THE ZEN NEUROSCIENTIST: A GUIDE TO SAM HARRIS

1. 

   @georgelewis3047

   January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

   Sam Harris' head is so far up his arse it would take an expedition to find it. The guy is snarky, hateful, and supremely arrogant.

2. 

   @Wildly-Oscar

   January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

   This was perfect. I once liked Sam Harris but the deeper I went into his claims the more doubtful I was towards his supposedly "selfless" intentions.

3. 

   @bathhatingcat8626

   January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

   Maybe this should be a 10 second video? “Orange man bad” -Sam Harris

4. 

   @ExiledGypsy

   January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

   What I find revolting about these so called pulic intelectuals; from Chomskey to Jordan Peterson is the their preachy approach to philosohy and their total lack awarenes of any environmental forces affecting human behaviour and their belief systems.
   I remember Mr Harris defending Budhhism a year or so before the genocidal attacks on Muslims with Buddhist priests proudly walking in their orange robes in fromt of the mob cheering them on and comparing their victims to vermins. I wonder if anyone has questioned Mr Harris about the issue and if he has changed his mind about peaceful nature of Buddhism.
   Of course he has now swapped his belif system to an obscure and irrelevant Inidan one that is unlikely to mock his alligence simply because they have any influence of followers.
   At least Chomskey has coherant well informed arguments on his side although his perspective is limited through American foreign Plocy as if the United state was the almighty God or god and the change in Administration made no difference what so ever.
   But Harris is not even well informed. He is as unaware of his own clutural prison as Tom Cruise was in Eyes Wide Shut; that is so called middle class prefessionals that were they more self aware would recognise themselves as the proleterians our time.
   Indeed one has to ask what was he doing through his 10 years of travelling except sitting silently under some tree with his eyes close? Others , especially in the U.S. are even worse living is their ivory towers disconnected from the rest of reality by two oceans and a border in the south where the nightmares of the crimes of their forefathers are bursting inside .
   They talk as if they know nothing about the gients of philosophy that came beofe them and are certain to remain influential long after these lot have been forgotten and their so called writtings were recycled as toilet paper .
   Talk about arogance of ignorance.

5. 

   @warpworshiper

   January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

   As much as id like there to be a cohesive group of eqaul levels to dismantle religion, its too much to repeat that horseman bit with a straight face. Who or what coined that? Ill assume some media sensationalist.
   Hitchens. The man needed no aide. An intellectual army of..one.

   I truelly enjoy the works of others ( Micheal Shermer for example). Their contributions though are a whirlwind of facts. Hitchens had genius and a poets fluidity , passion.

6. 

   @sikandork

   January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

   Great video, although I'm not sure if your last point on Sam's philosophy not answering what we should do in any unversal sense falling into the same problem as religion makes sense. His approach is not to be prescriptive about what we should do, but a guiding compass for at least what we shouldn't do. Agree that there's still a lot of white space between that and some of the more comforts of dogmatic religion, but it at least allows for flexibility and hopefully driving towards better local maxima on step at a time

7. 

   @adne4336

   January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

   I think Sam Harris is really great in some aspects, especially with his “pragmatic spiritualism”. Since spiritualism is so often argued for with pseudoscience or outright lies, it is refreshing to see someone arguing for the very real benefits of spirituality through rationality and scientific reason. He provides an important aspect to the lives of people more inclined toward skepticism which I can really appreciate.

   I also find his political views to be very interesting too (granted I tend to lean rather liberal socially, and somewhat towards moderat social democracy economically (social corporatism to be precise).

   In conclusion: Sam Harris is one of the thinkers I most strongly agree with although I do think some of his philosophical takes can be a bit one dimensional.

8. 

   @BenLapidusMusic

   January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

   You just summed up all my unarticulated thoughts on Harris, thank you

9. 

   @stevenhines5550

   January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

   You cant find Harris' cringeworthy email correspondence with Chomsky in any of his published or endorsed forums. Evidently he disavowed it for the steaming pile of racist stupidity for which Chomsky exposed it.

10. 

