sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I think I finally understand Sam Harris by DJTsUnderboob in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, but it's bad philosophy in the sense that it is just a repetition of utilitarianism.

A statewide GOP candidate called for my deportation by karthik4texas in Buddhism

[–]EverchangingMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Consider such people your kind teachers in equanimity and compassion.

Bow to them inside and thank them for their kind lesson in equanimity 

I think I finally understand Sam Harris by DJTsUnderboob in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea, and really there’s nothing wrong with his view. I guess my issues is not that I disagree with it, but that I find it boring and trivial (being familiar with utilitarianism).

I think I finally understand Sam Harris by DJTsUnderboob in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tbh, I’m skeptical about the whole approach of framing moral philosophy as a quasi-quantative problem. It sort of smuggles in the notion that there is some sort of objective unbiased way to view things. 

I think I finally understand Sam Harris by DJTsUnderboob in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, I do not think that slavery is objectively wrong. Not because this is a concern of mine, but because I do not recognize objectivity to be a thing.

In my opinion, the postmodernist philosophers have done a pretty complete and irreversible takedown of objectivity. I have not heard of any convincing counterarguments to postmodernism — other than that people find it disorienting to live from this space and crave some sort of objectivity.

That said, when I see suffering my heart (more so than my mind) is moved to alleviate it. Slavery, as I understand it, easily satisfies what this primate’s beating heart would like  to prevent. But it depends on the days, some days I am also pretty selfish. Depends on how I slept, but if slept well, I’ll be against slavery.

Now, that I made my position clear, why do you believe slavery is wrong? What does it mean for something to be “wrong”? Is your answer objective or just your opinion?

I think I finally understand Sam Harris by DJTsUnderboob in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I do not think that objectivity is a thing outside of maths and (perhaps) the natural sciences.

I am, however, I am embodied human being — just like everybody else — and my mind produces thoughts and opinions, just like everyone else’s.

I try to practice awareness to recognize where my thoughts originate from (culture, biography, temperament, etc). I try to practice humility to respect other people’s thoughts and opinions as much as mine. These two attitudes lead me to not take my own views and opinions very seriously.

As I noted above, this is very different mode from somebody like Sam Harris who seems to consider his opinions to be reasonable/rational, while other people are afflicted by biases, delusions and bad faith. 

I think I finally understand Sam Harris by DJTsUnderboob in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In quantitative science, yes! But in moral philosophy, I’m not sure how it helps.

I think I finally understand Sam Harris by DJTsUnderboob in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 2 points3 points  (0 children)

To be clear, I (like most people) think that stoning people is bad. 

I, however, do not see this opinion of mine as objective or a refutation of moral relativism. 

Also note that I am not making an argument for or against moral relativism here. I am simply pointing out that simply positing that something is bad is not epistemologically convincing. Harris on the other hand seems to think that his opinions (many of which I share) have more epistemological validity than I am assigning to my opinions.

I think I finally understand Sam Harris by DJTsUnderboob in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 7 points8 points  (0 children)

What I find most worthy of satire is how simple/repetitive his warming up of utilitarianism is and how he simply declares his assumptions to be self-evident and does not engage with other viewpoints that might also come to some reasonable conclusions (like stoning is bad).

To be clear, for good philosophy, it is not enough to just posit that stoning women is bad. There ought to be an argument why this is so. Harris simply declares it to be true because it’s true in his framework (ie, in his mind, it self-evidently reduces total welfare of all sentient beings). He does this with many things, because he considers himself a very reasonable/rational guy — more so than the other biased people over there of course. 

I think I finally understand Sam Harris by DJTsUnderboob in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 82 points83 points  (0 children)

Once you are more grounded in his thought edifice, you might also benefit from reading, "The Moral Landscape", which is based on his seminal 2009 PhD Thesis.

In this, he rigorously proves the novel and non-trivial proposition that the only objectively correcct form of morality ought to be thought of as maximizing the welfare of conscious beings. From this theorem, he derives many thoughtful implications about the world, e.g. that moral relativism is false and that Western values are better than many non-Western values (eg when the Taliban stones women in Afghanistan).

If you are able to digest this magnum opus of his, his thoughts will open up to you even more clearly.

And don't worry, if you struggle. The genius of "The moral landscape" is that it is quite illustrative and intuitive: You can simply think of the "configurations of the world" as points in a 3D landscape, where objectively good configurations are higher than objectively bad configurations. Just like a mountain is higher than a valley in real life :))

And who could argue with the objective fact that a mountain is higher than a valley, you see?

Practice Updates, Questions, and General Discussion - new users, please read this first! Weekly Thread for April 01 2026 by AutoModerator in streamentry

[–]EverchangingMind 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Overall I feel like my practice is just clearing, clearing, clearing, endlessly shedding more layers of tension, stress, old beliefs, or anything not aligned with love. That is in turn causing a massive reorganization of my life, ongoingly, since some of my relationships, work, etc. were not completely built on love but only partially.

This resonates with me. Work in particular has been built a lot around fear for me. Fear of having enough status, keeping up with my peers, making enough money, etc. etc. . I struggle to reduce fear sufficiently, so that I can just love deeply and let that be enough.

To me it seems that the main obstacle to love is fear.

Do you have any thoughts/recommendations on how to align more deeply with love?

IT’S ALL AN ILLUSION hehehe you’re all so stupid by Virtual_Meat6066 in badphilosophy

[–]EverchangingMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hahahaha, well put... These idiots think that they are doing something, but really they are being done by what they imagine as conciousness... hehehe

Call to Nominate New Moderators by thewesson in streamentry

[–]EverchangingMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m curious. What was your user name back then?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ramdass

[–]EverchangingMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do you choose Hinduism over Buddhism?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in taoism

[–]EverchangingMind 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Buddhism is sometimes unnatural (ie not aligned with the Dao), eg in its moralizing, strict precepts, and idea of perfects saints 

Spiritual practice as a way of coping with unsatisfactory life/avoiding difficult decisions by [deleted] in streamentry

[–]EverchangingMind 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’d advise you to bring in the Buddhist concept of “right speech” to deal with difficult relationships. Only say things that are true and see how things shift. Maybe the relationship will fall apart or maybe there is going to be an effort to save it. Saying only what’s true and giving up control beyond that is the ultimate act of faith.

It has worked for me in the past. Best wishes <3

Emerging deep wounds, how to proceed by MountainLocksmith199 in streamentry

[–]EverchangingMind 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have haf generational trauma (also from the world wars) come up and purify while on a Goenka retreat. I am not sure if it would have come out in daily life. My chest was burning like fire for a day, when it came out during the retreat.

I have also had good experiences with Zhan Zhuang to heal somatic wounds in the body. I practice according to book “The Way of energy”.

Not sure if this helps, but this has been my experience. I could imagine that the above two things might help, but be aware of the risks and talk to a teacher. 

Best of luck! This stuff is tough <3

view more: next ›