Sam Harris

I have seen a brief review of Sam's book by Chris Lehmann in "'Reason Magazine"'. I know nothing of the magazine or Lehmann, who compares Harris to the "'village atheist"'.  His main criticism seems to be that Harris ignores the vast loss of life due to political movements (the Nazis, Tutsis, Kmer Rouge etc.)  Lehmann is quoted as writing ''It is a notorious hazard of the village atheist's vocation to mimic many of the worst features of the dogma he obsessively denounces - and that is certainly true of "''The End of Faith"'. If it wasn't for a lack of congruence, I would suspect this magazine article is a strike-back by religious fundamentalism.
Jasper.

[quote author=“Jasper”]I have seen a brief review of Sam’s book by Chris Lehmann in “‘Reason Magazine”’. I know nothing of the magazine or Lehmann, who compares Harris to the “‘village atheist”’.  His main criticism seems to be that Harris ignores the vast loss of life due to political movements (the Nazis, Tutsis, Kmer Rouge etc.)  Lehmann is quoted as writing ‘‘It is a notorious hazard of the village atheist’s vocation to mimic many of the worst features of the dogma he obsessively denounces - and that is certainly true of “‘‘The End of Faith”’. If it wasn’t for a lack of congruence, I would suspect this magazine article is a strike-back by religious fundamentalism.
Jasper.

***
On Sam’s interview on Faith Under Fire, his opponent (Hugh Hewitt??) said Sam is encouraging religious oppressing with his call for religious jihad against believers.  I can’t recall Sam (as he reiterated) saying anything other than a RULES CHANGE for the dialog about the subject of faith.

JL

As one who, years ago, subscribed to Reason, I must say I’m disappointed. When I was a subscriber, during the late seventies and early eighties, the magazine was decidedly radical Libertarian and articles by atheist thinkers were common published. I found it a stimulating mix until it became watered down by an attempt to make the magazine more “mainstream,” and thus economically more viable (read “profitable”).

Gary

The one topic that Mr Harris may have missed is, what faith is driven by. The peasant is driven by what he thinks his god will do for him-salvation, cure ills, help with the bills-. The religious leaders such as Falwell, Robertson, Graham, are driven by riches. I don’t think there many who are truly rightious.

Aman to this! This remind me what Forrest Wood says in his book, The Arrogance of Faith,  that I’m currently reading: “For better or worse, power has always been the handmaiden of morality; and there is simply no getting away from the fact that religion is, among other things, a moral system. That is one it enduring virtures. And one of its abiding curses.” Pg. 11

Falwell, Bush, et al use religion as a source of power, as well as the bed rock of their ignorance. For too many people get off on using their religious convictions to will power over others, especially those whom they believe threaten their space and zone of comfort and power, e.g. homosexuals, feminists, and radical people of color. Thus religion will continue to be among the best tools the powerful elite use to get the masses in check.