http://beyondbelief2006.org/Watch/Control-Click on the first "watch" link. Choose "Save Link As...". Save the file to your Desktop or somewhere. It's huge (250MB) so it will take quite a while to download.
Once downloaded open it, and fast-forward 52 minutes in. Sam Harris talks for 21 minutes. Most of this stuff is from his book:
http://www.samharris.org/site/book_letter_to_christian_nation/I'm curious what your thoughts are.
j
a) I agree that dogmatism is dangerous, and his example of the Iraqi war as an expression of clashing religious ideologies is a good case in point. The US neocons of the Religious Right who welcome conflict in the Middle East as a necessary precursor to the end times and the return of Christ are to me just as scary as the Muslim jihadists who celebrate martyrdom and anticipate virgins in heaven as a reward for wreaking murder and mayhem here on earth. I think it needs to be said, however, that in both cases these are excesses of the fringe that do not represent the middle ground of the faiths they have co-opted for their own purposes. I don't think that Jesus or Muhammad either one would recognize or endorse the fringe of the faith movements begun in their names, despite these groups' representation of themselves as the "true" remnant.
2) While I do think we would be better off with less dogmatism, I can't agree with Harris that we would be better off without religion. Yes, Christianity, for instance, has given us Crusades and Inquisitions, but it also has given us social reforms to abolish child labor, eliminate slavery, reform mental health institutes, build hospitals, feed the poor, etc. I would stand by something I wrote to you once before, that while religion may not be strictly rational, in the sense a scientist seeks, but it is not thereby irrational. It seems to me it says that what is "real" or "true" in the human experience is not just measured by intellect or ration, but equally by intuition, emotion, mysticism, stories, etc. So when Harris says religion is based on "bad evidence," i have to ask what his criteria of "good evidence" might be. If it is only Western scientific method, I think it overlooks evidence of much greater depth contained in ancient religious traditions and "myths."
3. I agree with Harris that a temptation of religion is to divorce itself from all tests of reality, e.g. his instance of an ideology opposing birth control that thereby opposes use of condomss even in the African culture where millions will die from such ignorant dogma. I think the corollary is a science that divorces itself from the realities of faith, rejecting the testimony of thousands through the ages whose lives have been transformed by experiences with divinity. Are these experiences not "real" simply because they cannot be replicated in a laboratory?
4. I appreciated Harris' opening point that science is not necessarily the enemy of either morality nor mystery, despite what some fundamentalists may teach about the dangers of "godless secularism." I'm one of those described by the final lecturer who chooses to say that there is no necessary conflict between science and religion, e.g. accepting that a creator God could accomplish creation through the process of evolution rather than seven literal days. Don't press me too far, however, to explain just how the Creator is related to creation, since I'm still trying to figure out, for instance, where I stop and God begins, or vice versa.
Well, anyway, there's some grist for the mill--not very finely ground, but still something I keep chewing on.
Be most excellent to your most excellent self!
Ole Dad
Thanks for your thoughts. We'll have to talk through some of it when next we meet.
Sam is an interesting man. He seems to be calling rationalists to action, but then has no action to prescribe. Read:
http://www.samharris.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2I don't understand how a man with such apparently strong convictions doesn't have any recommendations for people to consider. There are, however, a thousand people who have posted to his forum w/ ideas. Some crazy, some reasonable I assume.
j