A masterclass in how to disagree constructively: Ta Nahesi Coates (whom Harris would not host) and National Review podcast host Jamie Weinstein. Well worth a listen

I agree he should have talked to the scientists, which Ezra happened to suggest as well. In this instance he was talking about the science, but Sam regularly wades into topics that involve race. He just had a conversation with a former white supremacist, he regularly talks about identity politics (which has a lot to do with race), race is also a component of his conversations about Islam / the middle east, etc. Sam talks about race all the time.

Race is a complex, messy topic with a diverse spectrum of thought. There are absolutely Latino, Asian, Middle Eastern, etc. thought leaders. Race isn't cut and dry, that's why you need to talk to different people. So I'll say it again, he should engage people as it RELATES TO THE TOPIC. Climate science there is 99% consensus, there is no need for the anti-climate science crew (even though Sam already filled that quota with dopey Scott Adams). When it comes to geriatrics, yes you should absolutely interview old people. Yes, primarily you should talk to the doctors and experts. But you don't think old people might have some insight into the "patient experience" when getting old or dealing with end-of-life / palliative care? The "patient experience" is one of the core elements of healthcare.

Some topics are homogenous in thought, some aren't. If you are honest about your intellectual thought, you need to consider this.

/r/samharris Thread Parent Link - nationalreview.com