# Interesting podcast conversation between Sam Harris and Charles Murray (of "Bell Curve" fame) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 23, 2017, 9:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052 "2017-04-23T09:21:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 31
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/601 "2017-05-19T16:53:50Z")
As PZ Myers noted in his article, what we have here is “rhetorical deniability”: > [@](#): > > Cenk Uygur nails Harris on his rhetorical deniability. Really, if you fall for his game of “here’s this evil thing I want you to think about, but I’m saying it’s evil, so don’t blame me if maybe we have to do it”, then you’re a fool. I have to point here to a comment from the article: [QUOTE=johnrockoford] Sam Harris and his fan boys present themselves as uber rationalists yet have real trouble with a hallmark of rationalism, which is to be able to distinguish, to the best of our ability, causes from mere coincidences, correlations, etc. So, they decided that Islam — all of Islam, not denominations or sects, Sunnis, Shiites, Sufis, Bahais — is directly responsible for terrorism as if Islam is a specific virus that affects any and all that come in contact with it and becomes a full-fledged disorder for many; it’s ideological Ebola. [/QUOTE] And so it goes for other issues. IMHO it is good to call attention to unfair moves that some made on college campus when using violence against people like Murray speaking. But it does not follow that you should then conclude that what the speaker peddles is a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/602 "2017-05-19T17:03:45Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > I’m more baffled that defenders of Harris and Murray do not see that they want to have their cake and eat it too. > > I think the point is missed here that many of the defenders of scientific racism do grasp and use the words of Harris and others to justify their sorry paths. That some come later to claim that there is perfectly good explanation of the very reprehensible or unscientific things Harris talks about does not change that many racists do grab the “misunderstandings” and I have seen enough to conclude that Harris and others do not do much of an effort to discourage racists from running away with their “misconceptions”. And I put that in quote marks because by now it is very clear what is going on regarding the “method” of discussion Harris uses. > > [Cenk Uygur: Sam Harris' anti-Muslim 'thought experiments' are like Repubs' actual policy ideas - Raw Story](http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/cenk-uygur-sam-harris-anti-muslim-thought-experiments-are-like-repubs-actual-policy-ideas/) > [http://www.alternet.org/belief/sam-harris-made-himself-look-idiot-email-exchange-chomsky-and-has-shared-it-world](http://www.alternet.org/belief/sam-harris-made-himself-look-idiot-email-exchange-chomsky-and-has-shared-it-world) > Of course Chomsky showed later how irresponsible Sam was on that. > > The more I read about him the more his style of being a bit ambivalent or having the consistence of baby poop is more noticeable (this reprehensible idea is bad, but maybe…). Also that he commits a lot of the very thing his supporters and him accuse others of doing: To not read what people like Chomsky actually wrote before tossing stones. Might as well consider him as not having any opinion at all worth considering. [That is what I see other critics notice too](http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2015/11/26/i-get-email-sam-harris-edition/). OK, so I don’t think this is a credible post. Google “Waking Up” to find a path to Sam Harris’s podcast. Decide for yourself. Pick any one of his casts - there isn’t a single one that is consistent with what GIGO just wrote. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Sanchez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19adc/32.png) [@Rick\_Sanchez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Sanchez)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/603 "2017-05-19T17:28:46Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > OK, so I don’t think this is a credible post. Google “Waking Up” to find a path to Sam Harris’s podcast. Decide for yourself. Pick any one of his casts - there isn’t a single one that is consistent with what GIGO just wrote. He could also try reading ‘Islam and the Future of Tolerance’ or ‘End of Faith’. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/604 "2017-05-19T17:29:08Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > OK, so I don’t think this is a credible post. Google “Waking Up” to find a path to Sam Harris’s podcast. Decide for yourself. Pick any one of his casts - there isn’t a single one that is consistent with what GIGO just wrote. Yep, Cenk Uygur was correct. BTW the cite I made goes directly to the email communications between Harris and Chomsky, you are indeed just trying to mislead others here. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/605 "2017-05-19T17:30:12Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > He could also try reading ‘Islam and the Future of Tolerance’ or ‘End of Faith’. Or you should read and find that the cite I made goes to the email back and forth between Harris and Chomsky. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Sanchez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19adc/32.png) [@Rick\_Sanchez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Sanchez)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/606 "2017-05-19T17:51:18Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Or you should read and find that the cite I made goes to the email back and forth between Harris and Chomsky. Okay. I’ll do that. You read ‘Islam and the Future of Tolerance’. It’s a very short book, probably only about 50-60 pages. You can probably read it in an hour or two. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/607 "2017-05-19T18:10:25Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Yep, Cenk Uygur was correct. BTW the cite I made goes directly to the email communications between Harris and Chomsky, you are indeed just trying to mislead others here. By steering them away from your links to any other that they might find? Give me a break. For the record, Sam and Cenk had a marathon clear-the-air conversation, and here it is: I've sat through it, but I can't recommend it. It goes on for three hours. I will say that I think that Sam chases Cenk all over the room, but of course I would, wouldn't I? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/608 "2017-05-19T20:03:57Z")
