Sam Harris believes in "speaking in tongues"

[bananas]

"Asked which cases are most suggestive of reincarnation, Harris admits to being won over by accounts of "xenoglossy," in which people abruptly begin speaking languages they don't know."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=106202&mesg_id=106202

[Meshuga]

1. Speaking tongues...

...is called "glossolalia" not "xenoglossy". That's a different "phenomenon". In Xeneglossy a German national who has never been to Japan or learned Japanese will speak fluent Japanese. In Glossolalia the person speaks a bunch of crap that doesn't make sense. In my POV they are both BS but you are suggesting Sam Harris believes in tongues which is not true.

[bananas]

2. Sam Harris speaks a bunch of crap that doesn't make sense

so he is speaking in tongues, LOL.

[Meshuga]

3. It doesn't make sense to you

who started a thread as a consequence of not quite comprehending the text you were quoting. ;-)

[bananas]

4. What Gibberish!

Not sure if I spelled that right...are there two B's or not two B's?
:)

[charlie]

16. Into your cups at 6:01am?

If I was inclined to worry about you, I'd worry about you.

[trotsky]

8. LOLOLOL

Nice one, MrWiggles.

[Az]

5. For the record Sam Harris is not the official Atheism Spokesperson

We don't have anyone that speaks for all of us. Not even Richard Dawkins. Sam Harris is his own person and speaks for himself alone. We may find sense in some of the things he says and find foolishness in other things he says. This is how it is with everyone.

In the end it is ideas we look to and not individuals. Some individuals may come up with more than their share of good ideas. But this does not mean all of their ideas deserve to be honored.

[shrike]

24. Unfortunately for you guys, he's the one in Time Magazine

For Mr. and Mrs. Average American, he's The Atheist.

With the stuff that's coming out about Harris. I'm even starting to wonder if he's one of those Stealth Guys, like David Horowitz turned out to be.

[lisby]

6. Get it straight

And stop disparaging the serious, scientific study of possible reincarnation. It has nothing to do with the fundamentalist Christianity you are trying to link it to. Go read the seminal University of Virginia-sponsored "Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation" and then we'll talk.

Lisby

:banghead:

[Orrex]

22. Funny you should mention that

The Skeptic's Dictionary examines Harris' views on this subject and even discusses the work you mention.

Here's the problem with reincarnation:

It requires the existence of a substance (the soul/consciousness/essence/spirit/Ba/whatever) that can't be detected by any means. It then requires that this substance can survive separate from the body while retaining memories and emotional souvenirs of a lifetime. It then requires that this substance can re-enter a new body while at some level retaining those memories.

Sorry, that's at least three huge leaps of faith, none of which is supported by any empirical evidence, U of V notwithstanding. The most "thorough" study of this purported phenomenon offers no better evidence than "well, it sounds convincing to me."

First demonstrate that this soul-substance exists. Then we'll talk about the rest.

[Glorfindel]

7. "Speaking in tongues" is widespread here in the Deep, Dark South

Amongst Pentacostalists particularly. I've never witnessed it personally (don't want to!) but from what one hears, it's mostly just eruptions of gibberish - mind-vomit, if you will, brought on by religious fervor. I seem to recall reading that the Pagan Greeks also practiced glossolalia. Idioglossia is another interesting phenomenon, in which one person or a small group of people create their own language.

[cosmik debris]

9. Since you failed to state your point clearly,

I will just guess that the point is that ONE atheist believes stuff that is just as wacky as what MANY theists believe.

I still don't understand why you think that is important enough to deserve a duplicate post, but if it makes you feel better, so be it.

Perhaps we should have a post about Christian Spokesperson Pat Robertson's belief that tolerance of gays caused the 9/11 attacks.

[Goblinmonger]

10. Well, that proves it then

if Sam Harris believes something then I, too, as a right-minded atheist also have to believe it. He's our "pope," you know. He sets the dogma for all atheists.

Oh, no, wait, that's not true. Sam Harris is just some guy. Like most people, he makes some good points and some not-so-good points. And as a fellow atheist I'm not required to believe jack shit about any of it. That's the beauty of being atheist. If something is bullshit, I don't have to buy into it. Now back when I was catholic--that's a whole different story.

[Evoman]

11. No he doesn't.

But millions of christians do. Along with believing that a dead man came back to life, and that he did magic.

I don't understand the point of this thread. One atheist believes in one woo-woo phenomena. Big deal. Is it a coincedence that most of the atheists here also post frequently in the Skeptics forum? Not only that, a disturbing amount of the religious people here actually believed that a Ouija bard really works.

I'm frankly suprised any religous person has the chutzpah to point out somebody elses irrationalities.

[MistressOverdone]

12. I don't think Harris talking about

fundamentalists speaking "in tongues" (which I have heard and haven't been impressed by) but rather people being hypnotized and going back to other languages. Has that ever been really documented? I'm not sure.

At our church one unfortunate soul launched into "tongues" out of nowhere and scared the living heck out of everybody. It definitely is not part of our church culture. But it did NOT sound like a language to me. Just a few repeated syllables...like his concept of a middle eastern language. And he had a very scary affect. Yikes. Didn't like it at all.

