The Heavenless

Sam Harris: “Religious Beliefs Are Poison”

September 20, 2024 | by The Heavenless

transly-translation-agency-KQfxVDHGCUg-unsplash

Sam Harris: The Problem of Religious Belief

Sam Harris is one of the most prominent figures in contemporary atheism, known for his sharp criticism of religious belief and its impact on society. Harris, a neuroscientist, philosopher, and author, has been a leading voice in what has been termed the “New Atheism” movement, alongside figures like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Daniel Dennett. One of his central concerns is the role of religious belief in shaping human behavior and social structures.

In his various works, particularly The End of Faith (2004) and Letter to a Christian Nation (2006), Harris explores what he perceives as the dangers and irrationalities of religious faith. His argument can be summarized as follows: religious belief, especially when it is uncritical and dogmatic, poses significant problems for individual and collective well-being, intellectual progress, and ethical development.

This essay will explore Sam Harris’s critique of religious belief, focusing on his key concerns about its role in ethics, violence, irrationality, science, and politics.

1. The Basis of Harris’s Critique: Faith as an Epistemological Problem

At the core of Sam Harris’s critique is the claim that religious belief is fundamentally an epistemological problem. Harris defines faith as “belief without evidence,” or the acceptance of claims without the necessary justification that reason and evidence typically demand. For Harris, this willingness to believe things on insufficient grounds is not only irrational but dangerous because it creates a system of thought in which critical scrutiny is discouraged or even forbidden.

One of Harris’s primary concerns is that religious faith often demands that its adherents accept supernatural claims that cannot be verified through empirical investigation or logical reasoning. For example, beliefs in miracles, divine intervention, or the literal truth of sacred texts defy the evidence-based methodologies that are the cornerstone of science and rational thought.

By fostering a mindset where questioning is discouraged, Harris argues, faith creates an environment in which false beliefs can flourish unchecked. This, in turn, can lead to harmful behaviors, as people may act on these unverified beliefs with real-world consequences.

Harris often contrasts the religious method of accepting truths with the scientific method. Science, by its nature, is self-correcting: hypotheses are tested, evidence is evaluated, and conclusions are revised based on new findings. Religion, on the other hand, often holds certain truths as immutable, even when evidence suggests otherwise. This epistemological rigidity, Harris argues, limits intellectual progress and the capacity to adapt to new knowledge.

2. Religious Belief and Violence

One of the most pressing concerns for Harris is the connection between religious belief and violence. Harris has consistently argued that religious faith, particularly when taken literally, often leads to conflict, violence, and intolerance. In The End of Faith, he examines historical and contemporary examples where religious doctrines have inspired violence, from the Crusades to modern-day terrorism.

Harris is particularly critical of Islam, arguing that the faith’s sacred texts—when interpreted literally—contain numerous passages that justify violence against non-believers. While acknowledging that not all Muslims engage in or support violence, Harris argues that the problem lies in the doctrines themselves, which can be used to justify acts of terrorism and extremism.

For Harris, the challenge is not simply violent individuals acting in bad faith; rather, it is that religious beliefs can create an environment in which violence is seen as divinely sanctioned. Harris points to the example of jihadist terrorism, where individuals who commit acts of violence believe they are fulfilling the will of God and will be rewarded in the afterlife.

While Islam is a central focus of Harris’s critique, he does not limit his criticism to it. Christianity, too, comes under fire for its history of religious wars, persecution of heretics, and complicity in modern conflicts.

Harris argues that religious belief, when tied to the idea of absolute divine truth, creates an “us vs. them” mentality. This exclusivist mindset—where adherents believe their religion is the only true path—naturally leads to division and, in many cases, violence.

3. The Ethical Dangers of Religious Belief

Harris also addresses the ethical problems posed by religious belief. While many people view religion as a source of moral guidance, Harris argues that religious morality is often arbitrary and outdated. For example, the moral codes found in ancient religious texts often reflect the prejudices and social norms of the time they were written, rather than timeless ethical principles. The Bible, the Quran, and other religious scriptures contain moral prescriptions that, by today’s standards, are deeply problematic—such as endorsing slavery, punishing homosexuality, or treating women as inferior.

Moreover, Harris points out that many religious traditions hold to moral precepts that conflict with human well-being. For instance, opposition to contraception in Catholicism, or the condemnation of homosexuality in conservative Christian and Islamic teachings, can cause significant harm to individuals by restricting their freedom and autonomy. In these cases, Harris argues that religious morality conflicts with the secular, humanistic values that prioritize human happiness, health, and flourishing.