**nachtmusick** , you seem to be posting to this thread a lot, so this a reminder that I’ve requested the following from you: > [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > > [@nachtmusick](#): > > > > The opposition states that all variation is cultural, but they more or less prohibit research to confirm that theorem. > > Not sure what you’re saying here. Care to provide some examples? Some examples of “the opposition” “prohibiting research” would be good. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/609 "2017-05-19T20:28:34Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > No I didn’t. > > Are you telling me I shouldn’t read that book? What if, for whatever reason, I decide I want to? > > Would you burn all copies of that book so as to prevent me from reading it? > > As long as we are starting a fire, how about we throw Charles Murray’s work upon the blaze? Or Sam Harris’s? > > Surely society would benefit if these foul ideas were expunged in the flames. I’m pointing out that by the post I responded to, you wouldn’t call Hitler a bigot unless you’ve read his book. I feel differently – it can be reasonable to call people bigots based on other actions and words, and reading their book isn’t always necessary. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2017, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/610 "2017-05-19T23:42:21Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > Ah yes, the old argument that it’s not enough to be able to refute some bigoted argument being made by a person. I must read his entire book before I can make any comment. If it’s some rando? No, you don’t have that obligation. If a Pulitzer-finalist and widely respected Harvard professor says the book is an “honest and intelligent dialogue” and “a superb exploration of the intellectual and moral issues involved”, then yes: you are going way too far out on a limb to dismiss the book as bigoted, if you have not read it. Context, people, context. I’m pretty sure the same cannot be said about any book by, say, David Duke. > [@GIGObuster](#): > > I think the point is missed here that many of the defenders of scientific racism do grasp and use the words of Harris and others to justify their sorry paths. That some come later to claim that there is perfectly good explanation of the very reprehensible or unscientific things Harris talks about does not change that many racists do grab the “misunderstandings” and I have seen enough to conclude that Harris and others do not do much of an effort to discourage racists from running away with their “misconceptions”. I’m glad to see someone be a little more honest about this. I feel that this is at the heart of most of the flaming tirades against any discussion of IQ and race: the idea that regardless of what the facts show, this topic should be taboo simply because it is inherently toxic and provides succor for bad people. And this is actually a reasonable stance! Sam has said much the same many times (disagreeing with some of his fellow “horsemen” like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens), and _he actually pressed Murray on this very point_ in the podcast. I am sympathetic to this notion in general; but as I’ve said many times, it would have to go hand in hand with an implicit understanding among educators and those who set education policy to go back to the so-called “soft bigotry of low expectations”. So long as teachers, school administrators, and those in charge of education policy are going to be under fire because majority-black inner city schools’ test scores lag behind national averages, supporters of educators and teacher unions like me need to be able to make this counterargument for why these scores are not the fault of teachers or “failing schools”. I’d be glad to never have to raise it again–sincerely–but it is a two-way street. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2017, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/611 "2017-05-20T00:03:18Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > By steering them away from your links to any other that they might find? Give me a break. You will not get it, specially when you are misrepresenting my post, as Harris loves to go about. > [@nachtmusick](#): > > For the record, Sam and Cenk had a marathon clear-the-air conversation, and here it is: > > I've sat through it, but I can't recommend it. It goes on for three hours. I will say that I think that Sam chases Cenk all over the room, but of course I would, wouldn't I? No wonder, because I did check how Harris likes to debate, in one occasion he did make the point that among Muslims: > [@](#): > > 25:29 Extremism is a false statement because extremism suggests > there is only a small percentage of people who agrees with this view. > > And certainly you never get a small percentage. It may be the ultimate question. “You want the hands and feet of thieves are cut?” “You want me to kill adulterers?” > No matter what the question, you never get three percent. Or five percent. But that avoids the fact that on a very very important issue the surveys do point out that most Muslims are indeed against Terrorism or Isis. By going for very ridiculous percentages is that then he can keep ignoring that most Muslims do not approve of terrorism. > **[Muslims and Islam: Key findings in the U.S. and around the world](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2017/08/09/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/)** > > Muslims are the fastest-growing religious group in the world. Here are answers to some key questions about their public opinions, demographics and more. