On Knowing Your Enemy

[rug]

Last edited Tue May 8, 2012, 01:00 PM - Edit history (1)

May 7, 2012
Sam Harris

I recently wrote a short essay about airline security (“In Defense of Profiling”) that provoked a ferocious backlash from readers. In publishing this piece, I’m afraid that I broke one of my cardinal rules of time (and sanity) management: Not everything worth saying is worth saying oneself. I learned this the hard way once before, in discussing the ethics of torture and collateral damage, but this time the backlash has been even more unpleasant and less rational.

One idea that seems to unite many of my critics is that I am shamefully ignorant about how airline security actually works and about the means that terrorists can use to circumvent it. Many who were eager to educate me on these matters, or to find another way of declaring me an imbecile, recommended that I consult the work of Bruce Schneier. Whether well-intentioned or not, this was a useful piece of advice.

Bruce is an expert on security who has testified before Congress and has written and debated these issues for many major publications, including The New York Times, The Economist, The Guardian, Forbes, Wired, Nature, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, The Boston Globe, The San Francisco Chronicle, and The Washington Post. He has repeatedly argued against profiling.

I invited Bruce to set me straight about airline security on this page, and he very generously accepted. He is writing a direct response to my article, which I will publish tomorrow. We will then discuss our differences in a subsequent post.

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/on-knowing-your-enemy29



The religious part is further into the article.

[Angry Dragon]

1. And this OP belongs in religion??

[rug]

2. Sure.

Last edited Tue May 8, 2012, 12:51 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121824867

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/05/07/my-objections-to-profiling-werent-actually-addressedbut-ok/

Context, context.

Here's the original post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121824239

Sorry about the vagueness.

[Angry Dragon]

19. thanks for the clarification

[bananas]

4. "We should profile Muslims, or anyone who looks like he or she could conceivably be Muslim"

From the article: "We should profile Muslims, or anyone who looks like he or she could conceivably be Muslim"

That absolutely is about religion, specifically, it is advocating religious profiling and religious bigotry.
So yeah it belongs in the religion forum.

Sam Harris is a religious fanatic and a bigoted whackjob atheist.
He's kind of a crackpot - and one of the leaders of New Atheism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism

New Atheism is the name given to the ideas promoted by a collection of 21st-century atheist writers who have advocated the view that "religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises."[1] The series of popular books associated with New Atheism argue that recent scientific advancements demand a less accommodating attitude toward religion, superstition, and religious fanaticism than had traditionally been extended by many secularists.[citation needed]

The term is commonly associated with individuals such as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and the late Christopher Hitchens (together called "the Four Horsemen of New Atheism" in a 2007 debate they held on their criticisms of religion, a name that has stuck[2]) and Victor J. Stenger.[3] Several best-selling books by these authors, published between 2004 and 2007, form the basis for much of the discussion of new atheism.[4]

[mr blur]

5. "a religious fanatic AND a bigoted whackjob atheist"?

Quite a feat.

"religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises."

On the other hand, he's right, there. (You left out "ridiculed&quot

[cbayer]

7. Why would you add ridiculed to that list?

Countered, criticized and exposed may be legitimate, but ridicule?

Would you also add harassed? Targeted by the TSA?

[trotsky]

8. Refer to this poster's comment, please:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=24813

"There is hostility out there and it's well deserved. When you try to deny basic human rights to other people, you deserve derision."

[trotsky]

6. Why are you attacking and insulting and name-calling someone based on their beliefs?

That behavior is not welcome in this group.

[cbayer]

9. Since you are mocking me here, let me make something very clear to you.

I am referring to the ways that members treat other members. Members here are protected by the TOS. Those that insult and name call other members make this site, and this group in particular, suck.

Insulting, name calling or otherwise deriding those who are not members is permitted on this site and in this group.

Although stalking and harassment of other members aren't specifically addressed in the TOS, I think they fall under the rules of general civility.

Is the distinction clear?

[trotsky]

10. Is the Dalai Lama a member here? n/t

[cbayer]

11. No, and attacking or otherwise deriding him are permitted.

That doesn't mean someone can't comment on that behavior.

I know you are smart enough to know the difference.

[trotsky]

12. Ok, and I commented on the behavior too.

So we are all set!

[bananas]

13. Another logical fallacy by a so-called "rational" atheist.

That behaviour is welcome here.

I didn't see you complain about this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121825797

This was flagged as OT in GD, so I'm reposting it here.
--as it's about religion.

New meme, please spread far and wide:

[trotsky]

16. Didn't see that one. Are you admitting yours is improper, then?

Good for you. I'd like to see this group be more civil and tolerant, and I welcome your efforts to change your behavior to help attain that goal!

[cbayer]

17. You forgot your sarcasm smilie, trotsky.

edited to add that this was meant in fun. Forgot my rofl smilie.

[trotsky]

18. Please refer to post #8 in this thread.

Thanks!

[bananas]

14. Sam Harris - Atheist Hero!

They even have a t-shirt!
He's a hero!

http://www.zazzle.com/atheist_heroes_sam_harris_tshirt-23564419083888933v

Atheist Heroes - Sam Harris T Shirts

[EvolveOrConvolve]

15. Yep, a t-shirt is almost the same thing as the bible

Almost exactly the same.

[Angry Dragon]

20. thanks

[Joseph8th]

3. We should profile all the fundies, then...

... which just puts us back to trying to enforce the law based on behavior, rather than race or appearance.

Not that I'm against profiling religious zealots -- they are after all the source of 99% of the terrorists worldwide (the remaining 1% is, apparently, FARC).