true in any movement, really, but especially growing ones). Richard Carrier is a problem, Michael Shermer is a problem, now Krauss. I would be very surprised if Sam Harris, Matt Dillahunty, or Aron Ra were a problem, but it wouldn't surprise me if, say, Dan Dennett had a history of preying on college boys. Peter Boghossian comes off like a bit of a problem too.
Click to expand...
Expand on this? I've never heard that one.
 
Caveat said:
Pedantic beats blatantly wrong though.
Click to expand...

it has not furthered any point whatsoever. I actually knew Shermer had an advanced degree in psychology btw though I doubt you would believe me. I do my homework. I tweeted him and Facebook message him telling him he is next after Krauss. I know Shermer. I messaged him a month ago, obviously long before this Krauss thing happened. I said, "you must be sweatin bullets huh?" lol I have read a lot on this douche. I have googled the guy at least 10 times today. I wasnt gonna give him credit for anything but a bachelors out of spite.

Thought I didnt know he had his phd in history of science. That is a damn shame. He is a disgrace.
 
forum poster said:
Expand on this? I've never heard that one.
Click to expand...
That's not linked to any rumors, and I've never heard anything about him to suggest it, just to be clear.

There's just something in his personality and the way he talks about secrets & love in a couple old interviews. He was making it really obvious that he was secretly gay, and he has a bit of a special closeness with his students. It may be that he's just a really loving and excellent person.
 
Physicist Lawrence Krauss had access restricted at Case Western Reserve University in 2009 after sexual harassment accusation, BuzzFeed reports

CLEVELAND, Ohio - Case Western Reserve University restricted star physicist Lawrence Krauss's access to campus in 2009 because of a sexual harassment complaint, according to a report in BuzzFeed News.

But by the time the sanctions were put in place, Krauss had left for Arizona State University, BuzzFeed said. He was permitted to return to CWRU in 2009 for a colloquium.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2018/02/physicist_lawrence_krauss_had.html

The allegation at CWRU was among several reported by BuzzFeed News against Krauss in the last decade.

Lawrence Krauss had a six-stop lecture tour in Australia and New Zealand scheduled for May alongside Richard Dawkins. Multiple sponsors are pulling out following the @BuzzFeed allegation
 
you should try to promote this "MeTo" campaign you speak of. there isnt one yet, but i think it would catch on TS.
 
ultramanhyata said:
From Sam Harris... Wow... This has to be one of the most powerful examples of projection EVER.
Click to expand...

You’re definitely correct that Harris is projecting but, having read up a bit on the beef between these two, I think there are additional layers at play here. My take of Harris is that he’s very much a sycophant groupie for what he seems to view as an exclusive club of “public intellectuals”. And though he appears, as far as I can tell, only moderately above average in intelligence, Harris is desperate to be seen as belonging to this group. Toward that end, he has made defending the honor and status of the club itself and its members the first order of his business.

Now along comes Nassim Taleb who, being the contrarian he is, not only cuts down legitimate members of the club but also - in what must have been a absolute gut-punch to Sam - publicly demonstrated in a series of tweets that Harris himself isn’t even worthy of circle of intellectuals he’s attacking. So in addition to projection, what you were seeing in that passage was extreme amounts of plain old butthurt rage. It was a meltdown worthy of the Sherdog Heavys
 
Must suck if a dinner invitation devastates you for weeks. What a weakling.
 
Gunny said:
You’re definitely correct that Harris is projecting but, having read up a bit on the beef between these two, I think there are additional layers at play here. My take of Harris is that he’s very much a sycophant groupie for what he seems to view as an exclusive club of “public intellectuals”. And though he appears, as far as I can tell, only moderately above average in intelligence, Harris is desperate to be seen as belonging to this group. Toward that end, he has made defending the honor and status of the club itself and its members the first order of his business.

Now along comes Nassim Taleb who, being the contrarian he is, not only cuts down legitimate members of the club but also - in what must have been a absolute gut-punch to Sam - publicly demonstrated in a series of tweets that Harris himself isn’t even worthy of circle of intellectuals he’s attacking. So in addition to projection, what you were seeing in that passage was extreme amounts of plain old butthurt rage. It was a meltdown worthy of the Sherdog Heavys
Click to expand...

Do you have any links to read about the beef between them?
 
alanb said:
We only have her word and he invited her up to his hotel room. There is a presumption that a man is going to make a pass if you consent to that.
Click to expand...

C'mon, you had to have read the story before you posted. g'dam, you can't tell me that you think pushing her down on his bed and forcibly kissing her is acceptable behavior.
 
Gunny said:
You’re definitely correct that Harris is projecting but, having read up a bit on the beef between these two, I think there are additional layers at play here. My take of Harris is that he’s very much a sycophant groupie for what he seems to view as an exclusive club of “public intellectuals”. And though he appears, as far as I can tell, only moderately above average in intelligence, Harris is desperate to be seen as belonging to this group. Toward that end, he has made defending the honor and status of the club itself and its members the first order of his business.

Now along comes Nassim Taleb who, being the contrarian he is, not only cuts down legitimate members of the club but also - in what must have been a absolute gut-punch to Sam - publicly demonstrated in a series of tweets that Harris himself isn’t even worthy of circle of intellectuals he’s attacking. So in addition to projection, what you were seeing in that passage was extreme amounts of plain old butthurt rage. It was a meltdown worthy of the Sherdog Heavys
Click to expand...

Excellent analysis. I think you nailed it.
 
JonesBones said:
He is a pop scientist by definition. Harris wrote an Atheist Manifesto. He is famous for being an atheist. Come on now. lol at him not promoting group atheism. He only has a foundation and organizes events
Click to expand...

Harris's rejection of the label "atheist" is a perfect example of his pomposity.

He's not rejecting the label because his position on belief in God is somehow more nuanced than the word "atheist" allows.

He rejects the label because he believes that his atheistic position must be considered the de facto, obvious and correct position - and therefore it is only every non hard atheist who should be forced to wear a designation.

Harris is such a dick.
 
In the live show with stupid looking chairs, Harris and Dillahunty talk about Krause. He was supposed to be on the stage with them last week and he wasn't there.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,907
Messages
55,454,563
Members
174,787
Latest member
Gladiator47

Share this page

Back
Top