    @SoarLong

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Born into wealth and able to spend 11 years doing nothing. I am already so unbelievably envious of this guy lmfaoEdit: An argument can be made that Harris continues to do nothing.

11. 

    @chancekeith3219

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    I appreciate Harris' takes on science and morality, because it provides a unique outlook on philosophy that is needed to encourage discussion. However, I find Harris' takes on Islam to be deplorable.

    Sam Harris argues towards the idea Muslim immigration should be repressed with bogus opinions like the fact that they're not willing to accept our cultural norms.

    I would like the raise the point that they don't have to accept any cultural norms, they don't even need to speak our language. A good Muslim is one who stays Muslim, after all.

    As a high schooler enrolled in JROTC, there are many Muslims in my class despite American aggression against Muslim nations. Our Cadet Battalion Commander is Muslim, and her brother who is also my friend is just like everybody else, except for his refusal to eat pork at a ball one time. This goes to prove that Muslims do integrate within Europe and America the same way white people do into darker countries, with dignity and grace but also with acceptance in hopes of having a better future in foreign lands.

    Sam Harris' lies repeat old white man's burden talk but with a cynical twist; the argument used to justify colonialism in and around the 1800's. It was once thought that white people simply had to accept their racial and religious superiority and to try to rule other races for their own good, while Harris believes basically the same but thinks the best way to coexist with Muslims is to eradicate their presence in western society.
    These arguments are genocidal and objectively wrong at worst, and repetitions of old white man's burden rhetoric at best.

12. 

    @ast453000

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Harris built his career criticizing Islam after 9/11 – not a particularly courageous thing to do at the height of anti-Islamic sentiment in the West.

    He claimed to be criticizing Islam out of a concern about terrorism. And yet he has never been interested in the overwhelming cause of terrorism in the US – namely the white, right-wing, christian terrorism. This is why he has rightly been accused of bigotry against Islam. If he were truly concerned about terrorism – if he were truly concerned about the biggest threat to western civilization – he would be criticizing right-wing conservatism. But he shows no interest in doing so, beyond a sort of self-interested anti-Trumpism. He won't even publicly recognize the problem of white terrorism.

    Harris is one of those atheists who thinks that because one needs very little information to see what is wrong with religion, that one needs comparatively little information to address all the major problems of the world. If one adopts such a position, then it becomes reasonable to platform people like Charles Murray and Jordan Peterson. One need only listen to or read his conversations with Noam Chomsky and Ezra Klein to see how deeply ignorant Harris is about History.

    I once had a co-worker who asked why it was ok to advocate "black power", but racist to advocate "white power". Well, if you don't know anything about history, that would seem like a good question. Harris is about at the same level of understanding of the world as my former co-worker. His ignorance of history and facts about the world lead him in a right-wing direction, and blinds him to the bigotry of his views.

    When arguing about religion, it's enough to be smart, or just reasonably intelligent. But for other issues, it's not enough just to be smart. You actually need to know things about the world and History too.

13. 

    @rpm2991

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    I like Harris but I just cannot listen to his podcast. His voice puts me to sleep.

14. 

    @Failzz8

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Ah, the esteemed malibu meditator

15. 

    @all_the_good_names_are_gon68

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    "…and despite the ability for science to explain why and how things interact and exist, it is yet to be convincingly argued that science can tell us what we should do in any universal sense. This is perhaps the greatest issue of Sam Harris: that in his pursuit of a simplified and objective solution to our moral problems, he may find himself repeating the very same dogmatic biases that he has criticized so often in religious practice" MY FAV PART

16. 

    @vikramchatterjee4495

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Sam Harris seems pretty cool 😎

17. 

    @jeraldbaxter3532

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    So, a child of "Hollywood privilege", has a bad experience with drugs, then spends a decade, thanks to mommy and daddy's money, wandering through India in order to " find himself". He then comes back, bringing his brand of wisdom and enlightenment, which are nothing more than opinions, and opinions are like a certain part of the anatomy – everyone has one, they are all too often full of the same waste product and should not be shown off in public.

18. 

    @ddammadd

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Sam Harris is a privileged bigoted charlatan.

19. 

    @WeedL0ver

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    sisy didn't even entertain the bell curve for a moment

20. 

