A review of the book the end of faith religion terror and the future of reason by sam harris

He would have no way of discussing science, politics or almost anything else. Chapter3 is a potpourri of potshots against Christianity. The subject matter has little to do with the main thesis of the book, although the occasional sentence has been inserted in an attempt to make a linkage.

Linkedin This review first appeared in the Christian Research Journal, volume29, number1 So, is this a good book? Harris is now completing a doctorate in neuroscience, studying the neural basis of belief, disbelief, and uncertainty with functional magnetic resonance imaging fMRI.

Somehow we have gone from demanding the End of Faith to claiming that medieval Tibetan mystics had very useful things to say about the human mind.

Sam Harris would like to see a world without religion, because he believes, with a lot of justification, that there will never be peace until people stop believing in invisible friends and fighting over whose invisible friend is real and whose is not, and he is pessimistic about the future unless such a peace can be achieved.

Like many others before him, Harris points out the absurdity and arbitrariness of this situation, and argues that it should change. For example, in one part of the book he takes several pages to quote, in bibliological sequence, all the instructions in the Koran which require Muslims to do damage to infidels.

The Consequences of Faith. Does Harris expect believers to shed their faith willingly, or does he condone the divestment of their faith by force? Harris quotes from Eastern mystics such as Padmasambhava and Nisargadatta Maharajbut he does not admit any supernatural element into his argument — " mysticism is a rational enterprise," he contends, "religion is not.

This is the message of his book The End of Faith: Overall, however, the book is a bracing tonic for atheists, and as we have seen, represents a powerful challenge to the status quo.

Ethics is a normative discipline. He stipulates a bizarre criterion for the conceptual coherence of free will: Harris must deny this, of course, but his denial creates special difficulties for him because he wants to provide for genuine moral responsibility on secular grounds. At the other end are liberals—the enablers, the ultra-tolerant who cannot make a clean break with religious belief.

In the paragraph that follows, Harris writes: To provide Christians worldwide with carefully researched information and well-reasoned answers that encourage them in their faith and equip them to intelligently represent it to people influenced by ideas and teachings that assault or undermine orthodox, biblical Christianity.

We may feel that loving others is conducive to happinessand it may be conducive to happiness. Harris forgets that we live in a democracy, where people, reasonable or not, have a say in how our country will be governed.

In what sense, however, would it be unethical? Harris avoids a balanced appraisal of forces shaping Western culture. This is the basis for fighting creationism and other manifestations of fundamentalism - the world is different now and it is time to put away childish things.

His diatribe against faith presents a spectacle of alarmist folly equal to what he attributes to religious believers. Several foreign editions are in press. It has been pointed out for a long time now that religious ideas uniquely get a free pass.

It has almost nothing to do with the dangers of religion, and even goes so far as to suggest that Eastern mysticism might have value and provide insights into the human condition that would be otherwise unavailable. He worries that human civilization is racing toward the brink of self-destruction on the fuel of religious fanaticism.

He also points out that we in the West only have the luxury of indulging those who claim to have absolute knowledge about the afterlife because we have been fortunate enough to live in a society that separates church and state.

Harris makes the point that any religion defines outsiders as heathens who must either be converted or condemned to Hell for eternity, and there can be no in-between.Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason at ultimedescente.com Read honest and it's not religion, but FAITH which is the most dangerous component in society.

Sam Harris puts it all on the table and pulls no punches as he compares modern educated reasoning to the thoughts. Sam Harris blames religious moderates for allowing extremism to flourish in The End of Faith. It is time secularists took a stronger stand against religion, says Steohanie Merritt.

In this sometimes simplistic and misguided book, Harris calls for the end of religious faith in the modern world. THE END OF FAITH: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason Harris's book. This is the message of his book The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason.

What is this faith that instills such dread? It is religious faith of almost any kind. In The End of Faith, Sam Harris delivers a startling analysis of the clash between reason and religion in the modern world. He offers a vivid, historical tour of our willingness to suspend reason in favor of religious beliefs―even when these beliefs inspire the worst human atrocities/5(K).

Review: The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason User Review - Vincent - Goodreads. What Sam Harris does brilliantly is convey his message eloquently and bluntly/5(K).

A review of the book the end of faith religion terror and the future of reason by sam harris
Rated 4/5 based on 19 review