Give me a quiet "Shall We Gather at the River" anytime, followed by a good chicken dinner.

[Evoman]

13. Yes, I realize that.

Thats why I said, "No, he doesn't" after Banana said he believed in "speaking in tongues".

I don't know what research has been done in being able to speak in other languages. But I'm just not convince anyways. I would probably asssume that if someone could speak in a language they had little exposure to, that they have a gift for language and that they may have picked it up watching TV or something.

I don't believe in hypnotic trances, let alone being able to remember a past self using hypnosis.

[MistressOverdone]

14. Where would one find trustworthy information

about all that? Certain not via Google, with all the assorted freaks out there, each with an agenda and an ax and grindstone.

[charlie]

15. You could look into Bridey Murphy

the original case that kickstarted the past-life-regression-through-hypnosis craze in modern times. Over the years it's come to light that Virginia Tighe, the subject, had childhood experiences that accounted for her seemingly uncanny knowledge of 19th century Ireland, including an immigrant neighbor with a nearly identical name.

One thing I haven't heard of in cases of xenoglossia is fluence in a language outside the subject's native language family -- Norwegians speaking Chinese or Japanese speaking Farsi. Case after case has someone speaking a cousin language, English with German, Spaniards with Latin, or somesuch.

[varkam]

17. Perhaps something to do with Chomsky's

innate language acquisition device.

[bananas]

18. "I'm frankly suprised any religous person has the chutzpah to point out somebody elses irrationa..."

"I'm frankly suprised any religous person has the chutzpah to point out somebody elses irrationalities."

You're surprised that Harris, a religious person, has the chutzpah to point out other peoples irrationalities?

[SidDithers]

19. I'm frankly surprised that you think Harris is a religious person...

but I guess that just goes to show that irrational ideas are common to believers too.

Sid

[Orrex]

23. Harris commits errors of reason similar to those of religious people

As was mentioned up-thread, he's no spokesman for atheism. He maintains a sort of gauzy tolerance of metaphysical notions as long as they originate in non-western belief systems.

When I saw him speak some months ago on CSPAN2, my overwhelming impression is that he doesn't subject non-western beliefs to the same aggressive scrutiny that he applies to western theism.

[bananas]

25. I agree - he's a believer and has irrational ideas. nt

[SidDithers]

26. Nice to see you're consistent...

consistently wrong, of course, but at least we know what to expect.

Sid

[bananas]

27. So which category are you in?

People disagree with me for different reasons:
1) "Harris isn't woo-woo, reincarnation is a proven scientific fact!"
2) "Just because Harris has woo-woo religious beliefs doesn't mean he's a religious woo-woo!"
3) "I agree with him that we shouldn't tolerate woo-woo religious beliefs, so I will tolerate his woo-woo religious beliefs."

[SidDithers]

28. Harris is an atheist...

and has some woowoo opinions. The two are not mutually exclusive, as you seem to think they should be.

Sid

[Evoman]

20. I suppose I would be suprised, if that were true.

Which, in fact, it is not.

[bananas]

21. What are you talking about?

What's not true - you don't consider him a religious person? I do - he certainly has religious beliefs about reincarnation etc.
What were you surprised at? Do you think I'm religious? I'm not.

[and-justice-for-all]

29. Why the hell would he say that?

I can talk French/Japanese if I am drunk enough....

Come on Sam, WTF?

[J Williams]

30. Speaking gibberish is not what Paul meant. "Tongues" means language or dialect.

Quote:

It is “religious” vanity for people to claim they “speak in tongues.” That has become a big thing in certain circles of misguided Christians, and it should be exposed for what it is. Spouting gibberish and babble is not what Paul meant by “speaking with tongues.” In fact, Paul knew Roman, Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew, and other languages, and he was merely talking about those other languages or “tongues.” But since those on the Christian Right will probably argue this point, you should know some more facts about it.

The word for “tongue” occurs 50 times in the New Testament. Sixteen times it refers to the tongue in our mouth, and thirty-three times it refers to the known languages of the world. But it is never even implied that it refers to gibberish or babble that pretenders and imposters now call “ecstatic language.” It refers only to language or dialect (Glossa or Dialektos in Greek) that is used by different people in the world –– not a nonsensical utterance that no one can understand.

For example, it is written: “And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” (Acts 2:4) Here the word “tongues” is from the Greek word glossa, which means a known language or dialect. Moreover, the words spoken by these disciples were not nonsensical utterances, but several different known dialects, because it is also written that “every man heard them speak in his own language,” and “how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:6-8).

These are all indications that they were merely speaking in other dialects or languages, and that is the case in virtually all of the other instances where the phrase “speak with tongues” was used. So the fact is that when people on the Christian Right now speak gibberish and babble and claim to be “touched by the Holy Spirit” and consequently “speak in tongues,” they are merely trying to impress others that they are “holy” and special. The truth of the matter, however, is that they are simply on an “ego trip.” They are in fact merely babbling and uttering gibberish, pretending that it’s a “holy” thing or some kind of gift from God.

(Quoted from Real Prophecy Unveiled: Why the Christ Will Not Come Again, and Why the Religious Right is Wrong, by Joseph J. Adamson.)

http://realprophecyunveiled.netfirms.com