    @connor9024

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Sam Harris “I want to form a perfectly scientific groundwork for morality absent of non objectionable beliefs like religion.”

    His critics “maybe you should read more metaethics”
    (The study of objective moral frameworks.)
    Sam Harris “ew metaethics is a gatekeepers term, how borrrrrring!!!”

21. 

    @chiraggupta7580

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    I think Sam Harris's position on the Israel Palestine conflict was misunderstood here. He doesn't believe that when Palestinians do bad things it's not because of the circumstances. His position on the human condition is that we don't have free will and we're puppets of our neurochemistry (which is shaped partly by our environment/circumstances).

22. 

    @shamanic_nostalgia

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    The way he handled the "Bin Laden is a better person than Trump" situation was funny to me.

23. 

    @ehud88

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Superb article. Thank you for this

24. 

    @chedisalhi2382

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    In short , sam harris is a lunatic who doesn't know what he's talking about.
    How about you read the religion's book before you criticize it ?

25. 

    @Achrononmaster

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    @12:50 if you ever want a proper physicists stance on why "free will" is possible, and that mental functions cannot be reduced to neurological functions, give me a tap somewhere. Taking what is "metaphysical" as beyond what physics can study is one thing, but understanding how basic top-down causation can occur is quite another, and involves some basic physics. It cannot explain consciousness or subjective qualia, it just shows there is room for such phenomenology. Physics makes room. Harris' depth of understanding of physics is utterly insufficient to comprehend this.

26. 

    @admiralbenji

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Good essay on Ben Stiller. Have you thought of doing one on Sam Harris?

27. 

    @scottyPsychotty

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    I really appreciate your videos.

28. 

    @tribudeuno

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    In President Eisenhower’s farewell address where he warned about the military industrial simplex, there was another theme that he warned about that is not really talked about. That was about how scientific curiosity had been replaced by a lust for government contracts.

    The religion of science waives all claims to objectivity by its involvement with profit motive. Scientists often set themselves up as the new priesthood, while being just as corrupt as the old priesthoods.

    Know this… Somewhere in the world there are scientists who are diligently endeavoring to create autonomous AI driven killing machines, while the new priesthood is just shrugging. They do not show the same level of courageousness that Werner Heisenberg demonstrated when he lied to Nazi High Command that the Atomic Bomb was not possible, though he knew it was relatively easy to do. That was very shamanic of him, determining that the Nazis were just too low consciousness to entrust with such power that they had not arrived at by themselves.

    The more common example of a scientist is Albert Einstein who used his fame to push the US Government to engage in the creation of an Atomic Bomb, then does a turn-around once Pandora’s Box is permanently open, crying about how it was a bad idea. He just didn’t have the ability to understand that he was giving that power to a culture that had engaged in genocide of the American indigenous 100 years before there was a Nazi Party in Germany.

    Scientists have failed to produce any system of beliefs that guarantees any correct behavior while smashing the glass house they are in with every rock thrown at religious beliefs. Heisenberg operated in Courage, while Einstein operated in Fear. The former in a quantum attractor field that is the first level of consciousness that has the ability to create positive change, the latter a quantum attractor field that has no power to change anything for the better, only to create the situation that faces humanity on the brink of WW3. Science, get over yourself. You are just as messed up as all other human endeavors. The highest technology has no technology…

29. 

    @Kitty-ex2gq

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Noam Chomsky fuckin dunked on him and this dude thinks they couldn’t have a debate because of the medium of email? Nah son. Noam thinks ur dumb

30. 

    @jacobcudmore-maupai4963

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    How he described spirituality is literally the function of prayer.

31. 

    @ricky4214

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    for a scientific reductionist, he is putting a lot of emphasis on the well-being of our consciousness (something that cannot be scientifically explained) for attempting to explain how we can arrive at morality only through science, Chomsky very deservedly did not speak about old average Sam as an intellectual

32. 

    @commonwunder

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Sam Harris has been drifting in and out ‘of his own mind’ for thirty years now,
    and I think you can tell?