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2017, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/612 "2017-05-20T00:09:01Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > I’m glad to see someone be a little more honest about this. I feel that this is at the heart of most of the flaming tirades against any discussion of IQ and race: the idea that regardless of what the facts show, this topic should be taboo simply because it is inherently toxic and provides succor for bad people. And this is actually a reasonable stance! Sam has said much the same many times (disagreeing with some of his fellow “horsemen” like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens), and _he actually pressed Murray on this very point_ in the podcast. As I pointed before, you are indeed falling here for his game of “here’s this evil thing I want you to think about, but I’m saying it’s evil, so don’t blame me if maybe we have to do it”. That is indeed foolish. > [@SlackerInc](#): > > I am sympathetic to this notion in general; but as I’ve said many times, it would have to go hand in hand with an implicit understanding among educators and those who set education policy to go back to the so-called “soft bigotry of low expectations”. So long as teachers, school administrators, and those in charge of education policy are going to be under fire because majority-black inner city schools’ test scores lag behind national averages, supporters of educators and teacher unions like me need to be able to make this counterargument for why these scores are not the fault of teachers or “failing schools”. I’d be glad to never have to raise it again–sincerely–but it is a two-way street. And as pointed before, Murray and others have really no clue about what are the proper solutions for the issue you are talking about here. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2017, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/613 "2017-05-20T01:02:49Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > You will not get it, specially when you are misrepresenting my post, as Harris loves to go about. > No wonder, because I did check how Harris likes to debate, in one occasion he did make the point that among Muslims: > > But that avoids the fact that on a very very important issue the surveys do point out that most Muslims are indeed against Terrorism or Isis. By going for very ridiculous percentages is that then he can keep ignoring that most Muslims do not approve of terrorism. > > [Muslims and Islam: Key findings in the U.S. and around the world | Pew Research Center](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/27/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/) You are artificially narrowing the goalposts in a way I don’t accept. Extremist views are not limited to terrorism. South African apartheid oppression didn’t generally involve terrorism; same for modern day North Korea or even virulent Trump supporters. If large percentages of Muslims want to cut off hands for minor crimes, or kill people for things that we in the West know better than to make any kind of crime at all (adultery, homosexuality), that is a clear indication that modern day Islam is an especially benighted and oppressive ideology, as Christianity was centuries ago. But liberals are afraid to say that, and instead take the quixotic position that the real threat (a la “Handmaid’s Tale”) is conservative Christianity. The latter is no picnic, mind you. But it’s centuries ahead of the ideology so prevalent in the Muslim world. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2017, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/614 "2017-05-20T03:10:20Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > You are artificially narrowing the goalposts in a way I don’t accept. Extremist views are not limited to terrorism. South African apartheid oppression didn’t generally involve terrorism; same for modern day North Korea or even virulent Trump supporters. If large percentages of Muslims want to cut off hands for minor crimes, or kill people for things that we in the West know better than to make any kind of crime at all (adultery, homosexuality), that is a clear indication that modern day Islam is an especially benighted and oppressive ideology, as Christianity was centuries ago. But liberals are afraid to say that, and instead take the quixotic position that the real threat (a la “Handmaid’s Tale”) is conservative Christianity. The latter is no picnic, mind you. But it’s centuries ahead of the ideology so prevalent in the Muslim world. Extremist sects of Islam are a big problem. But not Islam itself. That, unfortunately, some oppressive cultural practices happen to be associated with some societies that are majority Islam sucks, but it’s due to the practices of that specific region, which usually predated Islam, not Islam itself. Further, this rhetoric makes us less safe, because it makes the many millions of peaceful but still religious Muslims less likely to see us as allies against the extremists they hate and fear as much as we do. We should be fighting, and criticizing, extremism and violence, not lumping peaceful people into the same bucket as the violent ones. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2017, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/615 "2017-05-20T04:04:33Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > If it’s some rando? No, you don’t have that obligation. If a Pulitzer-finalist and widely respected Harvard professor says the book is an “honest and intelligent dialogue” and “a superb exploration of the intellectual and moral issues involved”, then yes: you are going way too far out on a limb to dismiss the book as bigoted, if you have not read it. Context is indeed important. Firstly, I didn’t call the book bigoted. We were talking about the political leanings of Harris, and I was saying I don’t care: Regardless what his aims are, he’s writing, and lecturing, on multiple topics than have little to no scientific value, but which are “catnip” to racists, bigots etc. So this is why it’s weird to have people tell me I must read the book before I can say what the subject of the book is. Or, to support the statement I made, we can just scratch _Islam and the future of tolerance_, and I’ll just link a dozen of his recent lectures instead. