IN the NEWS- Getting to the Roots of Sam Harris' Nonsense

Atheist preacher/Lecturer/Author Sam Harris sheds light of the

ROOTS OF HIS NONSENSE---he was strung out on drugs......(Harris is the current prime purveyor of the Nonsense you can have morality without God....in other words you set your own absolutes....but what is Harris really preaching/teaching?--that you can be your own god....what Harris misses is that Without a Higher Power than you setting the absolutes--you are left with opinions of the day...EXAMPLE: maybe you go to bed tonight thinking abortion is wrong and wake up tomorrow thinking it's o.k., just a viable tissue mass).

Go from the presence of a foolish man, 

when thou perceivest not in him the lips of knowledge.

Proverbs 14:7

"Harris recounts one of his own early empirical dabblings into how

physical experience precipitates metaphysical awareness — taking the drug 3,4-methylenedioxy-N-methylamphetamine (MDMA), commonly known as Ecstasy, with a close friend — which profoundly shifted his sense of the human mind’s potential. Remarking on the “moral and emotional clarity” of the experience, Harris describes it not as a muddling of consciousness but as a homecoming to truth:

It would not be too strong to say that I felt sane for the first time in my life. And yet the change in my consciousness seemed entirely straightforward… I had ceased to be

concerned about myself. I was no longer anxious, self-critical, guarded by irony, in competition, avoiding embarrassment, ruminating about the past and future, or making any other gesture of thought or attention that separated me from him. I was no longer watching myself through another person’s eyes.

And then came the insight that irrevocably transformed my sense of how good human life could be. I was feeling boundless love for one of my best friends, and I suddenly realized that if a stranger had walked through the door at that moment, he or she would have been fully included in

this love. Love was at bottom impersonal — and deeper than any personal history could justify. Indeed, a transactional form of love — I love you because . . . — now made no sense at all.

The interesting thing about this final shift in perspective was that it was not driven by any change in the way I felt. I was not overwhelmed by a new feeling of love. The insight had more the character of a geometric proof: It was as if, having glimpsed the properties of one set of parallel lines, I suddenly understood what must be common to them all… The experience was not of love growing but of its being no longer obscured. Love was — as advertised by mystics and crackpots through the ages — a state of being. How had we not seen this before? And how could we overlook it ever again?" BrainPickings