    His distinctive, soporific tone is hypnotic to some …and a sedative to others.
    He spent most of his early career being a bully. Around other ‘inspiring’ bullies.
    And we all instinctually know… if you’ve bullying tendencies – there’s something wrong with you.

    He's a devoted advocate of meditation and mediates several times a day.
    No wonder Harris needs multiple daily rests from himself.
    To turn away from those inner traits that he doesn’t like to face.
    From his seething ‘hatred of Islam’ to his bizarre ‘Trump derangement syndrome’
    There is an inner anger within this outwardly quiet person …that is surely palpable.

    There is a youthful arrogance… in the idea that you can right all societal wrongs.
    It takes a certain amount of time to learn that all notions of social progress… are just pathways on a plateau, there is no elevation, no higher ground to attain.
    We are not advancing up a metaphorical mountain… to some sort of apex of knowledge and wisdom.
    To believe in an unalterable and inevitable advancement ( if we just take this path, or that one. ) of western society is an illusion. No matter how much our societies socially condition us to believe otherwise. There will always be 'religion' and politicians we may despise… trying to belittle or even destroy them with your intellect and verbal bulling skills will never solve this eternal dilemma.

    If Mr.Harris knows this… he also knows that it doesn’t sell books, or fill lecture halls.
    But you can always buy his meditation app… if you also need a break from being yourself.

33. 

    @PersonOfTheInternet280

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    I use to like Sam Harris, I will only again if he continues his podcast.

34. 

    @ethangonzalez8904

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    I like the way Harris described a basis for morality by imagining a universe where every conscious being suffers as much as possible for as long as possible (a hypothetical he calls "the worst possible misery for everyone")- if the words "evil" or "bad" can be objectively applied anywhere, it's there. There's literally no worse outcome. The thinking is that an objective moral compass will point in the opposite direction of that hypothetical.

35. 

    @saltedfigs7325

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    That "adds to the boredom of the universe" comment might just be the most arrogant thing ive ever read in my life.

36. 

    @revenger211

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    From watching this video alone, I can see a lot if fallacies and hypocrisy in his reasoning. He justifies US foriegn intervention, yet condemns Islam as a threat to society.
    Did Islam create the most devastating of weapons that world powers use to threat who opposes them?
    If Islam as a religion is backwards, then why did both religion and science thrive during the golden age of Islam? Why is it that it's an issue of religion as a whole and note extremists, conservatives and politics tainitng the religion for their own personal gain? Why is the econmic backward not factored in to explain the ill-actions committed by various muslims, who are minority in comparison to the overall muslim groups abroad?

    I can say that there are definitely extremists who should be deported the second they commit hate crimes. I can say that religion is used as a mere tool in poltics to contorl people. I can say that a lot of religipus folks are mere hypocrites and truly disrupt society.

    But to cheerypick few examples here and there and generalise based on biased experience and no proper data to factor in other reasons for such phenomena is the epitome of hypocrisy and it clashes with everything he preaches.

37. 

    @crunchylettuce5446

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Just seeing how quick philosophers are to judge each other and stuff is just eery. Or just intellectuals in general. Arguing about philosophy is like approaching a new alien race and insulting them for their fence design. You have an incredible opportunity to have good relations with this completely different person, or to work together on solving different problems, but you go out of your way to sabotage that just because, surprise surprise, they are a different person than you.
    I just… don't get it. As someone who's been called "gifted", "intellectual", "interesting", or "talented" god knows how many times, just hearing about this stuff dissociates me from the group that I apparently belong to. I'll end up in the midst of these peeps one day anyway, but it worries me. The ego that comes with having intelligence in this day and age worries me, especially with the state of the world. Too much infighting and it could radically change what the future may look like. Just saying.

38. 

    @mikelane9572

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Harris doesn't see that most institutions are as guilty as Muslims of the pursuit of violence.

39. 

    @awsomebot1

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    I like him a lot. Even if you disagree with some of his views at least he's trying to make the world a better place for everyone.

40. 

    @billyumbraskey8135

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    the epitome of a fedora

41. 

    @l1m3w1r3

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    He is ok with using psychedelics , which I don't understand why😑👎
    A true philosopher embraces lucidity of mind and wants to keep it at the highest level possible, and not to experience with substances.

