Wednesday, December 08, 2010

Lotsa books III: The end of faith by Sam Harris

I had a fair amount of context I brought to this book: had always meant to read something by Sam Harris once I was aware of him several years ago, had heard him debate Chris Hedges on Truthdig and was impressed with his clear reason in the debate though ultimately sided more with Hedges, had first read Richard Dawkins'The God Delusion as my introduction to the New Atheists.

What I liked:
  • Harris attacks the right and left with vigor, even more so the left especially in chapter 4, "The problem with Islam" which caused me to question every apologetic word I've uttered in defense of moderate Islam.
  • He is much much more readable than Dawkins
  • He, unlike Dawkins, doesn't try to simultaneously take on religion and any "unscientific" discourse like postmodernism (at least he doesn't in this book)
  • So many provocative quotables--I will give you a few:
"Religious moderates are, in large part, responsible for the religious conflict in our world, because their beliefs provide the context in which scriptural literalism and religious violence can never be adequately opposed" (45)

"The only thing we should respect in a person's faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next" (225)

"We have, in response to the this improbable fact, declared war on 'terrorism.' This is rather like declaring war on 'murder'; it is a category error that obscures the true cause of our troubles. Terrorism is not a source of human violence, but merely one of its inflections" (28)

8 comments:

middlebrow said...

Sounds like a good book, and some good quotations. Harris always gets dumped in with Dawkins and Hitchens as one of the new atheists. I've never been as motivated to read the new atheism because, well, I've never been a believer in the first place, so it just felt like an exercise in agreement. Besides Hitchens just seems mean and Dawkins seems like he's on a mission. Harris his a bit of, shall we say, a missionary zeal to his atheism too. At least that's the impression. But your review makes him seem worth checking out. Still the best atheists are like me. We've evolved beyond argument. I am a proponent of slacker atheism. Slacker atheists just don't have the energy or interest in arguing about religion anymore.

Lisa B. said...

MB--you have to have been religious in the first place to respond to this, I think.

CI--and I do respond to it, but I don't, and I mean really, have the energy to engage. Maybe sometime our theory group will meet again and we could read something like this to discuss?

Mary Anne Mohanraj said...

Militant agnostic: I don't know and you don't either.

Relaxed agnostic: I don't know and I don't care.

Relaxed bisexual agnostic: I don't know, I don't care, and maybe I'll sleep with it.

HH said...

Agnostics are self-contradicting. I agree with middlebrow, at some points, that the opposite of the evangelical christian (mormon too) is not the evangelical atheist, but the gentle skeptic who cares not whether god exists or not.
I write, what I did, about agnostics because of this simple argument: "no one knows anything with certainty. Therefore no one can say with certainty that god(s) does/does-NOT exist." The problem here is that if this assertion is accepted on its face, then "anything" (including the conclusion above) can not be held with certainty. Therefore, it is absurd for an agnostic to conclude anything at all... Including uncertainty.

HH =)

lis said...

I am like Lisa on this one, I respond, but I so don't have the energy to engage. Should you be reading/ discussing things like this at the end of the semester, Ron? I mean, isn't your brain sort of tired?

shane said...

I've never read a Harris book. I did come across a quote or a written debate or something that turned me off, but I don't remember what it was. Helpful comment, I know.

I'm pretty impressed that now, at the end of the semester, you're finding all this time to read and blog.

SH said...

response to HH's comment...I was recently engaged in a discussion with my 12 year old (who has recently begun to take on the ideologies of "his" faith)...trying to explain my view. Trying to be soft enough that I don't crush or alienate him from his father's Mormon views...and yet also being honest about what I don't believe and the result was this mushy vanilla middle. Trying to express clearly a vague agnosticism and the point you made about uncertainty is so close to what he said, it give me chills. I think I'm in over my head. Caught in the middle. I'm eager for advice. I think Harris will muddy the water more. Incite my guilt response.

SH said...

when I say "take on", I mean by that "challenge it" not adopt it. It's pretty interesting to watch him. Last week he visited the Unitarians. Next week, he wants to go to a mass. Not sure where this will go. His dad is taking this very graciously.