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2017, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/616 "2017-05-23T06:46:26Z")
In his [latest podcast episode](https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-moral-complexity-of-genetics), Sam revisits this controversy. He actually spends the first seven minutes snickering about [a new Sokol-type hoax](http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/conceptual-penis-social-contruct-sokal-style-hoax-on-gender-studies/), a paper called “The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct” that passed peer review and got published, despite even the authors’ names being fake. Not explicitly about IQ, race, or Charles Murray; but another example of why I scoff at the idea that “peer reviewed” inherently provides gravitas. Then from 10:45 to 29:00, Sam addresses the _Vox_ piece \*\*iiandyii \*\*posted. He is in an email negotiation with Ezra Klein to see about getting Klein to come discuss the controversy on his podcast, so I \*really \*hope that happens as I like both of them but they are in opposite corners here. From 29:00 to 31:05, Sam prefaces his interview of the Pulitzer Prize-winning scientist and author Siddhartha Mukherjee by explaining that since Mukherjee spends a few pages on Murray in his latest book, Sam could not resist raising the topic, but not until the second hour of the conversation. That comes at 1:37:27 and continues for just over a half hour, to 2:08:47. It might surprise some people to hear, since I’m such a Sam Harris devotee, that I thought Mukherjee got the better of Harris here. But notice that one of the primary arguments Mukherjee makes is rather similar to one I made repeatedly in this thread, which was generally greeted with scoffs. Mukherjee does not specifically name Gardner or use the term “multiple intelligences”, but that’s pretty unmistakeably what he’s going for with his analogy about blue eyes and his references to LeBron James. [It’s all the more surprising that I took Mukherjee’s side over Sam’s in that section, given that I had not been nearly as impressed when they were earlier debating whether expecting mothers should be required to prevent horrendous genetic diseases like cystic fibrosis, which not only cause great suffering but place a heavy burden on the health care system we all collectively pay for. You can go to around the 1:11:00 mark to get a sense of that debate, which I thought was decisively won by Harris, even though he raised only the issue of suffering and not the point about cost to the health system, which I consider highly relevant as well.] ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2017, 11:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/617 "2017-05-23T11:33:00Z")
[QUOTE=SlackerInc;20226071He actually spends the first seven minutes snickering about [a new Sokol-type hoax] ([Skeptic » Reading Room » The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct: A Sokal-Style Hoax on Gender Studies](http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/conceptual-penis-social-contruct-sokal-style-hoax-on-gender-studies/)), a paper called “The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct” that passed peer review and got published, despite even the authors’ names being fake. Not explicitly about IQ, race, or Charles Murray; but another example of why I scoff at the idea that “peer reviewed” inherently provides gravitas. [/QUOTE] The “paper” was published in a pay-to-play journal that is only two years old and has no serious reputation in any field of science. It is the academic equivalent of vanity press. Peer review may be overrated in some instances, but part of the evaluation of such papers includes an understanding of the publications in which they are published. This incident did nothing to seriously question peer review, only indicating that there is more to genuine peer review than simply tacking the label on spurious publications. If Harris used this example to challenge peer review, he is suffering from the same problem at which he is scoffing. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2017, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/618 "2017-05-23T11:44:18Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > If Harris used this example to challenge peer review, he is suffering from the same problem at which he is scoffing. He did not. He just read some of it and tried to contain his laughter (it is pretty funny, although I found the last bits he read, relating to capitalism/patriarchy/climate change, surprisingly on point). Of course, you could have just spent four and a half minutes like I did (on 1.5x) just listening for yourself. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2017, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/619 "2017-05-23T12:43:44Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > He did not. He just read some of it and tried to contain his laughter (it is pretty funny, although I found the last bits he read, relating to capitalism/patriarchy/climate change, surprisingly on point). > > Of course, you could have just spent four and a half minutes like I did (on 1.5x) just listening for yourself. :rolleyes: Besides showing again your jerkish inability to type a bit of what Harris or others said, **tomndeb** said “if”. You are not grasping basic tings. Of course in context it was you the one that attempted to use that item to stupidly claim that peer review was not a serious thing. ---
**Author:** ![Malleus\_Incus\_Stapes](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malleus_incus_stapes/32/3293_2.png) [@Malleus\_Incus\_Stapes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malleus_Incus_Stapes)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2017, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/620 "2017-05-23T12:48:58Z")
And here I was sure **SlackerInc** would be posting today because of [this](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/science/52-genes-human-intelligence.html?action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052.md?page=30) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052.md?page=32)