Harris also critiques the notion that moral behavior is dependent on belief in God. He challenges the idea, popular among many religious believers, that without religion, there can be no objective morality. Harris argues that ethical principles can be derived from a secular understanding of human well-being.

In his later work, The Moral Landscape (2010), Harris outlines his case for a scientific approach to morality, where questions of right and wrong are understood in terms of their impact on human and animal well-being. Rather than relying on religious doctrines, he proposes that we can assess ethical behavior based on how it promotes or diminishes the well-being of conscious creatures.

4. Religious Belief and Science

Harris is a staunch defender of science, which he sees as the best tool humans have for understanding the world. In his critique of religious belief, Harris argues that faith and science are fundamentally incompatible. Religious belief often relies on supernatural explanations that conflict with the naturalistic framework of science. For instance, creationist beliefs about the origin of the universe and life on Earth directly contradict the scientific understanding of evolution and cosmology.

Harris sees this conflict as dangerous, particularly in societies where religious beliefs undermine scientific education. In the United States, for example, there have been political and cultural battles over the teaching of evolution in schools, with some religious groups advocating for creationism or intelligent design to be taught alongside or in place of evolution. Harris argues that such efforts are harmful because they mislead people about the nature of scientific inquiry and deny them an accurate understanding of the world.

Moreover, Harris is concerned with the broader implications of religious belief for scientific progress. When people believe that certain truths are revealed by God and cannot be questioned, this stifles the curiosity and open-mindedness that are essential to scientific discovery. Harris often cites religious opposition to stem cell research, contraception, and other scientific advancements as examples of how faith can hinder progress in fields that have the potential to improve human well-being.

5. The Political Implications of Religious Belief

Another major concern for Sam Harris is the intersection of religious belief and politics. He argues that in societies where religion holds significant political power, religious doctrines often shape laws and policies in ways that are detrimental to human rights and progress. This is particularly evident in countries where religious fundamentalism dominates the political landscape, such as in Islamic theocracies, where strict interpretations of Sharia law can lead to human rights abuses, particularly against women and minorities.

Harris is also critical of the role of religion in American politics. He argues that the influence of Christianity in the United States, especially among conservative politicians, leads to policies that are at odds with secular values. For example, Harris has criticized efforts to limit reproductive rights, same-sex marriage, and scientific research on religious grounds. He contends that when religious beliefs are used as a basis for lawmaking, they often lead to policies that harm individuals and society.

Harris calls for a secular approach to politics, where laws and policies are based on reason, evidence, and a concern for human well-being, rather than religious doctrine. In a secular society, religious belief would be a private matter, with no influence over public policy or governance. Harris argues that such an approach would lead to more just, equitable, and progressive societies.

6. Religion and the Fear of Death

A key reason why many people hold onto religious belief, according to Harris, is the fear of death and the hope for an afterlife. Religion, for many, offers comfort in the face of mortality, promising an eternal life or some form of existence beyond death. Harris acknowledges that the human fear of death is profound, but he argues that this fear should not justify belief in something for which there is no evidence.

Harris suggests that part of the solution is to accept the reality of death and to focus on making the most of the life we have now. He believes that by embracing a secular worldview, people can learn to live more fully in the present, rather than pinning their hopes on an uncertain and unverifiable afterlife. He encourages people to find meaning and purpose in the finite nature of life, rather than relying on the promise of eternal reward or punishment after death.

7. The Future of Religious Belief

In his work, Harris expresses a hope for a future where religious belief is no longer dominant and where human societies are guided by reason, science, and concern for well-being. He does not argue that all religious people are bad or that religion should be forcibly eradicated; rather, he advocates for a gradual shift away from religious thinking. Harris envisions a future in which people abandon faith in favor of a secular, rational approach to understanding the world and solving human problems.

Harris’s critique of religious belief is thus not just about rejecting the supernatural or irrational aspects of faith; it is about embracing a worldview that prioritizes human flourishing, intellectual progress,

and ethical responsibility. He believes that by moving beyond religious belief, humanity can achieve greater levels of peace, prosperity, and understanding.

Conclusion

Sam Harris’s critique of religious belief centers on the epistemological, ethical, and social problems it creates. He argues that faith, by its nature, discourages critical thinking and fosters violence, division, and intolerance. Harris believes that religion, rather than being a source of moral guidance, often promotes outdated and harmful ethical principles. Furthermore, he contends that religious belief is incompatible with science and reason, leading to conflicts that hinder progress.

In Harris’s view, the solution is to embrace a secular, rational approach to life—one that values human well-being and intellectual curiosity over unverified religious doctrines. While Harris acknowledges the psychological comfort religion can provide, he believes that the cost of religious belief is too high, both for individuals and for society as a whole.

RELATED POSTS

View all

view all