Bernardo Kastrup challenges Sam Harris on idealism

Perhaps a discussion/debate between the two could clear things up?

#idealism #SamHarris

"Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."

[Mandibil]

Harris hasn't got time ... he is out measuring morality !!

[michaelekoka]

People critical of Kastrup's aversion to Harris here are obviously unaware that Sam Harris is very happy to publicly and uncharitably criticize these ideas (and the people that work on them) to the point of insult, without fully grasping them, whether at the philosophical, scientific, or even experiential (i.e. "spiritual") level. Once you understand what Conscious Realism (Don Hoffman) or Analytical Idealism (Bernardo Kastrup) are proposing and also, _why the alternative materialist theories don't work_, it's difficult to listen to Sam Harris's (mis)characterization of those ideas and not see him as someone _really_ out of his depth, but trying to insert himself in a conversation for attention (and given the mic just because he's a public VIP). Before you protest as to his qualifications, consider that Kastrup and Hoffman are both academic polymaths, with a solid background that spans computer science, psychology, math, physics and philosophy. They pull from those various perspectives and are dedicating the bulk of their time on exploring and advancing these ideas. That's the reason they can routinely and so confidently challenge their colleagues from those various fields that explore consciousness, but from a materialist framework (C. Koch, J. Tononi, S. Hameroff, etc). Sam Harris is a dabbler, he's a very eloquent public figure who's made some astute observations about society which he wrote some books about, but that's nowhere near his league.

[cloudstclass]

I recently listened to a conversation between Sam Harris and Rupert Spira. Sam Harris’ misinterpretation of idealism and the fundamental tenants of nonduality were so vast that they bordered on the infinite, to quote David Bentley Hart. Harris is completely locked into a mechanistic worldview and he’s more interested in arguing and converting than he is in any sort of authentic dialogue with dissenting voices. It’s sad. He’s a smart man and chooses to fight imaginary opponents. In that sense, one may call him a fundamentalist.

[josephstanick]

That would be a great debate. Hopefully it will take place.

[satoritennis]

He doesn’t have the free will to make this decision!

[poorboi]

Would it be possible for you or Bernardo to make an animation describing of how reality really is or how Idealism is the true way. I logically understand it but if there was an animation it would be amazing.

[giorgioacccc]

Does anyone know what Annaka Kastrup conversation was like?

[solarpoweredafricanvegansp]

He debated Sam Harris’s wife lol?

Where’s the vid?

[Tmnb-jhts]

To all the comments saying Bernardo was showing weakness or saying he was being disrespectful to Sam Harris. Sam identified as one of the four horsman of the new atheists. Him and the others where extremely disrespectful to anyone without their opinion. Summed up by Richard Dawkins announcing to a large crowd that" everyone needs to stop being so damn respectful"😅😅😅

[imransuhail]

In the first 2 minutes all I hear is arrogance and defensiveness.

[morganpottruff]

You do realize Sam Harris waking up app is practically dedicated to non dual perspectives and meditation? Sam invites people to investigate non duality as a matter of their own experience. At the end of the day, that's all we CAN know. Everything else is a series of beliefs, claims and theories, for the time being anyway. I'm a huge fan of Bernardo and idealism, but I think the criticism is a little unfair. I would like to see a conversation between these two.

[SuperStargazer]

It would be great to see Sam Harris debate Bernardo or Donald Hoffman.

[geunhokim]

I respect Sam Harris. I don’t agree with everything he says, but I consider him a very intelligent, articulate, and clear thinker who has his heart in the right place. With that said, however, he does tend to make straw mans out of ideas that he is critical of such as religion, idealism, God, reincarnation, etc. I would very much love to see a debate between Harris and Kastrup on the subject of physicalism vs. idealism.

[drsalka]

I couldnt stand Sam Harris since he became more public/famous and I started listening to his speeches/debates/ideas. Being someone who’s experienced many mystical experiences, I can’t listen too long to someone who’s so convinced of the materialist reductionism. Reassuring to hear Bernardo feeling similar about him.

[vg]

I have no idea who is right or wrong in this topic, but so offputting and arrogant the way Bernado speaks about Sam Harris, if he think Sam Harris is wrong, just say so, why the need to belittle someone else opinions and views, regardless if one think they are wrong.

[MrSidney]

I thought Sam would be sympathetic or at least very understanding of your take on idealism given his view of consciousness. He’s said many times, consciousness is the only thing that can’t be an illusion and the only thing truly matters.

[jamiea]

Can anyone share a link where Sam Harris expresses the views that they're discussing here?

[johnnastrom]

I like Kastrup's ideas and even though Harris can be closed-minded at times, it is not wise for Kastrup to talk in this manner. He is setting himself up. And he really looked like a baby that time he walked off that debate with Tim Maudlin.

[thephilosophermma]

Sam himSELF cannot come since his SELF IS AN ILLUSION

[motorhead]

Next time just say you disagree with him. This “he’s too afraid too debate me” “hopefully he opens his mind” “he has a degree from Stanford yet is somehow a big dummy know-it-all” “he wont debate me because he cares too much about his image and I will obviously obliterate it because I’m such a genius” shit is infantile. Should be beneath Kastrup and the host. It actually is possible to politely disagree and even to politely say you think someone is very wrong about a topic. Would go a long way, and maybe people would be more willing to debate you if you were mature and thus you could get your ideas out to a larger audience. I’ve never heard of Kastrup till just now and it’s probably because the way he talks about people he disagrees with keeps him from getting a conversation with them.