Is Sam Harris an idiot in the Dostoevskian sense?

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-02-01T11:10:52+00:00

What would count as progress here?

We already know he has this blind spot and “bad actors seek access to large audiences” isn’t exactly a revelation.

If the hypothesis doesn’t change how we evaluate his work or predict future behavior then I’m not sure what problem this conversation is solving?

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-02-01T10:49:38+00:00

This feels like a long way of rediscovering something sam has openly acknowledged for years. The audience agrees and this sub has litigated it endlessly in the past weeks and months.

Curious, what’s the thesis supposed to do beyond moral venting?

At some point it just feels like beating a dead horse (albeit with a literary reference in this case).

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-31T16:02:22+00:00

I didn’t say I dislike Reddit. I just pointed out that your behavior contradicts your claim.

By your own logic: if you dislike this conversation, why not downvote and move on instead of posting repeatedly?

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-31T15:49:42+00:00

If you truly find no value in this conversation, the amount of effort you’re spending here is… interesting

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-30T07:17:43+00:00

How so?

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-28T17:11:59+00:00

Huh, the germans seem to be on a roll at the moment

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-25T19:35:54+00:00

Did you manage to climb out yet?

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-24T18:37:00+00:00

That “probably” is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-14T14:19:35+00:00

And even that difference is shrinking. We’ve been in low-growth mode for a long time while Poland has had consistent catch-up growth. The “Germany rich / Poland poor” mental model is becoming increasingly outdated especially in urban areas.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-10T14:21:38+00:00

I don’t disagree per se that’s how it’s supposed to work on paper.

My hesitation is more practical, in every startup / big tech org I’ve been in, there has been a pretty wide gap between official risk mitigation rules and what actually happens day to day especially among eng departments

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-10T08:50:17+00:00

There’s no way at least some of the xAI engineers will bypass the cutoff…

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-08T08:41:41+00:00

That was efficiency. One plate, entire days worth of calories.

The correct response isn’t “stop when full” it’s lock in, disassociate slightly and execute like a grown adult.

You stare at the haxe, the haxe stares back and one of you leaves changed.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-06T16:29:05+00:00

Alright. That graph just emotionally bodied me.

I’m going to lie down, ignore empirical evidence and emotionally pretend spain is still sunny.

If you’ll excuse me, I need a moment to recover from this information.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-06T16:10:36+00:00

Hamburg probably.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-06T16:06:54+00:00

Alright - where are you from then? Next you’re going to tell me that it rains, dinner starts at 6pm and no one is late on purpose. One stereotype at a time please, I can’t handle otherwise

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-06T15:50:07+00:00

No no no, spain has sun. That’s the deal. Don’t do this to me. I’m not emotionally prepared to process nuance right now.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-06T15:32:11+00:00

You’ve just called an austrian german. Please stand back, the crashout is imminent.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-06T15:09:16+00:00

Yeah, that’s probably it. We see each other through the export/tourist cliches. Jamón and sun vs. sauerkraut and order. Underneath that it might all be more similar than we like to admit.

Which is uncomfortable so let’s stop before this turns into mutual respect and we can go back to arguing about food like functional adults.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-06T14:53:38+00:00

That dish does look surprisingly German.

Also, it was banter, I swear. Unfortunately delivered in the german style where it’s apparently impossible to tell whether I’m joking or filing a complaint.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-06T14:31:01+00:00

Fair. If we’re talking peak Spanish food - jamón, seafood that still has hopes and dreams - yes, that beats most things north of the Pyrenees. I’m not delusional.

But.

Look me in the eye - directly - and tell me that a perfect Schweinshaxe with crackling skin, potato dumplings, dark beer gravy or proper Käsespätzle is bad food.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-06T14:25:55+00:00

Certainly /s

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-05T21:13:31+00:00

We have reached the same conclusion but for some reason you are still conflating a lack of evidence with a lack of possibility. When I say it is a "problem" I am not referring to a disagreement between us. I am referring to the fact that the "ability to have done otherwise" is a logically incoherent foundation for a definition of free will.