42. 

    @coRnflEks

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    I think Sam is spot on with his responses to the mentioned intellectuals. They repeatedly fail to grasp Sam's point, despite his best efforts to explain, and he is usually a great communicator. I think the intellectuals critizising him are engaging in sophistication for it's own sake, and/or are blinded by their own theories, failing to see how they apply to the real world.

    Let me try with an arrogant analogy, trying to succeed where Sam fails:

    Sam and his friend Dennet want to cross a busy road, holding a sheet of glass between them.
    They both see what they think is a good moment to cross, and start walking.
    Upon reaching the middle of the road, Dennet stops.

    "Why did you stop?" Sam asks.

    "I'm unsure if we should continue" Dennet responds.

    Taken aback and feeling increasingly unsafe by the second, Sam blurts out:
    "It might be unsafe to continue, but it sure as ** is unsafe to stand here! Let's go!"

    Dennet looks at Sam with clear annoyance.
    "You don't know that with 100 percent confidence!" says Dennet.
    "Besides, you are making an aweful lot of assumptions."

    "What?!" says Sam, unable to belive what he is hearing.

    Dennet rolls his eyes and explains:
    "You arrogantly assume I want to live, and that I do not want to take risks in my life.
    Do you know all the effects crossing the street will have on my life?
    Nobody can know that. This isn't something science can determine."

    Sam stands frozen in disbelief and horror, but Dennet keeps TALKING.

    "Besides, can we really say that life is worth living? You cannot deduce what we SHOULD do,
    from what IS! My preferences may not be your preferences, SAM. I think we shou.."

    BAM! A speeding car hits them both and they die.

    —

    Notice how everything Dennet is saying is philosophically correct, but also how he still fails to grasp the obvious need to get OUT OF THE **** STREET.
    (Daniel Dennet seems like a really cozy, good guy in real life, but he does annoy me, so I don't feel super bad portraying him this unrealistically bad)

    Put as best as I can:
    If we are to have any meaningful political dialogue, we have to agree on our shared preferences. Locally, regionally, globally. Science and philosophy can help us find, clarify and articulate these, but will probably never directly prescribe them. Once these are in place however, the rest IS actual SCIENCE. AKA, the best tool we have to accomplish anything with defined goals. And while both the goals and the answers might never have the clarity of 1+1=2, and might be constantly changing, science is nevertheless the best tool we have to do it with.

    And the absurd thing is, we ALREADY do this. Everywhere, all the time, to a greater and lesser extent. It just haven't been made explicit before.

    Awareness, acceptance, and successful implementation of this fact is paramount to future human flurishing. That is, to fully understand everything about humans/life with all the neuances, wierd contradictions and quirks they have, work hard as heck, trying not to fool ourselves, using the best tools we have available, to create our own best reality.

    That's my opinion, I think this is Sam's opinion, and I think this is the reason why he pushes it so passionately.

43. 

    @harrisonfuller2589

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    1:21…huh??? say that one more time?

44. 

    @jordant.teeterson3100

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    The biggest problem with islam is that their adherents actually beleive it. In my experience most Christians dont actually believe that shit, its just a cultural tradition.

45. 

    @aaronnash1776

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Really enjoyed how you demonstrated his argument against the 'bad side' of religion can come full circle showing the hypocrisy in an individual who critiques it and engages in similarly critiqued behavior and yet at the same time you remained open enough to acknowledge him as a potentially positive driving force for new ways of thinking about how to 'better' spirituality and religion in regards to their clear denials of metaphysics. I love this seemingly objective discourse you curate that allows the viewer cognitive space to internally debate without needing to immediately come to any conclusions in order to track what is explained.

46. 

    @EvGamerBETA

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Objective moral code will be a biproduct of development of safe artificial inteligence

47. 

    @josephsmith3908

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    Sam Harris biggest flaw is thinking that most ppl have common sense

48. 

    @beauwhitlock5034

    January 31, 2026 at 8:49 pm

    PRAISE SCIENCE!!! -Sam Harris

Comments are closed.