

Next goal: 5
Champion Hub
1 person wants this. Add your vote.
0 of 6 done
Nomination created on December 22, 2025

Join neuroscientist, philosopher, and five-time New York Times best-selling author Sam Harris as he explores important and controversial questions about the mind, society, current events, moral philosophy, religion, and rationality—with an overarching focus on how a growing understanding of ourselves and the world is changing our sense of how we should live. Sam is also the creator of the Waking Up app. Combining Sam’s decades of mindfulness practice, profound wisdom from varied philosophical and contemplative traditions, and a commitment to a secular, scientific worldview, Waking Up is a resource for anyone interested in living a more examined, fulfilling life—and a new operating system for the mind. Waking Up offers free subscriptions to anyone who can’t afford one, and donates a minimum of 10% of profits to the most effective charities around the world. To learn more, please go to WakingUp.com. Sam Harris received a degree in philosophy from Stanford University and a Ph.D. in ne
No context yet for this conversation.
Record a short video telling everyone why this dialogue should happen. Your clip gets featured right here.
No voices yet. Submit a tweet, video, or post to be the first.
Suggested
If neuroscientific data genuinely eroded the concept of libertarian free will, should our legal and moral practices be overhauled?
Sam Harris has written that free will is an illusion, and Erik Hoel has pushed back on purely eliminativist readings of the mind. If we are complex causal systems, how should responsibility, blame, and punishment change, if at all?
The best novels are controlled experiments in what it means to be another mind.
Erik Hoel's 'world behind the world' idea treats literary fiction as a kind of cognitive engine: it gives us access to subjective experience in a way that third-person empiricism cannot. What is lost when we privilege scientific description over the phenomenology found in literature?
What would it take for us to be confident that a large language model is conscious, and what depends on getting the answer wrong?
Hoel has expressed skepticism about some of the strongest claims of sentience from LLMs, but he takes the question seriously. What kinds of tests, theories, or introspection could actually give us evidence, and how should we weigh the risk of creating suffering machines?