Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I’m going to take blame for it either way, but that doesn’t sound like something I posted. I only defended Sam Harris’ and Bill Maher’s rights to interview Murray and not be pilloried for it.
I have never found Murray particularly convincing because he seems very weak on the clinical science regarding intelligence. He seems to think data sets about groups trump the hard science. He’s an anthropologist. He goes in the bucket of necessarily dubious intellects, along with economists and most historians.
|
One of my best friends from college, an Asian studies professor, has a book coming out next month that, among other things, takes Harris and his pals to the woodshed for being an ignorant slut when it comes to Buddhism. It's always worth a laugh.
Why do these people insist on speaking out of ignorance? Maher knows less than jack-shit about Islam or the Middle East, and won't listen to people who do know something; Harris knows jack-shit about Buddhism, and won't listen to anyone who does; and Murray knows jack-shit about evolutionary biology, among other subjects, and has been ridiculed by some of the best biologists out there, but still won't listen.
It's really amazing. They make a living off ignorance.