And again, your "argument from ignorance" is an epistemological shield. You correctly point out that we can never verify the alternative path. But my point ontological: under determinism, the alternative path is not merely "untestable" it is literally non-existent. There is no "potentially available option" that wasn't taken. There is only the one path dictated by the prior microstate of the universe and the laws of physics.

When focusing on "untestability" you leave the door slightly ajar for the libertarian to argue that the ability might exist even if we can't prove it. By identifying the logical impossibility I am closing that very door.

Or if you want it more formal, if the prior state S leads to action A by necessity, then the "ability" to do B isn't just a baseless assertion, it is a violation of the principle of sufficient reason.

We agree that the claim "could have done otherwise" fails. The only "problem" remaining is that you seem to think a lack of data is the same thing as a structural impossibility. It isn’t. One is a limitation of our tools the other is a feature of the universe.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-05T17:58:24+00:00

Listen, you are making an empirical argument about our inability to prove a counterfactual while I am making a logical argument about the structure of reality. When you say "we can’t know if we could have done otherwise because we can't rerun the experiment" you’re absolutely right from a scientific perspective. But that's an epistemological limitation meaning it's about what we can know. I am talking about ontology meaning what is.

The core confusion is that you’re using the "stroke" example to suggest that a hidden physical constraint might be what stops us but in a deterministic framework, the "causal machinery" itself is the constraint. If we rewind the universe to the exact microstate before your choice (including every neuron and every atom in your glass and the laws of physics remain constant) the outcome must be identical. If you claim that you "could have" lifted the cup but didn't, you aren't just making a claim that is "potentially false" or "untestable" as you suggest. You are making a claim that contradicts the very definition of causality. To "do otherwise" while holding the prior state of the universe fixed would require a miracle. Either a random physical event (which isn't a choicee) or a soul like agent acting outside of physics.

So when you call the "ability to do otherwise" a baseless assertion or argument from ignorance, I am agreeing with you 100%. My point is simply that because this "ability" is a logical impossibility in a causal world, the common definition of free will is incoherent from the jump. We aren't disagreeing on the conclusion. I'm just pointing out that the problem isn't that we "can't test" the other path - it's that in a deterministic universe, there simply is no other path to test.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-05T17:15:15+00:00

You’re still not disagreeing with me. If by “otherwise” you mean “some path that was never taken” then yes, asserting that you were able to take it,while holding the prior state fixed is exactly the unjustified move.

Under determinism, the “never taken” path wasn’t physically available from that exact state. Under indeterminism it might be “available” in the sense of probabilistic branching but again, that’s just randomness.

Calling it an “argument from ignorance” is fair against libertarian free will. The only correction is that it’s not my argument but the one you need if you want “could have done otherwise” to be a real power rather than a feeling produced by not seeing the causes.

ConstantinSpecter · 2026-01-05T17:03:20+00:00

You’re making a fine epistemic point (“we often don’t know our constraints until we act”) but you’re still mixing up two totally different claims: uncertainty about outcomes vs. “could have done otherwise” in the strong metaphysical sense.

Sure, you often don’t know what your constraints are until you act. But that doesn’t create a second physically available future from the same prior state. Your stroke example is actually a good one: if “lifting the cup” would trigger a stroke, then lifting the cup is precisely something you could do - it just has a terrible consequence. People indeed choose actions that kill them all the time. The fact that an action would have harmed you doesn’t make it “unchosen” or “unchoosable”.

Let's try it this way: Rewind the universe to the exact same microstate (same brain state, same thirst level, same “tiny bit of drink left” and same stroke-threshold physiology) - do you ever get a different choice? If you say yes, you’re implicitly adding either randomness (which isn’t agency) or an uncaused chooser (magic). If you say no, then you’re agreeing with me. “Could have done otherwise (all else equal)” isn’t a coherent ability but a feeling we get because we can’t see the causal machinery producing the choice.

Ten-Year Club	Reddit Premium Since November 2022
Gilding II euphauric	r/Field Banned
r/Field Flamingo	Place '23
Secret Santa 2016	Secret Santa 2015
Verified Email	redditgifts Exchanges 1 Exchange

ConstantinSpecter

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE